BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

Take that

51 comments on Take that

Take that

: From Baghdad, Ali translates a radio report about Iraqis fighting back against terrorists, killing five of them:

From Radio Sawa (Arabic link):

Citizens of Al Mudiryiah were subjected to an attack by several militants today who were trying to punish the residents of this small town for voting in the election last Sunday.

The citizens responded and managed to stop the attack, kill 5 of the attackers, wounded 8 and burned their cars.

: And over at Iraq the Model, Omar reports that the terrorists used a Downs Syndrome man in a suicide attack:

The suicide attack that was performed on an election center in one of Baghdad’s districts (Baghdad Al-Jadeedah) last Sunday was performed using a kidnapped “Down Syndrome” patient.

Eye witnesses said (and I’m quoting one of my colleagues; a dentist who lives there) “the poor victim was so scared when ordered to walk to the searching point and began to walk back to the terrorists. In response the criminals pressed the button and blew up the poor victim almost half way between their position and the voting center’s entrance”.

I couldn’t believe the news until I met another guy from that neighborhood who knows the family of the victim. The guy was reported missing 5 days prior to elections’ day and the family were distributing posters that specified his descriptions and asking anyone who finds him to contact them.

51 responses to “Take that”

  1. Oay Ereswd Avatar
    Oay Ereswd

    close your fucking italics tag

  2. Oay is an Idiot Avatar
    Oay is an Idiot

    “close your fucking italics tag”
    Or what, the world’s going to come to an end? Some people need to lighten up.

  3. Alan Kellogg Avatar
    Alan Kellogg

    Jeff, you forgot to close your italics tag.
    For Gay Ereswd…
    Enjoying life in the barn?

  4. /pd Avatar
    /pd

    There is no substantial coverage from the radio station on this subject. Neither am I hearing chatter from any other news/FM stations in ME.
    Are we sure that insurgency activities are now being repelled by the Citizens or is this Hogwash and propoganda ??

  5. tex Avatar
    tex

    Ali translates US Government Arabic radio for Americans.
    There’s something circular about that.

  6. tex Avatar
    tex

    How come Allawi is claiming all of the nine suicide bombers were foreign? Doesn’t he know about this Down syndrome kid?

  7. Mork Avatar
    Mork

    This was reported three days ago by Paul McGeough, who interviewed the victim’s family.
    And yes, that’s the same Paul McGeough who all the warbloggers decided was making stuff up when he reported interviewing eyewitnesses to Iyad Allawi executing prisoners (which story was, of course, subsequently corroborated by John Lee Burns of the New Yorker).

  8. Dishman Avatar
    Dishman

    It wasn’t Ali, it was Omar, and if you read the link, it’s word of mouth from a resident, not any media report.

  9. Dishman Avatar
    Dishman

    Sorry, my bad. I thought you were referring to the Downs Syndrome report.

  10. George Bush Avatar
    George Bush

    Jeff,
    Welcome aboard!
    Glad to see you have now become a fully-fledged participant in our clever little CIA PsyOps in Iraq.
    Freedom is on the march! Whoo hoo!
    (BTW your cheque is in the mail.)
    With deep, man-like love,
    W.
    x

  11. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    It was a media report several days back, but most media here don’t want to present the barbaric scum in a bad light–might piss off CAIR or some others.
    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050131/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_suicide_attacks_2

  12. A.W. of Freespeech.com Avatar
    A.W. of Freespeech.com

    btw, i found old media talking about this, here. some interesting stuff.
    http://www.freespeech.com/index.php?/weblog/into_the_heroic_world_of_the_terrorists_in_iraq/

  13. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    It’s a shame that our hatred of our enemies prevents us from understanding them. We’re not going to win (are we even trying?) by calling them names.

  14. kat Avatar
    kat

    God forbid I should ever understand people who take great joy in cutting off heads, strapping homicide belts on handicapped children, and deserve to be called evil barbarians for their actions. There is no explaining using a Down’s syndrome person because the cowards themselves weren’t willing to blow their own heads off. It could only be justified by a fellow terrorist or someone who has taken leave of his senses.

  15. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Kat, please go back and read what I wrote. To understand is not to justify. Much of America thinks much like you do, and it is to our detriment. We aren’t going to stop terrorists by calling them names. Not that I have some kind of tremendous strategic insight, but I’m quite sure that we are not going to apprehend and/or kill our enemies with rhetoric. They’d be gone by now.
    And, frankly, I’d like to see the “war on terror” pass into history. Our goal should be to deal with the problem and move on. Emotional responses frustrate this – do you think the terrorists fail to understand that? They want us to be quaking in fear, or seething with hatred, or put into any other state of mind useful for clouding our judgment. It works. And yet we think that they are irrational…

  16. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    And how should we deal with the problem–kill all the jihadists or convert to islam or allow them to keep killing us and look the other way like Clinton did? Should we give them what they want– the Islamic flag flying over Downing Street and Pennsylvania Avenue?

  17. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Well, I would suggest that one necessary step in solving the problem is studying it in a way that is as objective as possible. Our analysis is always dogmatic, never practical. Early on in this debacle, I thought that the line “they hate us because we’re free” was merely propaganda, but it seems our leaders believe it. (Of course, they’re also deluded enough to believe that we’re still free. A man can believe anything, if he’s got the faith!)
    I think that the best way to win the war on terror is to isolate and divide our enemies through diplomacy and effective human intelligence. It is unfortunate that this became much less easy after 9/11: we simply could have stopped doing the things that upset them so badly. That is, we could have stopped our unconditional shoveling of money and arms to Israel, taken our troops our of Saudi Arabia, and stopped our despicable support for dictatorships.
    I still think that we should do all of these things, because they aren’t consistent with our values, and are of dubious strategic advantage. But things are stickier now, and will only grow more so. We cannot seem to accede to their demands, as this will quickly teach us just how ubiquitous and useful are the methods of terror.
    We should have responded to 9/11 by: 1. Getting bin Laden, preferably alive, and 2. Quietly ending the aforementioned practices.
    There are some among our enemies who will hate us, and try to attack us, no matter what. They aren’t rational. But I think that the vast majority of terrorists – including OBL – are far from irrational. They have an agenda, they have methods that are quite (cold-bloodedly) rational, and they are achieving their ends.
    Go ahead and torch me, but I think that:
    1. Osama bin Laden doesn’t want to destroy America, except as it would help him achieve his goals;
    2. In general, terrorists can be reasoned with – they are not implacable, irrational, demonic entities. While I’d like to see them all face justice, I would much rather get the important ones and have the prospect of ending the conflict.
    3. Our actions in the Middle East have motivated more terrorists than they’ve removed, making us far less safe.
    4. Their complaints against us are really pretty valid. Doesn’t justify to any extent acts of terrorism, but it’s true.
    5. This is costing us the moral high ground as well as the PR high ground, with which it is often confused.
    6. The longer the “war on terror” lasts, and the more military interventions it entails, the more the overall situation will favor them.
    7. We will never defeat the terrorists without the help of people who share their basic point of view. We will never get such help without showing them that we aren’t so evil.
    8. The terrorists are not of one mind. They could, in fact, be easily split. Most of them would today be at each others’ throats, were it not for U.S. policy.
    9. Nobody noticed, but Osama bin Laden basically offered us a truce in his last tape. To me, this suggests that his network is not presently capable of pulling off something exceeding 9/11, and that he realizes his time is running out. (Their next strike must, or it will be anticlimactic.)
    10. There is nothing we could do to more seriously weaken Al-Qaeda than by stopping the policies about which they complain. We have made the enemy more credible than ourselves in the minds of the people we’re trying to win over.

  18. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    I knew it–kill all the damned Jews and it will solve all our problems. Hitler said that too.

  19. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Kat,
    Jeez! Where, exactly, do you pull that out of what I wrote? Oh – I get it – not giving Israel money = ‘kill all the Jews!’ Please. You owe me an apology.

  20. Jimbo Avatar
    Jimbo

    I guess it would be nice to “understand” Islamic terrorists, and they do try to help with their nifty video tapes and fatwas. I’d much rather take the current approach: find out who wants to kill you, learn how they’re going to do it, and neutralize them before they succeed. It doesn’t matter if it’s because we help the Jews, are the Jews, or offended the terrorists’ manhood (on behalf of the Jews). Understanding their motives are a nicety that may be to expensive to care much about and empathy is impossible.
    “People” who live to kill don’t have much to discuss with those who are dying to live. Does saying this demonize them? Yes, and they have nothing more than their own actions to thank for that.

  21. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    Kat,
    Could you please provide that link re Shariah Islam you gave four months ago? I lost it and would like to reread it. Clearly stevek needs to become educated, too.
    Sorry stevek, but you are now absolutely over the top. You need to learn about our enemy. Period.

  22. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Again, I’m not suggesting empathizing with the terrorists! I’m suggesting that we try to seriously defeat them, rather than play into their strategy.
    Do you really think that they “live to kill”? Maybe Zarqawi… maybe a handful of others. In a sane world, they would be mere sociopaths – maybe they’d torture animals, or work their way up to being serial killers… Muslims would revile them. The only reason they have any credibility is that we’ve helped them. It’s as though we’re trying to validate everything they say about us.
    We haven’t isolated them. They are isolating us. This way lies defeat.

  23. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    I’m willing to read any link that anyone posts. I have an understanding of things, but maybe I’m wrong. I’d be happy to read anything.
    But I’m not an anti-Semite. That’s really below the belt, and it really hurts. If you only knew…

  24. gandhi Avatar
    gandhi

    Stevek,
    Welcome to the sick, perverted world of the warbloggers.

  25. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    gandhi,
    I’ve had it with you. Go crawl back under a rock in your Australian cave. We don’t need your ‘help’ in solving our problems. People like you Are the problem.

  26. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    Eileen–I have a virtual library on sharia. I even suffered through the Koran–because after 911 I felt such hatred towards these fanatics that I felt guilty for attributing their ideology to islam. I was naive and believed islam was peace. Since then, I have become educated and I truly believe islam is the greatest threat to world peace–it is not our policies that need changing, but theirs. This is a piece I saved after 911, but no link. Maybe not the right one.
    {It is very apparent that certain elements of the Islamic faith are hell-bent on dominating and usurping the areas in which they have settled, in total disregard to the sovereignty of those places and the feelings or wishes of the populations. The worst aspect of this action is that these groups seem to have no regard or respect for human life in their pursuit of their ambitions.
    The great lie propagated by Muslim spokesmen is that Islam is a peaceful religion. This could not be further from the truth. Of all the major religions of the world, Islam is the only one that promotes or condones the denigration and subjugation of women, severe physical mutilation for even minor offences, mutilation of women’s genitals for no reason and many other unsavoury and barbaric practices that have no place in civilised society.
    There are constant reports of insurrections and revolutions by Islamic separatist movements all over the world. The crisis in Kosovo was caused by Islamic terrorists wishing to control what was and still is legally a part of Yugoslavia. Not content with literally forcing the annexing of Kosovo with the connivance of NATO, Albanian Islamic terrorists are also attacking Macedonia, trying to take control of parts of its sovereign territory because of claims that ethnic Albanians live there. Currently there are Islamic insurrections occurring in the Indian state of Kashmir, the Indonesian province of Aceh, in the Philippines, Nigeria, Egypt, Israel, Morocco and many other places.
    It is blatantly self-evident that wherever Islamic fanatics operate, there is carnage, death and destruction. Apart from Kosovo, the burning and complete desecration of the major cities of East Timor, the killing of innocent tourists in Algeria and Egypt, the massacre of people of other religions in Aceh and Nigeria, the kidnapping and murder of innocent hostages by the Abu Sayyaf Islamic separatists in the Philippines are stark proof that human compassion and mercy are not in the lexicon of these groups.
    Maybe I am seeing too much in this but there seems to be a common modus operandi in the way some Islamic groups set about their quest to take over territory. They often start by demanding the right to follow their religion without hindrance, which is generally accepted in most parts of the world. They then populate the areas with Muslims, usually still not a problem in most places.
    Once they have the numbers, the fundamentalists then demand the imposition of draconian Sharia law, which is quite repugnant to most people of democratic persuasion, even many Muslims. Then they will demand political autonomy or even complete secession from the host country. If, unsurprisingly this is rejected, they form terrorist armies or militias such as in Kosovo, East Timor, Nigeria and the Philippines and they start insurrections, resulting in the murder of non-Islamic people and causing untold grief and destruction.
    This has been seen in the French city of Lyons, where large numbers of Muslims have settled. Now that they have the numbers, these people are now seeking a degree of autonomy from French law and have demanded that French police refrain from entering the “Muslim” areas after 6pm each day and at no time on their holy days. Of course the French authorities have dismissed such demands out of hand, but it is really only a matter of time until the Muslim populace there grows to an extent where they totally control who represents them in government and then the face of traditional France will be irrevocably changed. Even worse, they may even mount an insurrection to achieve their goals.
    A very pointed example of this invasion by stealth was seen in Australia recently in the Sydney suburb of Auburn, which has a large Muslim population. Islamic community leader and Imam of the local mosque, Sheik Hilaly, demanded that a Muslim candidate be automatically given electoral preselection over his opponent in the Labor Party, rather than submit to the normal ballot process. Premier Bob Carr instantly rebuffed this demand, stating that preselection is a democratic process and is not decided upon ethnic or religious criteria. Sheik Hilaly was most indignant and indications are that there will be a Muslim based backlash against the ruling Labor Party in the next state election.
    This sort of Islamification is being attempted in many parts of the world where compassionate countries have granted safety and refuge to Muslims claiming to be refugees. Once established in these countries, the Muslims then attempt to impose their culture and religion onto the greater community, or even worse, demand autonomy and ultimately secession from their hosts. Kosovo and Macedonia are two prime examples where civil wars have erupted because of this. A group in England called Al-Muhajiroun which means “the emigrants” in Arabic, targets university campuses in search of recruits and urges the creation of an Islamic state in Britain.
    One of the most disturbing aspects of militant Islamism is the utter fanaticism of its adherents. This is graphically portrayed by the wanton destruction of all statues in Afghanistan by the ruling Taliban organisation, who claimed they were un-Islamic, therefore had to be eliminated. Totally ignoring pleas from all over the world to preserve these historic and unique artefacts, some dating back to the seventh century, the Taliban vandals systematically destroyed irreplaceable artworks because of their incredibly stupid and misguided religious zealotry.
    The utter repression practised by the Taliban was just mind-numbing. When the Taliban took control of Kabul in 1996, they imposed the most draconian and literal interpretation of Muslim Sharia law. Alcohol was strictly forbidden, as were most forms of entertainment, including movies and music. All statues and images were banned. Women were forbidden to work, girls were forbidden to attend school beyond the age of eight and men were forced to wear beards and pray in mosques. In fact women were forced to wear head to foot covering when in public and were not allowed out of their houses unless accompanied by a male. The death penalty was automatically imposed for murder, as was the amputation of limbs for theft. Merely the preaching of any religion other than Islam was strictly forbidden and was punishable by death and any Muslim converting to another religion, even voluntarily, faced the death penalty.
    Many Islamic groups are now demanding to impose a mild form of this barbarism in the countries that gave them refuge in the name of humanity. It is important to resist this concept, as any changes to the law or territorial sovereignty must be made with the free and willing consent of the population by democratic means, not by terrorism or coercion. If Islamic fundamentalists desire to live under Sharia law, there are a number of Islamic nations in the world where that can go. If they wish to reside among people of other religions, especially in secular sovereign nations, they do not have the right to demand that those people live under intolerable, repressive or extreme religious laws in a fundamentalist Islamic state.
    The latest in a long line of Islamic orchestrated atrocities occurred on the morning of Tuesday 11 September in New York, where a well coordinated attack using four hijacked passenger aircraft culminated in the destruction of the World Trade Center and partial damage to the Pentagon. The horrendous numbers of innocent people killed was eventually determined to be in excess of 3000. There can be no excuse made for the perpetrators of such a callous and murderous attack, which could only be described as an act of war. One interesting aspect was the constant denial by Osama bin Laden and the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Mohammed Omar and the demands for proof of bin Laden’s complicity in the attacks. However in a videotape made in October 2001, bin Laden literally admitted to having masterminded and organised the attacks on the USA, so he condemned himself by his own words.
    After some weeks of unsuccessful attempts to persuade the Taliban regime in Afghanistan to stop harbouring Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of these atrocities and his al-Qaeda terrorist network and hand him over to the USA for trial, on 08 October 2001 the USA and its ally Great Britain responded by launching an attack on that country. With very little loss of life to the civilian Afghan population and almost no casualties for the US and British military, this short war resulted in the defeat of the Taliban and the installation of an interim government headed by Hamid Karzai, who has expressed his desire to transform Afghanistan into a tolerant and democratic country.
    After surveying the problems caused in so many countries by Muslim fanatics, the only conclusion that any sensible person could arrive at is that these lunatics have a completely different value on human life, as seen by the murderous acts of suicide bombers in Israel, who deliberately target innocent women and children and the Abu Sayyaf Muslim separatists in the Philippines, who kidnap and execute many innocent people merely to make a point.
    Therefore it is obvious that the Muslim fundamentalists cannot be treated in the same manner as those who subscribe to the sanctity of life. It is apparent that these murderous barbarians only understand one language and that is one of death and destruction, therefore it is incumbent on the civilised world to dispatch these people to the same place as their victims, and as quickly as possible.
    General Norman Schwarzkopf of Gulf War fame had the right perspective when asked if there was any room for forgiveness towards the people who have harboured and abetted the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks on the USA on 11 September 2001. Schwarzkopf’s answer was short and to the point. He said, “I believe that forgiving them is God’s function. Our job is simply to arrange the meeting.” }

  27. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Gandhi,
    Sorry to disappoint you – I am upset, but this is really nothing. I’ve had much worse hurled at me. I just have a particular sympathy for the Jews for an awful lot of personal reasons.
    And I’m also well aware that any nation that went after the Jews would also go after those of my, um, ilk.
    But the warlike spirit that has seized and blighted the hearts of so many nations has struck at America. I was jeered on 9/12/01 for not having an American flag on my car. I was jeered on 7/04/02 for blocking traffic while I went to pick up an American flag that had fallen in the road. I shudder to think how many of the people who drove over it that day think of themselves as patriotic. (Americans are scarcely patriotic at all – we are becoming nationalistic. The manner of our concern for the flag belies this.)
    Like every nation that has ever walked this path, we will find where it leads.

  28. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    Kat,
    Thanks. I will read this more thoroughly in a minute. The link I’m looking for is the one that is more in the form of a treatise….it lists (at the beginning) basic ‘laws’, numbered 1 through 15 or so. It is lengthy and cites the Koran throughout… I’m sorry but I cannot remember the source.
    P.S. to gandhi, I can barely type your pseudonym. How Dare you misappropriate his name to further your hate!

  29. oodja Avatar
    oodja

    [T]herefore it is incumbent on the civilised world to dispatch these people to the same place as their victims, and as quickly as possible.
    Or we could attempt to reason with them peacefully, because apparently that seems to work just as well (if not better):
    “Only after winning the militants’ trust does Hitar gradually begin to correct their beliefs. He says that most militants are ordinary people who have been led astray. Just as they were taught Al Qaeda’s doctrines, he says, so too can they be taught more- moderate ideas. “If you study terrorism in the world, you will see that it has an intellectual theory behind it,” says Hitar. “And any kind of intellectual idea can be defeated by intellect.”
    Costs a lot less, too.

  30. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    This is it:(I will need to send Jeff a cheque for bandwidth)
    The answer lies in the systematic brainwashing that Muslims are subjected to since birth. The majority of the Non-Islamic world has deluded itself into believing that the principles of Islam are tolerant in nature. This misconception is heightened when people think that the fault lies with only a handful of misguided Muslims who are not adhering to Islamic principles and hence indulge in terrorism. It is time for the entire world to realise that Islam by its very nature and through its essential principles openly supports, encourages and propogates Terrorism of the worst kind. Therefore the Islamic terrorist is in fact the most devout Muslim, because he is following exactly what Islam teaches through the Divine Koran. It is this very Koran which is considered by Muslims to be the holy word of their Allah himself. The Koran functions as the central terrorist manual that urges them to slaughter, rape, torture,pillage, mutilate and molest all Non-Muslims.
    Actual Quotes from the Koran
    The Muslim Bible commands Muslims to murder all non-Muslims:
    “O Prophet! Make war against the unbelievers [all non-Muslims] and the hypocrites and be merciless against them. Their home is hell, an evil refuge indeed.” (Koran, 9:73)
    “When you meet the unbelievers in jihad [holy war], chop off their heads. And when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously. Then set them free or take ransom from them until the war is ended.” (Koran, 47:4)
    “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and his messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be to be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet and genitals cut off, or to be expelled out of the land. Such will be their humiliation in the world, and in the next world they will face an awful horror.” (Koran, 5:33-34)
    “When we decide to destroy a population, we send a definite order to them who have the good things in life and yet sin. So that Allah’s word is proven true against them, then we destroy them utterly.” (Koran, 17:16-17)
    “In order that Allah may separate the pure from the impure, put all the impure ones [all non-Muslims] one on top of another in a heap and cast them into hell. They will have been the ones to have lost.” (Koran, 8:37)
    “How many were the populations we utterly destroyed because of their sins, setting up in their place other peoples.” (Koran, 21:11)
    “Remember Allah inspired the angels: I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them.” (Koran, 8:12)

  31. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    Sorry, Kat…..and that’s a good one….but that’s not it. I’m going to start looking for it, too.
    Meanwhile, to oodja:
    You need to become educated, too. It is not ‘intellectual theory’ we’re dealing with here. Rather, it is fanatic, extremist, lunatic, fundamentalist Shariah Islamic religious LAW. And unless you’re prepared to become a follower, you’re basically toast. I don’t care how much you wish to believe Islamic terrorists are ‘ordinary people’, to suggest you can coax them to intellectually denounce their religious tenets is ludicrous. Moreover, they are well aware that doing so would only result in their Own death warrants, according to Sharia law.

  32. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Kat,
    You will get no argument from me that Islam helps to lay an ideological foundation for inhuman acts of violence. (So do Christianity and Marxism, among other systems of belief.) I will also not argue with you – for you are, I think, 100% right – that fundamentalist movements within Islam, such as the Wahhabists, are a very great danger to the societies that they inhabit. And I don’t think it needs to be mentioned that the terrorists they spawn are a threat to us, and must be stopped.
    I also think – I hope – you’d agree with me that the crucial battleground is really in hearts and minds. Or should we simply nuke ’em all, and let Allah sort it out, as so many were ready to do after 9/11? Or should we offer them “the Bible or the M-1 Abrams”? (Didn’t Ann Coulter suggest something along these lines?)
    Is that what you would have us do? If Islam is so evil, should Americans be allowed to practice it? Should we be allowed to not hate it? Surely you wouldn’t support such steps!
    Also, I thought that we were going to bomb and conquer Muslim countries in order to give them freedom and democracy. How does that square with:
    It is apparent that these murderous barbarians only understand one language and that is one of death and destruction, therefore it is incumbent on the civilised world to dispatch these people to the same place as their victims, and as quickly as possible.
    There is eagerness in those words, Kat. This is the language of retribution. It is a language in which our terrorist enemies are quite fluent.
    Fundamentalist Islam can only be thwarted by the actions of other Muslims. Just as the extreme-right elements in Israel can only be stopped by other Jews. If we try to force the Muslim world to conform to our vision of it – no matter what that vision may be – we will wind up galvanizing Muslims around the ideology of Al-Qaeda.
    P.S. – I hear that the situation in France is somewhat worse than you describe. A French friend tells me that, indeed, Muslim parts of many cities are effectively “no-go” areas, and that the police are of little help against Muslim criminals. (Her family has, literally, fled to the countryside.) But I think that a successful Muslim insurrection in France is unlikely. The French can be quite tough. More plausible is that, eventually, the French (and other components of the EU) will get fed up and will purge pretty much all of the Muslims – this will be an important step on their march toward fascism.
    P.P.S. – I don’t want to be petty. But I ask you, Kat, to either substantiate your insinuation that I’m an anti-Semite or retract it.

  33. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    stevek,
    Shari’a is only one brand of Islam. The rest of the religion, as I understand it, does Not adopt their extremist tenets. Hence, Shiites v. Sunis (the sect which has adopted Shari’a law) in Iraq. Hence the ‘Suni triangle’, where terrorists use mosques to stage their battles. Hence Sunis bombing Shiite mosques in Pakistan. Hence Suni clerics who issued fatwas to their people NOT to vote, then turned around and claimed they were disenfranchised from voting on Sunday. [Oh, and MSM will then talk endlessly about the poor Suni population who aren’t represented in the new Iraqi government ad nauseum, because they’re too stupid to understand the basis for Shari’a terrorist religious mandates to begin with.]
    Again, You need to learn about Shari’a LAW.

  34. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Eileen,
    I will strive to learn more about Shari’a. My impression was that it is accepted by all Muslims, Shi’a and Sunni alike, although there is a mind-boggling diversity of opinion and practice. As Shari’a takes as its sources not only the Qu’ran, but also the Hadith – not all of which are as accepted as authentic by all Muslims – the complexity thickens. So I thought. I didn’t think that Shari’a commands acts of terrorism against all infidels. But it is something about which I should read. Or are there Muslims (or scholars) out there who could clarify this?
    I share your contempt for (along with a hearty belly-laugh at) the Sunni clerics who issued fatwas against the election, then complained about being disenfranchised. It reminds me of George Bush prompting the weapons inspectors to leave by threat of imminent attack, and then blaming Saddam for throwing them out.

  35. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    “It reminds me of George Bush prompting the weapons inspectors to leave by threat of imminent attack, and then blaming Saddam for throwing them out.” Either I was dead or deaf or dumb or blind when you claim Bush did this. Saddam had thrown them out several years earlier.
    HelLO? Stick to learning about Shari’a/Sunis/TERRORISTS for me for a minute will you please, eh?
    Good night.

  36. paul_lukasiak Avatar
    paul_lukasiak

    steve….
    you do appreciate the irony in these Anti-semitic bigots (who hate Arab semites) accusing you of being anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish).
    I mean, how many times have you seen that same list of bogus “Koran” quotes that kat provided? Its not like kat has the first clue about Islam, but because he can cut and paste from a wingnut website he thinks he understands stuff.

  37. oodja Avatar
    oodja

    Eileen,
    I know enough about Islamic law and Shari’a to know that your crackerjack pop analysis comes from a long historical tradition of Christian “debunking” texts and not through any serious study of the subject. You also obviously didn’t read the article I linked to in the Christian Science Monitor. Contrary to your and Kat’s demonization of Islam as fundamentally arational, even in its most reactionary manifestations there is a respect for reason and logic that can be appealed to successfully, as the outreach efforts of Judge Hitar in Yemen with former Al-Qaeda members has demonstrated.
    Only someone who never intended peaceful coexistence in the first place would fail to find such a news item cheering. Yemen was one of the world’s worst hotbeds of radical Islam, and now in no small part through rational intellectual engagement this is no longer the case. Or are you just so hell-bent on killing yourself some Hadjis that you don’t care what they say or do at this point?

  38. oodja Avatar
    oodja

    p.s.,
    Shari’a is not a “form of Islam”. It is the system of Muslim jurisprudence which although demonized in its most extreme manifestations in places like Afghanistan appears in progressive and Reformist contexts in many modern Islamic nations. Again, something you might know if you didn’t derive all your knowledge of Islam from anti-Islamic tracts and cherrypicking quotes from the Qu’ran.

  39. Esther Avatar
    Esther

    SteveK, I’m not Kat but I’ll explain why your words can be taken as anti-Semitic. Because you hold Israel out to unique criticism and demonization. As for unconditional aid to Israel, it is conditional and based on agreements between Egypt and Jordan to get aid from the US as well. But Israel aid, comes back in the form of trade, technology and medical research. Can’t say that about Egypt, Jordan or almost every other country that receives our aid.

  40. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Esther,
    I don’t believe in foreign aid, period. I think it’s morally wrong to loot the American people to enrich foreign governments – in all cases, always. I’m not singling out Israel at all – and you will note, perusing my original post, that I didn’t even criticize Israel, much less demonize it. It just happens that in that case, there is the added problem of creating a readymade propaganda line for our enemies.
    And the aid “comes back”? You mean, they spend in on American stuff. So what? It’s still theft, and I still defy anyone to give me any good reason for Israel – or any nation – to receive aid from the American government. What, do we owe it to them? Or do we owe it to our brave American corporations?
    Socialysm is sick. That its benefits accrue to the already rich makes it even more sick.

  41. kat Avatar
    kat

    Stevek–I did not accuse you of anti-semitism, but of blaming Israel for refusing to go into the sea and the US for helping her exist. What would you have us do–allow the PLO charter to come to fruition so that they could fly their flag which shows Israel as part of a new muslim state? You are a smart guy–you know what happened the last time we turned our backs on the Jews? That happened to the Copts and Armenians,etc.too because we never helped.
    You do know what the PLO charter states, don’t you?
    1. Through the “armed struggle” (i.e., terrorism), to establish an “independent combatant national authority” over any territory that is “liberated” from Israeli rule. (Article 2)
    2. To continue the struggle against Israel, using the territory of the national authority as a base of operations. (Article 4)
    3. To provoke an all-out war in which Israel’s Arab neighbors destroy it entirely (Article 8)
    Do you suggest we should allow modern day Nazis, the islamofascists, to finish Hitler’s work?
    http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/

  42. Eileen Avatar
    Eileen

    “I know enough about Islamic law and Shari’a to know that your crackerjack pop analysis comes from a long historical tradition of Christian “debunking” texts and not through any serious study of the subject.” Actually, oodja, you couldn’t be more incorrect. I am not a Christian, and have never studied any Christian ‘debunking’ texts.
    Rather, my information comes from articles such as this: http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/21475
    This is the treatise Kat provided some time ago, and you will note it is based on a translated compilation of works by ancient Islamic scholars:
    “This work is the first translation of a standard Islamic legal reference in a European language to be certified by al-Azhar, the Muslim world

  43. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Kat,
    Ok, maybe I misinterpreted what you wrote me. I got a little steamed… maybe I jumped to conclusions. You state:
    I did not accuse you of anti-semitism, but of blaming Israel for refusing to go into the sea and the US for helping her exist.
    Do you really think that Israel would ‘go into the sea’ without American aid? Is Israel weak? Is Israel poor? Would stopping the flow of U.S. dollars be a step toward the destruction of Israel? I think that all of these propositions are ludicrous. Israel is more than capable of defending itself. Even were the whole Muslim world to attack it, I think that Israel would prevail.
    What I said is that America should end its practice of foreign aid, universally. Surely, this would cause disruptions in many countries – well, as far as I’m concerned, any foreigner who feels entitled to a cut of my paycheck can go straight to hell. That’s the central issue for me.
    Foreign aid in general is also a bad idea because it usually translates into money given to foreign governments. It seems inevitable to me that this brings with it many kinds of corruption. In the particular case of Israel, such aid also makes us many enemies.
    I would add that, if I lived in a country that received regular U.S. aid, I would view such aid as a threat to my country’s sovreignty. And as an American, I would view any nation that subsidized the U.S. government, or garrisoned forces on U.S. soil on any pretext, to be my enemy, and would work with what patriots I could find to drive them back home.
    Do you suggest we should allow modern day Nazis, the islamofascists, to finish Hitler’s work?
    While I think there are many valid points of comparison, I maintain that it is a gross and misleading oversimplification to see the ‘islamofascists’ (not wholly accurate) as the heirs of the Nazis. Maybe we’ll have to take this up… but do you really think they’re capable of “finishing Hitler’s work”? Israel has one of the most powerful military forces on Earth. If they were to try, they could probably crush every Arab military inside a month.
    Another interesting aspect of your perspective is that America, evidently, is the only force capable of defending the innocent. I think this is far from true – why do the French / British / Russians / Spanish / Greeks / etc. not share blame for the slaughter of the Armenians or the Copts? Or why not blame the victims? I’m not serious, but I do believe that civilians of every nation should provide for their own defense by maintaining arms and skill in their use. History is full of examples of what happens when trust is placed in States…
    Or why not blame the people who actually carried out such atrocities?
    It is also strange that you would assume I’m in favor of the PLO and its goals, of which I am quite aware. I have great affection for Israel, and little love for the PLO. This is one reason (go on and flame me, other side) that I don’t support an ‘independent’ Palestinian state. I think that Israel should annex the West Bank, and either hand over the Gaza Strip to Egypt or push Egypt back to the Suez. But Israel isn’t my nation, so my opinion on this is rather idle.
    Also, Eileen – thanks for that link. I will undertake to read it.

  44. Esther Avatar
    Esther

    SteveK, you say, “In the particular case of Israel, such aid also makes us many enemies.”
    See, it’s statements like this that can get you into trouble. I think I know what you’re trying to say, because you don’t want to give aid to anyone, but to say something like this is playing into the hands of true anti-Semites/paleocons. If we stopped giving money to Israel, those “enemies” you speak of wouldn’t suddenly like us. That’s a canard. Don’t play into that. As for what I said before about what we get in return for our aid to Israel, their technology and medical research benefit us in incalculable ways. Their advances with weapons systems, etc… so that money is very well spent. I guess you’re just an isolationist, which is fine. I just don’t think we can afford to put our heads in the sand like that when we’re pretty much involved in World War III (tho some would say IV).

  45. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Esther,
    I hope I’m not playing into any anti-Semitic hands, but would take some small issue with equating ‘paleocons’ with ‘anti-Semites’ – there is, surely, some overlap, but traditional conservatives should not have to live under such suspicion.
    I realize that stopping U.S. aid to Israel wouldn’t make friends of our enemies, but it would, I think, make a difference with many of the ambivalent. And I still don’t get it – is U.S. aid to Israel necessary in order for our two nations to remain friends? Would they stop trading with us, or exchanging ideas, without the lucre? If so, what the heck kind of friendship is that?!?
    But I think this is hardly the case. Trade and the exchange of ideas are natural and inevitable – they occur even when governments try to prevent them. They certainly don’t need the lube of $$$$$$$ handed out in order to function!
    And I think that only the barest fraction of government money is ever well spent! Even without U.S. government aid to the Israeli government, America would still help Israel (and vice-versa) a great deal.
    You’re right that I tend toward isolationism. My general distrust of government dictates this, and I can’t help but note how our interventions abroad (as at home) have, whatever their native merits, been often justified on the basis of a bunch of lies. And I think it obvious that this is a practical matter as well as a moral one.
    I would also suggest that we are not, in fact, in a World War, nor indeed in a real state of war at all. But we’re working hard toward that end every day. Whatever you want to call the system of government with which we’ve replaced our constitutional republic, it’s plain as day that it requires perpetual (and fake) ‘war’ in order to function. Which is reason enough to scrap it, as far as I’m concerned.

  46. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    I agree that much foreign aid is abused. I think the intent is good but the result is not . I don’t believe we should never help people in need. I think we were wrong not to intervene in Rwanda. I think what happened in Ethiopia was because foreign aid was slow in arriving. I am sick and tired of poverty being used as an excuse for muslims to terrorize. It is their fault, not mine. How can a region that is richest in resources have the most impoverishd and illiterate people in the world with a total GNP of all 50 some states, less than that of Spain?
    No, the US should not have to always be the one to be blamed for the AIDS in Africa or the genocide in Darfur, but I don’t see anyone else stepping to the plate.
    I don’t support an independent terrorist state either. But I do not blame the Jews for the mess there–I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of muslim terrorists and Arab states and their European allies. I think US support of Israel is important . I don’t give a crap that the Arab states and Europe resent American Power and, by extension, see Israel as a Jewish outpost of American policy. I can’t help it if they are frustrated by their history of failure and defeat. I guess having to be rescued from two World Wars and to be rebuilt with American dollars was humiliating. But being anti-semitic like them is too high a price to pay to be liked by Arab terrorist enablers and Jacques Chirac and Co. Screw them. They can’t force Israel to commit political suicide.

  47. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Kat,
    See – we’re not so different. I think the roots of our points of view are, indeed, pretty close… but we’re reaching very different conclusions. I’d like to try to resolve that. But I’d also like to examine a couple of your points.
    How can a region that is richest in resources have the most impoverishd and illiterate people in the world with a total GNP of all 50 some states, less than that of Spain?
    This is a really interesting point. In general, an abundance of resources doesn’t seem to lead to progress or wealth. The resources of Africa and Central Asia are vast – look how much it’s helped them out. Comparatively, places like Japan and England, for instance, are resource-poor. Not too long ago I read a pretty worthwhile essay on this.. I will look for the link.
    It’s also worth pointing out, I think, that the Muslim world was (comparatively) vibrant and progressive when it was resource-poor… before the modern oil were uncovered…
    I don’t give a crap that the Arab states and Europe resent American Power and, by extension, see Israel as a Jewish outpost of American policy. I can’t help it if they are frustrated by their history of failure and defeat.
    I shudder that you capitalize ‘Power’. To resent the power of others is a natural tendency, and the way in which America has used that power, as of late, has not helped matters. But power really is something to be feared – even your own power. I would much rather America be powerful enough to defend herself, without (as has happened) coming to worship power as an end in itself.
    Also, why are you so angry at the rest of the world? Is there any nation (other than the U.S. and Israel) for which you have respect? And do you really think that the two world wars were really all about America? That the ‘good guys’ would never have prevailed without our help? Or that we needed to rebuild Europe in the way we did? I think that all of these points could be reasonably disputed.

  48. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    No great invention has come for many hundred years from Muslim countries, unless you count a homicide vest as one. I think they stole that from the Tamils. And conquering civilizations and stealing their ideas as you impose that islamic crap on them gets you the Crusades.
    Don’t get your shirt in a knot, that was an honest grammatical capitalization error.

  49. stevek Avatar
    stevek

    Kat,
    I’m sorry! I make grammatical errors all the time – I thought you were trying to make a point…
    Jeez, I am a touchy person! I should really just slowly back away from the keyboard, face the fact that I am under the influence of a diet of nothing but coffee and chewing gum, and take some corrective action.
    You’re not endorsing the Crusades, are you, Kat? ;>

  50. Kat Avatar
    Kat

    I was kidding about the shirt in a knot. :)::)but it was an honest error.
    Yes, I am. I don’t endorse some of what happened, but the Crusades were necessary or I’d be wearing a long shapeless thing and a
    hood on my face. I’d rather fight to be Christian than not and be forced to be a muslim. I would even today if it came to that.
    http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm

  51. Esther Avatar
    Esther

    I’m not sure anything is left for me to say, stevek. Kat seems to have handled things and everyone is playing nicely. I’ll try not to malign the paleocons but from where I’m sitting, they do seem to be an anti-Israel bunch. As for whether Israel needs our aid, I think their economy is improving but I think losing our aid would hurt it tremendously. I’m not positive of that; someone here must know more. I do think it sucks we have to pay Egpyt and Jordan to not attack Israel. That’s what I mean by at least we get something back from Israel. They put the aid to great use. I don’t think it’s going to buy arms and being smuggled through tunnels to Gaza.