[Welcome, Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish readers]
In an article written for the London Telegraph, Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo says:
"You have to distinguish between ordinary Muslims and their self-appointed leaders," explains Dr Sookhdeo. "I agree that the best hope for our collective future is that the majority of Muslims who have grown up here have accepted the secular nature of the British state and society, the division between religion and politics, and the importance of allowing people to choose freely how they will live."According to the Telegraph, Dr. Sookhdeo is a secular Briton. According to Islamophobia Watch, Dr. Sookhdeo is a Nazi and an Islamaphobe.
Islamophobia Watch also labels Hirsi Ali as a right-wing "provocateur"
The Telegraph believed that an article about Dr. Sookhdeo's criticism of some Muslim leaders and their efforts to bring Sharia to the UK, titled 'The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state' should be published.
Someone with influence disagreed. The article has now been pulled from the Telegraph's website, for "legal reasons"
It was also removed from Google's cache. It is, however, still in Yahoo's cache. It's also reprinted in parts here, here here and here:
The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state'I don't agree with Sookhdeo's ideas about getting rid of faith-based education, but I don't see anything libelous or illegal in this article.
By Alasdair Palmer
(Filed: 19/02/2006)
For the past two weeks, Patrick Sookhdeo has been canvassing the opinions of Muslim clerics in Britain on the row over the cartoons featuring images of Mohammed that were first published in Denmark and then reprinted in several other European countries.
"They think they have won the debate," he says with a sigh. "They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.
"The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that's a clear victory.
"It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent."
Dr Sookhdeo adds that he believes that "in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.
"It is already starting to happen - and unless the Government changes the way it treats the so-called leaders of the Islamic community, it will continue."
For someone with such strong and uncompromising views, Dr Sookhdeo is a surprisingly gentle and easy-going man. He speaks with authority on Islam, as it was his first faith: he was brought up as a Muslim in Guyana, the only English colony in South America, and attended a madrassa there.
"But Islamic instruction was very different in the 1950s, when I was at school," he says. "There was no talk of suicide bombing or indeed of violence of any kind. Islam was very peaceful."...
...Several years ago, Dr Sookhdeo insisted that the next wave of radical Islam in Britain would involve suicide bombings in this country. His prediction was depressingly confirmed on 7/7 last year.
So his claim that, in the next decade, the Muslim community in Britain will not be integrated into mainstream British society, but will isolate itself to a much greater extent, carries weight behind it. Dr Sookhdeo has proved his prescience....
..."The whole approach towards Muslim militants was based on appeasement. 7/7 proved that that approach does not work - yet it is still being followed. For example, there is a book, The Noble Koran: a New Rendering of its Meaning in English, which is openly available in Muslim bookshops.
"It calls for the killing of Jews and Christians, and it sets out a strategy for killing the infidels and for warfare against them. The Government has done nothing whatever to interfere with the sale of that book.
"Why not? Government ministers have promised to punish religious hatred, to criminalise the glorification of terrorism, yet they do nothing about this book, which blatantly does both."
Perhaps the explanation is just that they do not take it seriously. "I fear that is exactly the problem," says Dr Sookhdeo. "The trouble is that Tony Blair and other ministers see Islam through the prism of their own secular outlook.
They simply do not realise how seriously Muslims take their religion. Islamic clerics regard themselves as locked in mortal combat with secularism...
... concentrate Muslim presence in a particular area until you are a majority in that area, so that the institutions of the local community come to reflect Islamic structures. The education system will be Islamic, the shops will serve only halal food, there will be no advertisements showing naked or semi-naked women, and so on."
That plan, says Dr Sookhdeo, is being followed in Britain. "That is why you are seeing areas which are now almost totally Muslim. The next step will be pushing the Government to recognise sharia law for Muslim communities - which will be backed up by the claim that it is "racist" or "Islamophobic" or "violating the rights of Muslims" to deny them sharia law.
"There's already a Sharia Law Council for the UK. The Government has already started making concessions: it has changed the law so that there are sharia-compliant mortgages and sharia pensions.
"Some Muslims are now pressing to be allowed four wives: they say it is part of their religion. They claim that not being allowed four wives is a denial of their religious liberty. There are Muslim men in Britain who marry and divorce three women, then marry a fourth time - and stay married, in sharia law, to all four.
"The more fundamentalist clerics think that it is only a matter of time before they will persuade the Government to concede on the issue of sharia law. Given the Government's record of capitulating, you can see why they believe that."
Dr Sookhdeo's vision of a relentless battle between secular and Islamic Britain seems hard to reconcile with the co-operation that seems to mark the vast majority of the interactions between the two communities.
"Well, it isn't me who says Islam is at war with secularisation," he says. "That's how Islamic clerics describe the situation."...
..."Take, for example, Tariq Ramadan, whom the Government has appointed as an adviser because ministers think he is a 'community leader'. Ramadan sounds, in public, very moderate. But in reality, he has some very extreme views. He attacks liberal Muslims as 'Muslims without Islam'. He is affiliated to the violent and uncompromising Muslim Brotherhood.
"He calls the education in the state schools of the West 'aggression against the Islamic personality of the child'. He has said that 'the Muslim respects the laws of the country only if they do not contradict any Islamic principle'. He has added that 'compromising on principles is a sign of fear and weakness'."
So what's the answer? What should the Government be doing? "First, it should try to engage with the real Muslim majority, not with the self-appointed 'community leaders' who don't actually represent anyone: they have not been elected, and the vast majority of ordinary Muslims have nothing to do with them.
"Second, the Government should say no to faith-based schools, because they are a block to integration. There should be no compromise over education, or over English as the language of education. The policy of political multiculturalism should be reversed.
"The hope was that it would to ensure separate communities would soften at the edges and integrate. But the opposite has in fact happened: Islamic communities have hardened. There is much less integration than there was for the generation that arrived when I did. There will be much less in the future if the present trend continues.
"Finally, the Government should make it absolutely clear: we welcome diversity, we welcome different religions - but all of them have to accept the secular basis of British law and society. That is a non-negotiable condition of being here.
"If the Government does not do all of those things then I fear for the future, because Islamic communities within Britain will form a state within a state. Religion will occupy an ever-larger place in our collective political life. And, speaking as a religious man myself, I fear that outcome.
Do you?
The war isn't Islam vs. Christianity. It's not even anti-terror vs. terror. It's human rights vs. sharia.
[links thanks to Charles and commenters at LGF]
When you write that the war isn't Islam vs Christianity, it is only partially true because it really is Islam vs Western Christianity.
Muslims understand it that way, and they are right. Western anti-Muslim hatred wasn't just born yesterday, it is part of western culture. Western culture, despite the "tolerant" face its tries to put out, is still deeply intolerant of others who are different. When I write different, I don't mean another westerner with a slightly different taste. I mean as different as the European Jew was.
The massacre of millions of Jews wasn't a coincidence or an act of one madman or a clandestine group on the run like Al-Qaeda. The WESTERN massacre of these OTHER people was supported by all fields of western society: from academia, media, and industries to all branches of governmentS.
The massacre of the native Indians in America (95% of them were exterminated) is also another example to consider. The Indian could have converted to Christianity, and some did, but that was not enough because the Indian could not be brought to become a WESTERN Christian. The Indian Christian couldn't just forget about his centuries old traditions (that bothered the westerner).
Later came the enslavement and kidnapping of blacks. The blacks were not exterminated like the Indians because the westerners who ruled America really did not consider them humans. They were considered animals and valuable like any other animal out there. Note that the Indians were not considered Animals; in the eyes of Westerners, they had some kind of civilization, but it was too different to accept, therefore had to be terminated. The blacks, in western mind, had no civilization whatosever.
Later on things changed a little, Jim Crow laws landed in the land of the free, racism was even enforced in Western Christian churches, something, that would never happen in Middle Eastern Christianity.
That basically sums the inherent intolerance in Western culture. Anyone who believes western culture has changed radically in the last 40 years is quite naive.
The Nazi ovens are still warm and the wounds of the Native Indians are still deep and painful. For the blacks, well in the westerner mind, they are still taught what civilization is. They are "dogs" on a leech, shot and put back in their cages (black ghettos and US prisons) when they get too "wild".
TO go back to the original subject, Western christian societies have codified many Christian-based laws and morals into what they call today "secular law".
Who says marriage is only between men and women? who says polygamy should be banned?
Well it is all rooted in Christian western beliefs (emphasis on Western as opposed to oriental where Christianity came from).
Sharia is just a bunch of codified laws that were put together in the Middle ages. There is nothing inherently "evil" about it. They are as outdated as Western concept of marriage and not as old as Jewish religious laws that many faithful Jews observe.
Please stop wasting my time with lame and irrelevant moral equivalencies. Sharia laws are more brutal and more discriminatory than any other legal system in existence today. The nations that are ruled by Sharia are intolerant, imperialistic and genocidal. We're talking about the facts that exist today, not half a century ago or hundreds of years past.
It doesn't matter where they came from or what they're based on, the fact is, Sharia laws are considered to be brutal and downright criminal by every other system on earth. Sharia legalizes genocide and of slavery. Arabs and Muslims have used these laws to justify their atrocities against anyone they deem to be 'infidels', including fellow Muslims. Arabs and Muslims have used Sharia to justify their history of enslaving blacks for more than a thousand years. They're still enslaving and torturing blacks in Africa. However, the culture in general wasn't always as brutal and non-productive as it is now. Arab/Muslim culture, financed by oil money and Wahhabi-based Sharia, is currently at its absolute nadir.
As far as Western culture goes, we do have a history of being intolerant, especially of the sort of fascism that Islamism/Sharia represents. We're no more or less intolerant than most, but we have better toys. We're currently somewhat crippled by our efforts to live up to liberal/Christian/multiculti standards, but that may change at some not-always-predictable point. That's the only history that's relevant here.
There is no such thing as "Sharia laws". Sharia itself has different versions and is quite diverse. The Sharia in Saudi Arabia is not the same as the one in Tunisia, and is not the same one in Iran neither.
As to brutality, the United States government still kills its own convicted citizens (by poisoning them). In 2004, the US was ranked 4th in the entire world in terms of its record in the death penalty business. China was ranked first, but I know that western culture needs its cheap nikies from it.
Now don't tell me this is some wacko law enforced by some madman on the run like Bin-Laden. It is part of US culture. It is an institution. US citizens pay government employees to kill convicted prisoners, watch them die, make sure they actually died (if not poison them more), then sign off their books and put the government seals. Barbaric or civilized? ...oh i know, its the civilized lethal injection, we "Western people" make sure the person doesn't suffer.
That's how all massacres committed by the "culture" you write about were justified and distorted throughout its modern history.
Note I left out the imperial colonial days of "democratic free Europe" that colonized half of the globe and killed people with impunity as if they were parasites.
You argue that western culture have a history of fascism that is similar to Islamism.
No it is not similar.
Nothing can compare to western fascism.
Just name me another nation that built railroads, then using them, transported human beings in trains in order to put them in Ovens and Gas chambers.
There is only one. GERMANY. The land of Beethoven that is so celebrated in Western culture. All other Western European nations helped in, and send few of their Jews into the death camps.
The other western nation that stayed away from this massacre, and not that it didn't earn its own Indian genocide prize, got involved in the end. To end the war, the western way so they say, the US government had to drop 2 nuclear bombs on 2 civilian cities, killing its children, women and elderly in few seconds. A very popular move that earned the bombers (really genociders) medals of WESTERN honor.
The western warS ended...but it turns out that there was not enough killing to rest on. Vietnam had to be there, and 2 million Vietnamese were massacred, all in the western quest to "save these people".
Then came Gulf war I, and lately Gulf War II.
It is all the same story.
There is no such thing as "multi-cultural western standards". They are multi-western standards.
Your dribble is only made by thoughts like yours and for thoughts like yours too.
The topic was the inabilty of european muslims to integrate into the societies that they mooch off of.Granted,we Americans don't really have a problem with our muslims integrating.I beleive the reason for this is our brutal devotion to the constitution.American muslims know that we as a people can get amazingly violent when anyone attempts to subvert our laws and traditions.Your species are able to pull their separate society crap in europe because the europeans don't have the guts to put you in your proper place.By all means enjoy the fruits of our superior society,but know that should you attempt to subvert that society,you will die.Islam is a primative shame based culture that is obsessed with ideas of fear and humiliation(wether giving or receiving,these two ideas are allways on their minds).Turning the other cheek with muslims is like wearing a steak suit to go pet feral dogs.The only things you lowly sons of dogs respect is death and humiliation.If you continue to press us with your demonic relegion and your primitive demands,we will surely give you a good dose of both.Make no mistake swine...we are skilled killers and one of us is worth a thousand of you mindless pigs.
with regards,
Robert Alpy
I'm not sure if the story in this link is true (17 year old girl sentenced to death), it is linked in a few different places. At least the convicts on death row in the US have had some type of legal representation, as well as have committed some kind of heinous crime that, by the laws passed in each state, would subject the,to the death penalty.
How many religions have crashed planes into large buildings full of people at work? ONLY ONE, ISLAM. Is this a really good and valid argument? At least during WWII, some countries in the 'western' culture saw what was happening and fought back and, thanks to their courage, managed to rid the world of this evil. Where are the Islamic leaders that will outright denounce terrorism? Where are the people from Islam who will stand side by side with other human brethren to stop suicide bombings?
I think your logic is all twisted up, unfortunately, by how much hate you have in you.
Good question.
a-) economics. People (whether Muslims or other people that western culture can't accept) know that deep inside the "Western culture", racism is still there. It can't just disappear within 40 years. b-) ignorance. "Western culture" puts a good amount of effort in propaganda. Its feel-good self-serving propaganda consists of putting on the mask of "we are tolerant multicultural people". In reality, it works like this: "You other people can come to our countries but we have to put you in ghettos. You can't live among us".
Western intolerance and racism has just evolved and has taken new sophisticated forms of discrimination.
The issue comes down to this:
Can the western thought (here I m talking about the average people) look at blacks, Indians, people with different habits and religions, straight in the eye and feel the same way they do towards another Western man?
The answer is NO.
In the US, when a white-man marries a black-woman (which is rare), it still raises eyebrows! Please!
For the subject of suicide bombers, Muslim-Arabs were not the first ones to crash planes into targets.
But to answer your question, the difference between that and western fascism is that Al-Qaeda was not an Islamic cultural effort that involved all sectors of society. Al-Qaeda is a gang of people who got together and killed people. Fascism is factories, railroads, armies, scientists, politicians, etc.
Not saying that Islamic culture can't descend into fascism, my point is that it hasn't yet and probably won't because it wasn't born few decades back.
Islamic culture also doesn't look down on different people the same way western culture does. History teaches us that during WWII Muslim states who had Jewish citizens, and who were under European fascist rule, protected their them despite the tensions between the 2 communities.
It is easy for you to say "live side by side" when your culture has engaged in the biggest organized killings of others in modern history.
There is no "at least" in death row cases. The US until recently still convicted minors with capital punishment....but in line with the usual hypocrisy of western thought, they say "we will only kill these convicted minors after they become adults!".
Iran is a violator of human rights the same way the US is.
The US government has killed more people (count all the wars) than all Iranian governments combined since the 70s.
The US government and its neo-fascist army could have killed 10 million Vietnamese had the death toll on the US side stayed "reasonable".
Western Europe was largely silent when the US was massacring viets. In fact, they were business partners with the US government.
The French government still teaches its schoolkids that "French colonialism" was a force of good.
Bryanj,
There was no worldwide celebration of 9-11. That is utterly false. Some thought the US deserved it but that included non-Muslims too (Latin America).
And speaking of Latin America, Hugo Chavez, who is not a Muslim or Arab, has not called Bush as a terrorist for nothing; he just summarized all of what I said in that label against the elected president of the so-called "Free world".
You make very valid points about US and Western history, but your attempt to attribute these sins to "Western Christian" culture reveals a prejudice similar to that of the Islamophobes who wrote those disgusting rants after your post. On the one hand, you're happy to attribute the sins of Germany 50 years ago and US now to the Western culture in general, but dismiss criticism of Iran as nonrepresentative of Islamic culture. You can't have it both ways.
I don't believe in propensity of any group of people or culture for good or bad. What corrupts people of any religion is absolutism, as evidenced by Nazism, Stalinism, Maoism, fundamentalist Islam or Christianity, or even absolute belief in American goodness. Whenever people feel they are justified to kill for a better tomorrow, you will have mounds of dead bodies but no bright future. Unfortunately, that viewpoint is in evidence in a substantial part of the Muslim world. That doesn't say anything bad about Islam in general or Muslims as people, but this evil ideology of death and intolerance of anyone with different beliefs must be opposed.
The Western ideals (not that they are always upheld) of freedom of thought, speech, the rule of law, have nothing to do with Christianity, which is why they are fought tooth and nail by fundy Christian wackos here in the US. You're right that US and Western foreign policies have been horrible, like of any empire in the past, and I oppose them, but that does not invalidate the achievement of a relatively free society domestically. Having grown up Soviet Union, I can really tell and appreciate the difference, and I can see nothing culture-specific about these big Enlightenment ideals.
You repeatedly cite the worst of what has happened in Western societies.
Is it your point, in citing these instances, to justify the call to kill Jews and Christians? Does the fact that Hitler did it in the 1940's make it right for Muslinms to do the same in the 21st century?
Are you really saying that?
And if not, what, then, is your point?
Not saying that Islamic culture can't descend into fascism, my point is that it hasn't yet and probably won't because it wasn't born few decades back.
According to this article in the Asia Times, Islamic culture descended into fascism a long time ago:
And here is a group of modern Islamist Nazis, doing the classic salute.
The US government and its neo-fascist army could have killed 10 million Vietnamese had the death toll on the US side stayed "reasonable".
What a very Chomskyesqe argument, full of half-truths. It's not true that the US government/military is neo-fascist, but it is true that we did have the ability to easily wipe out the Vietnamese. We didn't, but lets just concentrate on our abilities for the sake of argument.
We also have the ability to easily wipe out every Muslim on the face of the planet. We probably won't, but the fact is, we could. Given that fact, Muslims should probably ask themselves why their current Wahhabi-inspired Imams and fascist-inspired political leaders are so anxious to wage war with us. Are your leaders trying to do good things for the general population? Have your leaders ever done good things for the general population before? No.
Are they trying to grab all of the money and the power they can, are they stuffing billions of dollars into Swiss bank accounts and fueling up their Learjets and their Mercedes to make a break for it when the party is over? They've always done that before, (although Mullah Omar broke with tradition by using a motorcycle). There's no reason why they wouldn't be doing it now.
Your so-called war against the West is just another con from the same folks who have been conning you for decades - your leaders. And you're falling for it. That's what makes your arguments so sad.
Many of the points that Felix makes are true and valid. However his tone seems to suggest that Western civilization is more evil because of the death and destruciton it has caused has been greater. But that is more a matter of greater resources and technology in the art of death-dealing than Iran or other Islamic countries. If Iran had nukes to drop on Iraq in the 80's, it would have.
I am a huge fan of Western civilization but I recognize it's true history and it's limits. The "tolerance" of the West is only a recent phenomenon and evolves out of "liberal" Christian ideas. If a white-black couple raises eyebrows, that is far better than 50 or more years ago when it caused violence, typically in the form of lynchings. I live in Detroit, which is one of most segregated metropolitan areas in America. Yet even here the progress has been great.
Muslims have come to America (as they have Britain) for primarily economic reasons. While over the decades there have been some criminal incidences of racial or religious bigotry (mostly fights, graffitti), there has been far more acceptance. In the neighboring city of Dearborn, Muslims are increasingly taking the reins of city governance and political influence. There is a magnificent mosque in Dearborn that proudly takes its place among a row of churches. An Arab festival is held where many people come to enjoy the arts of Muslim culture. This is far better than the hatred, violence and oppression (political and economic) that immigrants (mostly White European) faced in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
But no society is free from the evils of men. If no Westerner can look upon an Other (in race, nationality or religion) and feel the same as they do towards those who are the Same, neither can the Muslim (or Buddhist or Hindu, etc.) Because in human psychology, we group people in our minds and those who are Other are treated differently as those who are the Same.
Speaking of human psychology and human evils, do not think that a Muslim community is not susceptible to fascism. It is a basic human impulse to look to leaders to take action against "threats" and often a populace is willing to give up liberties to do so. Neither age of culture or greatness of cause innoculates a civilization. The word "fascism" is Western, but Mao and the Chinese Communists were very fascist--and you can't more Oriental then China. It is only a deep suspicion of leaders that fosters a political culture that innoculates against fascism. This is a quality missing in current American culture; hence the compliance in allowing the current Administration to develop the technological and legal tools to spy and imprison Amercans without legar redress. President Bush is unpopular because of his perceived ineffectiveness, not because of his corruption of protections of individuals against the state.
“The massacre of millions of Jews wasn't a coincidence or an act of one madman or a clandestine group on the run like Al-Qaeda. The WESTERN massacre of these OTHER people was supported by all fields of western society: from academia, media, and industries to all branches of governments.”
Tell me, Karim, what happened when Islam had the upper hand. What happened to the OTHER people who once lived in Iran, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, and many other countries? Were their populations not butchered by hordes of invading Muslims? Did this colonialism, which is, apparently, only bad if unsuccessful and practiced by Westerners, have no negative affect on the indigenous cultures and religions? What happened in Turkey and the Balkans, Karim? Are we to understand those events as the benign expansion of the “peaceful” religion? Shall we ask the Greeks, Spaniards, or other peoples who shed oceans of blood to free themselves from Muslim slavery? Shall we ask the Jewish populations of north Africa, who were locked in ghettoes and humiliated every day? Shall we ask the Armenians, who well remember their “benign” treatment at the hands of their Muslim “brothers?”
“I am not wasting your time, I am exposing the hypocrisy contained in your "western thoughts" that people like you always try to whitewash. I am also educating you.”
Is that how you usually “educate” people, Karim? Do you usually approach them with this threadbare, self-righteous, patronizing attitude, and implied assumption of intellectual superiority?
“Sharia is just a bunch of codified laws that were put together in the Middle ages. There is nothing inherently "evil" about it. They are as outdated as Western concept of marriage and not as old as Jewish religious laws that many faithful Jews observe.”
Let me quote to you from your own book, Karim:
“O you who believe, obey Allaah and obey His Messenger, and the people in authority among you. And if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allaah and His Messenger if you really believe in Allaah and the Last Day, that is best in terms of consequences.” (4:59)
“And he who does not rule by what Allaah sent down, it is they who are the disbelievers.” (5:44)
“And he who does not rule by what Allaah sent down, it is they who are the wrongdoers.” (5:45)
“And he who does not rule by what Allaah sent down, it is they who are the rebellious.” (5:47)"
Do you not agree with these passages in the Quran, Karim? Are they simply vestiges of ignorance from the Middle Ages. Do you also agree with the passage in the Quran according to which the 95% of Christians who believe in the Trinity will burn in hell forever, or is that also to be ignored? What about the passage requiring that apostates be put to death?
>>”The massacre of the native Indians in America (95% of them were exterminated) is also another example to consider. The Indian could have converted to Christianity, and some did, but that was not enough because the Indian could not be brought to become a WESTERN Christian. The Indian Christian couldn't just forget about his centuries old traditions (that bothered the westerner).”
Obviously your head has been quite successfully pumped full of propaganda lies about the Indians, the death penalty, western colonialism, slavery, etc., etc., and you can recite the usual full repertoire of western “sins” by heart. Do you have the courage to honestly debate even one of your lying assertions? Let’s take the Indians. You claim that 95% of them were exterminated. That is a lie. Extermination implies a deliberate act. It implies deliberate murder. How, then, is the number of Indians surviving today in the U.S. about the same as were alive at the time that serious European colonization of our territory began? There is a great deal of legitimate scholarly debate about the original numbers of Indians in what is now the U.S. They may have numbered in the tens of millions, or the number may have been much smaller. The debate is not settled, and no one has a monopoly on the truth. What we do know for a fact is that, if there were tens of millions, the overwhelming majority of them fell victim to Old World diseases long before serious European expansion into North America began. When Marquette explored the Mississippi River in the late 1600’s, he found a few small villages along its whole length, to within 200 miles of its mouth.
Again, Karim, let’s just stick to one point. I have no doubt you can hop from one propaganda talking point to another for days. After all, you, who pride yourself on your “open-mindedness,” have spent your whole live soaking up hate. If you prefer one of your other propaganda themes, by all means, name it. Slavery? The death penalty? Genocide? Colonialism? Whatever. However, if you really possess a shred of intellectual honesty and have the courage to engage in a debate instead of one of your usual sermons, let’s just stick to one subject and examine it critically. I’m waiting.
Lots of bad stuff happened throughout history everywhere. It is not relevant. The sooner we all stop using the past of ourselves or others to justify our dysfunctional present behavior, the better. Unless, and until, the Muslim religion accepts the sanctity of the individual and actually respects that individual, whether they are man, woman, Christian, Jew, Hindu, black, yellow, red, green, etc. there is little to discuss.
The content, the process, the enforcement... you name it, these two legal systems have nothing in common.
When I use the "Western Christian" label, I don't mean it in the religious way. I am not blaming Christianity or any other religion.
Will people stop being able to hate long enough to stop throwing punches?
Or will we never be able to solve any differences and it is only a matter of time before a nuke is set off in the name of God (on either side, for that matter).
Your arguments, quite simply. are weak.
I am not familiar with the Egyptian story but it is irrelevant since no institutional fascism was ever able to succeed in the Arab world or the Muslim world in general.
You argued that what I wrote about the US government killings in Vietnam is half-truth. Your "truth" (again the in your Western thought) consisted of the fact that the US governent and its army of killers only killed about 2 million people in Vietname when they could have killed more.
Well, when Hitler walked in Paris after France was conquered, weren't the Germans in a position to kill the French in great numbers if they wanted to?
Yes they were, but they didn't.
The Army of the US government bombed Vietnamese villages with all kind of weapons including napalm, sprayed vast forest territories with deadly chemical agents, and so many innocent people were killed...so many. Tell us why all those people had to die in such a wasteful way while the war was supported by US institutions?
There is nothing wrong with a Chomskyesqe argument.
It is your argument that defends killers instead of their victims.
Doing good things can be quite subjective. It could be doing business in deadly weapons (first exporter of weapons in the world is the US), or caring about and respecting all people on this planet.
Absolutely not.
The Muslims are in general content with what they have even if it is not that great.
The West, mainly represented by the US now, still isn't at that stage yet.
The US would still go to war and kill people to safeguard its economical interests alone. I am not imagining this. That was Gulf war I and also Gulf War II.
The real question is:
Can the westerner settle down, be content with what they have, and stop dictating to the world the terms on which OTHER people should lead their lives?
A lot of western thought still believe they inherited this planet. Europe has backed down since their last adventure in colonial business, but the thoughts just morphed into new subtle ways.
Pay attention to how South America is changing, and how hostile they are becoming towards US hegemony.
Well, since Noam whiftily dreams of his 'anarchism' and a Vietcong-style revolution in America that will destroy liberal Democracy, I'd have to say that there are a lot of problems with Chomsky and his arguments.
But you didn't answer the second half of my question. You obviously believe that the United States can be a very dangerous enemy. And you are, in some ways, right. We have a history of being conflict-averse, until, one day, we decide not to be. You know that this "clash of civilizations", if it continues to follow its current path, will end badly.
If we are as bad to the bone as you seem to believe, why are you supporting the philosophies of the leaders who are provoking us? Why do you defend genocidal, apartheid, Sharia laws and the leaders who benefit from them? Why do you defend the laws and the leaders who are trying to impose Sharia in Europe, India, Thailand and Africa? Why do you support the ethnic cleansing, or Arabization, that has caused the displacement of millions in the Middle East?
Why are you supporting this fascist quest for Islamist Lebensraum? You know that Islamist leaders aren't working in your best interests. You know they'll take the money and run. Why are you working so hard for them?
Christians still live in the Levant (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine). Lebanon itself is half Christian.
Muslims have ruled the area for over 1400 years.
The Armenian massacre by the Turks is the only thing that comes close to the brutality of organized western modern killings. The Turks, like many westerners, don't like to think of the Armenian genocide attempt as such.
Well of course the genocide of the native Indians was deliberate.
It wasn't an accident. It's like saying the kidnapping of blacks from Africa and their institutional enslavement in America was not deliberate.
The native Indians had to be removed, and killed if they resisted, because they lived in all fertile lands and "strategic" (in the time terms) areas.
It is only your self-serving opinion that "schools, roads, technology" brought by force by the imperialist western thought in the 3rd world is good.
It is interesting how you mention "law and order" while all the imperialist adventures were a violation of law and order itself.
But as usual, which still happens even today, the law and order is one way.
The native indians had their own questionable traditions.
That doesn't justify their genocide.
Nazi Germany was technologically superior than all of the world nations.
Reason, Science, Freedom, life are not exculsive western values. This is typical western thought ignorance.
Besides, when do you draw the line for this "superior western values"?
Only 40 years ago, the USA still officially discriminated against black people in the millions. That alone violates freedom, individual rights, science and even reason.
Outside the USA, your western offshoot in South Africa (good ole Dutch colony) enforced a racist apartheid system against the NATIVE blacks until 1994.
I am not asking you not to be proud of your heritage. After all, common sense (note it was not invented by western thought) says you should not be held responsible for any crimes or wrongdoings committed by your ancestors.
However,
To keep KILLING the PEOPLE of the world TODAY, to lecture them of your distorted selective past, to keep BUILDING and SELLING deadly WEAPONS, to justify WARS based on economical interests, that is not be acceptable.
We don't need Chomsky or what you called "intellectual elites" (who by way invented the technology you chant about), to realize that the western killing machine has got to stop.
Roberts, there is no desire for world domination by Muslims.
That is only in your imagination. It sounds like some "Jewish conspiracy of world domination".
There are no Muslim troops stationed in the US but there are thousands and thousands of US troops all over the Middle East.
Obviously you are angry at 9/11 but remember those people were not a government or even a nation, and that your nation has killed, just recently and before, many more people.
A crime is a crime whether it was committed by the US government or a gang like al-Qaeda.
>>"Christians still live in the Levant (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine). Lebanon itself is half Christian.
Muslims have ruled the area for over 1400 years."
Really, Karim, and how did they come to rule these areas? Can you tell us that? Why are you so reticent to discuss certain aspects of your history? What were Moslems doing at Vienna in 1683, Karim? Were they on a peace mission? How humane was their treatment of Byzantine soldiers after the sack of Constantinople, and what were soldiers of the "religion of peace" doing at Constantinople to begin with?
What is the ratio of mosques being built in majority Christian lands today to the number of churches being built in majority Moslem lands? Are Christian evangelists being welcomed in majority Moslem countries with open arms? Are Jews comfortable living in those countries? Which is larger, the number of people emigrating from majority Moslem to majority Christian lands, or vice versa? Why do you suppose that is? If the culture and governments of Western lands are so evil, why do you suppose it ever occurs to Moslems to leave their own homes and go live among these evil strangers, and resist fiercely any attempt to send them back?
>>"The Armenian massacre by the Turks is the only thing that comes close to the brutality of organized western modern killings. The Turks, like many westerners, don't like to think of the Armenian genocide attempt as such."
A little holocaust denial here, a little revisionist history? The genocidal massacre of the Armenians is a historical fact, regardless of how the Turks like to think of it. The only thing that comes close? What about the slaughter of half a million people in Indonesia in 1965? Are you going to tell us that religion had nothing to do with it, or that it was all the CIA's fault? Go ahead, we all need a good laugh.
>>"Well of course the genocide of the native Indians was deliberate. It wasn't an accident. It's like saying the kidnapping of blacks from Africa and their institutional enslavement in America was not deliberate."
Let's see, this is the one theme we were going to single out for debate, right? Is that all you're going to do? Wave your hands and bluster that it wasn't an accident and that it was deliberate? No citations from scholarly journals, no attempt to cite sources for your 95% claim, no orderly listing of massacres that add up to the total of 40 million plus killings your statement of "fact" implies? Pretty lame, Karim! Let's assume for the sake of argument that your claim that 95% of the original Indian population perished is true, even though your original statement of that number as a "fact" was mere shameless propaganda. Whether you belong to the "high counters" or "low counters" of original Indian population in North America, it is generally admitted that the "95%" you refer to died as a result of diseases whose spread was inevitable unless the New World was to remain hermetically sealed from the old for all time. Most of these people caught the diseases from other Indians, and never saw or even heard of the original source of the infection. Most of them had already died or were doomed before the actual colonists of North America had even arrived, yet, according to you, this inevitable spread of disease was a "deliberate act of genocide." Go ahead, Karim, explain to us why the spread of diseases was a "deliberate act of genocide." Why not throw in the old chestnut about how some colonists sent infected blankets to their Indian neighbors, and document how the end result of that one act was your "95%." Let's stay focused on the Indians, Karim. We can see from your reply that you have an irresistable urge to go hopping off after other propaganda butterflies. If one of them appears prettier to you than the current one, by all means, let's chase it, but let's stick to one topic. Nothing is easier than the mouthing of propaganda slogans. Backing them up is a little more difficult.
@Kai
>>"The western world didn't meet a peacefully world of Harmony when it for instance entered the Americas, but a barbarous Aztec Indian community infamous for its sacrifice of human life to the gods by the number of 50 thousand a year. And the other native Indian tribes were not peace-loving tribes living together in harmony but tribes in constant warfare with each other, taking war loot such as humans as slaves to dispose of as they wished - and all living as they produced, on a bare existentialist minimum. The English brought light into India, and for this India today still is the better off."
These are historical facts, and they remain historical facts regardless of much mouthing of Chomskyite propaganda slogans. It is also a fact that, at one time, Pennsylvania was ruled by Christian Quakers, who refused to participate in war. The result was that the settlers in Pennsylvania were slaughtered and their possessions plundered by Indians, many of whom came from distant regions and had no claim whatsoever to the settlers land. The slaughter and plunder continued virtually unopposed until the Quaker government was replaced. The Indians regularly smashed out the brains of white babies and small children against trees when they were captured, because they were too much of a hindrance on the trail. White men were regularly tied to posts and tortured with fire for as long as they could be kept alive. The Indians treated each other the same way, and were constantly at war with each other. These are the "peaceful Indians" Karim refers to.
When it comes to India, there are documented cases of the execution of whites for the murder of native Indians at the order of white judges, putting the lie to Karim's claim that the country was a scene of universal slaughter and rapine. The "leftist Chomskyites" in those days were known as Whigs, and many of them, in spite of their liberal principles, ardently supported colonialism as a necessary evil to replace a greater evil. In retrospect, they were probably right.
"By their fruits shall ye know them." Compare the documented results of western colonialism with those of Arab colonialism. Take a stroll through northern Africa and notice the mighty stone ruins all about you, from Egypt to Morroco, remnants of a glorious, pre-Islamic past, now the home of unemployed masses whose one goal is to somehow escape to Europe or America. Look at the once mighty and enlightened Greek cities of Anatolia, now miserable Turkish villages squatting in the sun. Look at Persia, which once rose from the ashes of defeat to bid defiance to the Roman empire for centuries. Now her citizens are slaves of religious bigots who preside over a state, failed in spite of a massive inflow of oil wealth, whose only recourse to gain respect is the development of nuclear weapons. Western colonialism was an evil, but no worse an evil than Arab colonialism. Which bore the better "fruits?" Ask the millions of citizens of majority Muslim countries who are now voting with their feet.
But you do need Chomsky to frame your arguments, and that's why you defend him.
Speaking of Pied-piper style leaders who are leading the Islamists and their supporters towards destruction, Chomsky is not on your side.
Chomsky's goal is to destroy American democracy through propaganda. If the Roberts of the world used American-made weapons to destroy the Muslim world, Chomsky would be thrilled. The destruction of the Muslim world give him another propaganda weapon to bash America with. Think of the lecture fees he'd be raking in.
Again, why are you defending these creeps?
Chomsky is America's conscience speaking.
He is trying to awaken yours and others, but obviously it is still in deep sleep.
It is the people of the Middle East who established Judaism, Christianity, then Islam.
Not Romans, or Westerners in general.
You are the ones who adopted OUR EASTERN RELIGIONS and even KILLED our OWN people for it (From Romans to Crusaders).
If the people of the Middle east want to establish a NEW religion, well it is NONE of the west business.
As far as we are concerned, it would be good if you get your own western based religion, and leave our "beliefs, holy places, etc" alone.
You speak of the Levant as if it was a western property, simply because they share the EASTERN religion the western thought adopted. This is the same ignorance and arrogance that I've been trying to explain here for you.
How did Islam, which is a Middle Eastern religion, become the major religion in the Middle East? Well because the people of the Middle East adopted it.
Just like after Judaism, many middle easterners adopted Christianity.
The first time Muslims arrived in the Levant was in the 7th century when Jerusalem was under Byzantine rule. The Byzantines, after good old westerners from Rome destroyed the Jewish EASTERN holy site, took control of the area from the Persian empire (Eastern), then banned the Jews from it.
The Muslims, Middle Easterners, ended the Byzantine rule (non-Middle Easterners), and restored the Jews (middle Easterners) access to their city.
With few exceptions, that's how the Middle East became majority of Muslims. Most other religions, however, survived, up to this day.
Arabia where Islam came from, was not inhabited by billions of people, who invaded the area and overrun the natives like America's western invaders did to the native Indians.
Muslim expansion into Europe by the Muslim Turks could be considered a conquest of the same caliber as western conquests and adventures into other people lands. I don't defend any of that.
It is good that the Ottoman empire was pushed back to where it came from.
The new emerging American empire should be treated the same way.
The US government has no business in the Middle East.
For your question about immigration of Muslims into Europe, it is for economical reasons.
Relatively speaking, there are more people immigrating to the oil rich Gulf states than to any western country.
Name me one western nation in which immigrants overrun in number the natives.
All of the Arab gulf states have either a majority of immigrants or close to 50% immigrants.
Your point is a moot one.
When you ask: "Western colonialism was an evil, but no worse an evil than Arab colonialism. Which bore the better "fruits?" Ask the millions of citizens of majority Muslim countries who are now voting with their feet."
What religion Mexican immigrant-wannabes have when they try to cross the US southern border illegaly?
In case you didn't know, they are considered Christians.
If the West becomes poor, then fewer people would want to immigrate to it.
I leave it to anyone who can read to consult their history books about the benign manner in which the people of the Middle East adopted Islam.
>>"What religion Mexican immigrant-wannabes have when they try to cross the US southern border illegaly?"
Christianity, Karim. In fact, the most intelligent European observers of the early 1800's dismissed predictions that the newly independent South American states would become strong, prosperous rivals of the U.S. The most significant reason they cited was the degree to which those states had been controlled by the large and dominant class of priests, resulting in passivity, unwillingness to question established authority, lack of enterprise, and incapacity for self-government. Things happened exactly as they predicted. We are witnessing the result in our day, in the form of immigration from Mexico and other South and Central American countries. The same cause has the same effect in Moslem countries.
I am not a religious person. I conclude from this, not that Christianity is good and Islam bad, or that Islam is good and Christianity bad. I conclude that religion should be kept out of politics, period, and that a strong wall of separation should be maintained between religion and the state. I am perfectly content to have Moslems, Christians, or worshippers of the great green grasshopper god as my neighbors, just as long as they don't try to force their religion down my throat, or down the throat of anyone else. When religious people demand that their religious doctrine play a role in state law or administration, they are doing just that. I reject all such interference, regardless of the religion.
As for all the incongruous leftist slogans which now form such a thick veneer over your Islamist core, my attitude is essentially the same. Stop posing as helpless victims of the evil U.S. ogre. Stop pretending that, because we are strong, we must, therefore, also be bad. Tell the U.S. to leave your countries, refuse to buy arms or other objectionable items from us, and put all your wonderful new philosophy into practice. Show us how it should be done! No U.S. troops will remain in your countries if you refuse to allow them there, as long as they don't act as sanctuaries for terrorists, and as long as they don't attack us. I was never in favor of invading Iraq, but now that we are there, it seems to me we can't simply leave and let the country descend into chaos. Do the Iraqis want the U.S. to leave? All they have to do is stop fighting each other, form a government based on some reasonable level of compromise, restore some reasonable semblance of order, and invite the Americans to get the hell out. I assure you that, if they do, the American people will never tolerate leaving our troops in Iraq, regardless of who is in power. Are you citizens of Muslim countries really all so weak and stupid that a few CIA agents can make you dance to any tune? How abject you must truly be if that is really the case. If you would spend a tenth as much time working to change your own governments for the better as you do bitching about the U.S., you might actually accomplish something positive.
Yes in the US they execute their mass murderers. Of course in Muslim world you celebrate them as martyrs and give their families bounties.
Timeline of Islamic History
Notice how many invasions, conquests, revolts of the conuered, civil wars, and political assassinations occur in this timeline. A useful debating tool.
I am myself one of those people of the Middle East whose ancestors were conquered by Muslim-Arabs.
You speak of my people who became Muslims today as if they are dying to free themselves from the Islamic conquest and embrace Christianity or any other religion that the western thought OKed.
For the Indians, well I doubt you are an Indian yourself, so I assume you are whitewashing your "white western heritage in America". Anyone who reads American history will realize that many Americans like to believe that their country is an exceptional country with, of course, an exceptional enlightened history, until you ask their victims, Indians, and Blacks.
I have seen enough documentaries and read enough about the Indian tragedy in America.
One example that comes to mind is the "Indian removal act" (aka the civilized way of Western Land Theft) which was voted by the US congress in 1830, and signed by President Jackson. By 1837, Jackson's administration removed 46,000 native Indians from their homes in the East of Mississippi. Thousands for forced was leave in harsh conditions in their way to their new "homes". The Indians called that route "The Trail of Treas" in which 4000 people (men, women and children) died because of cold, diseases and hardship.
When I was younger, I used to watch Western American movies, and I used to side with the American forces against the native Indians. The Hollywood propaganda machine succeeded in turning the victims into evil people and the aggressors into noble people.
Not only the Indians were massacred, their lands taken from them, the western thought even tried to demonize them through movies to keep the lies alive among average people, including foreigners.
It is good to hear that you don't pass judgement on other people "religious beliefs".
Your take on the Latin American states sounds like the republican take on every issue in life.
They might be trying to get to America for economical reasons but they are NOT killing foreign people and invading other countries in order to maintain the same high standard of living (what the US government does).
Governments that buy deadly US weapons, that kill people, are also to blame. The country that produces them, the government that allows them to be sold, and the government that keeps chanting that "we are better than all of you", is also to blame.
Why don't you take responsibility for your government policies that you keep telling us that it is democratic, by the people, for the people, and all that chanting?
Yes the CIA can wreck havoc in countries. The coup against the Iranian Prime Minister Mossadeq that brought the Shah in power was the work of the CIA and the British (oil interests).
I agree that the CIA is not capable of everything and that we can't blame it all on the CIA (CIA needed local Iranians to execute the coup), but your government says they don't do such things.
For Iraq, it is the same story. No accountability.
You tell me you didn't support the war as if the war was a soccer game.
In wars, actual people DIE. Thousands and thousands of Iraqis have died since your President, like others, pushed their favorite "War Button".
I just don't understand why you care so little about other people lives.
That is not true.
Didn't the bombers of Hiroshima and Nagasaki get "war hero" awards for their genocidal bombings that killed 120,000 people within few seconds?
Oh but it ended the war...that's right!
No, Chomsky is a Vietcong wannabe. In his own words:
“I believe that in the United States there will be some day a social revolution that will be of great significance to us and to all of mankind, and if this hope is to be proven correct, it will be in large part because the people of Vietnam have shown us the way.”
* from his speech originally delivered on April 13, 1970 in Hanoi while he was visiting North Vietnam with a group of anti-war activists. Broadcast by Radio Hanoi on April 14, and published in the _Asia-Pacific Daily Report_ of the U.S. government's Foreign Broadcast Information Service, April 16, 1970, pages K2-K3.
He calls himself an Anarchist. This is the future he's working towards:
As I understand the term "anarchism," it is based on the hope (in our state of ignorance, we cannot go beyond that) that core elements of human nature include sentiments of solidarity, mutual support, sympathy, concern for others, and so on.
Would people work less in an egalitarian society? Yes, insofar as they are driven to work by the need for survival; or by material reward, a kind of pathology, I believe, like the kind of pathology that leads some to take pleasure from torturing others. Those who find reasonable the classical liberal doctrine that the impulse to engage in creative work is at the core of human nature -- something we see constantly, I think, from children to the elderly, when circumstances allow -- will be very suspicious of these doctrines, which are highly serviceable to power and authority, but seem to have no other merits.
Of course, this whifty description leaves out the most important issue that faces communist/anarchist societies - what do you do about the Kulaks?
One of Noam's minions offered an alternative to the traditional Stalinist tradition of genociding the unrepentant capitalists and counterrevolutionaries -
They wouldn't fight because there'd be no possibility of winning, outnumbered by some 9 to 1 and deprived of the military means (i.e. they wouldn't have the army if we secure control of the political machinery of controling it).
Which is the goal of Noam's propaganda campaign - to see American democracy and the American military weakened and/or dismantled, replaced with anarchism. You and your Islamist leaders are, in Noam's loony worldview, just a means to that end.
Noam's plans are loony but defending him is beyond the pale.
You argue about semantics and philosophical ideas, I argue against actions and policies in which people die.
You should ask Noam himself what he meant by that speech about Vietnam.
Try not to put words in his mouth.
From what I gather, he was fighting the American war machine, his own country, that was killing Vietnamese people thousands of miles away. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Where is your "unwillingness to challenge authority" mantra that you slapped the Latinos with in one of your posts above?
I am guessing it applies to everyone, except the US government or the US army, the institution that execute the killings.
When the US army, like any other army, becomes an aggression force as opposed to a defense force, and a tool for carrying illegal invasions against other nations, well it must be condemned and even prosecuted in the world court for war crimes.
Noam's idea of weakening the support for the military is a civilized one. It should be the goal of all nations in this world so we can put an end to wars.
Noam must be aware of the amount of propaganda that is waged in America by the US government (and other institutions) against their own citizens in order to make the army look "attractive and cool" to people.
I think today I read that some 19 year-old US GI was killed in Baghdad.
Just 19 for god's sake.
In the US it is illegal to drink under 21 of age, but apparently it is OK to be trained to kill others (especially foreigners) when one is only 19.
Your so-called "civilized" government sends kids to kill other people, and get killed themselves, while you are sitting here lecturing the rest of the world how Chomsky is trying to undermine the US military.
Why do you defend your government so much?
And the only way is to give them an ultimatum: integrate and become part of society or leave. There can be no tolerance of intolerance. If that means massive discrimination against Muslims and "Islamophobia" so be it.
Islamophobia Watch is looking in the wrong direction. If they want to cure others of fear and discrimination against Muslims, they should look to themselves first and not at their critiquers. Stopping all those terrorists would be a good start. As is, Islamophobia Watch is one of the most useless groups in the world.
Use of military force is deplorable. I would rather not send the US military into combat.
But! What can you do when your enemies only understands military force, death, and destruction? The enemies haves rejected reason and placed their trust in assault rifles and IEDs.
You make much commotion about the death of a 19 year old GI. He was 19-years old and sent to Iraq - to fight - to keep the peace. He volunteered for it and made a sacrifice. So there is outrage in sending an 19-year old to fight. Is there outrage against the man that killed this 19-year old????
Is there outrage against terrorists crashing planes into buildings? Is there outrage against children being conned into becoming suicide bombers?
One thing that you can admire about Chomsky is that he is trying to change America from within. Although he is misguided, he is critiquing how the US government has acted. In Islam such critique is glaringly absent. Whoever dares to critique Islam is permanently silenced. To face the modern world, Islam needs to change and it has stubbornly refused to do so.
I think it started out as a discussion about the influence of Islamic sharia law in Britain. At least, that's what the missing article in the London Telegraph was about.
The goal of a site like Islamophobia watch is to spread Sharia and the Islamist/Leftist influence. If you object to the imposition of Sharia laws or Islamist violence, you're "Islamophobic". Personally, I have no idea why we should care about this nonsensical lable, but apparently fear of being labelled Islamaphobic influences the actions of the British government.
According to Dr. Sookhdeo (in the article) the best way for the government to integrate Muslims into Western society is "to engage with the real Muslim majority, not with the self-appointed 'community leaders' who don't actually represent anyone: they have not been elected, and the vast majority of ordinary Muslims have nothing to do with them."
However, from what I've seen, the Muslims who do follow these leaders are incapable of questioning their leaders' judgement. They just can't do it. They just do what they're told. These functioning human drones are supported by Chomsky minions from the left, followers who are also incapable of questioning their dear leader. Karim is a perfect example of this phenomenon.
I think Noam Chomsky is able to defend himself against what you wrote. I didn't brought him in the discussion in the first place.
Like I said earlier, non-Americans do not need Chomsky to be told of the violation of human lives and brutality that your government has been accused of in our modern history by its victims, non-Americans, while most of you are wrapped in your fanatical nationalism and patriotism.
So Chomsky is mainly your own business, American to American.
The man who killed the 19 years old US soldier is not part of an institution, an official army, a government supported by a majority of voters, that can be stopped. No one voted in favor of this man to kill the 19 years old. America, however, has voted for this nasty war, and gave the green light for its military to drop bombs on Iraq, a foreign country.
The international community, and the UN, has declared that the the US invasion of Iraq is illegal and a violation of international treaties and regulations.
You attempted to compare criticism of Islam, a religion, with Chomsky's criticism of US policies, a government.
The Arab world has not awarded the Arab hijackers who crashed planes in 9-11 and killed 3000 people with any title or award of honor.
The US government, along with most the shameful US mainstream media, has been "defending" the troops since the invasion. The government of course is routinely "thanking" the soldiers for their "job well done" (destruction well done) in Iraq.
Over 100,000 people were killed, and much more injured, traumatized, terrorized and maimed.
How many bombs were dropped on Iraq? How many places were destroyed?
During Saddam's entire tyrannical rule, some 300,000 were killed. 1/3 of that died within 2 years of the US invasion.
We are not asking to you to change your religion, your habits, your language, your culture, or your political system,
just whatever you do, STOP KILLING PEOPLE.
You can't write Islamist/leftist in the same sentence.
Islamists are right-wingers. Their equivalent in America are the Republicans who are trying to pass religion-based legistation by playing with sementics and words like "intelligent design" for "Bible design".
The war effort itself is also part of their belief that they are some kind of Chosen nation (God Bless America) that has been given the right to "spread their beliefs" on this planet.
American foreign policy is regarded as a totalitarian policy by most of the world, including by your neighbors in South America.
This is the reality that you awaken yourself to.
>>"just whatever you do, STOP KILLING PEOPLE."
You and people like you are the killers. You don't oppose the real killers, you collaborate with them. You turned a blind eye to Saddam's butchery of his own people, a butchery that would have by no means stopped if he hadn't been deposed. According to U.N. figures, the infant mortality under Saddam was over 100, not because of sanctions, but because he chose to keep the number high as a propaganda tool. This is proved by the fact that infant mortality fell in Kurdish areas that suffered from the same sanctions, but which Saddam could not reach. The rate of infant mortality in Iraq today is in the low 50's and falling. That means that there are hundreds of thousands of children living today who would never have seen the light of day under Saddam. The net effect of the invasion so far has been a great saving of life. It is not the fault of the US that the killing goes on. Clearly, we would like nothing better than to leave Iraq. The fault is with the insurgents who want to "liberate" their country from the US, meaning they want to restore or establish the tyranny of their faction over all the others. If the insurgents would lay down their arms and agree to cooperate with a democratically elected government, the killing would stop tomorrow. Your moral support to the killers is what keeps them in the field. You are a COLLABORATOR WITH KILLERS, A MURDERER YOURSELF! YOU are the one who need to stop killing, and others like you.
Her heard people like you singing the same tune in Vietnam. We had every right to be there, and to resist Communism. Stalin murdered 35 million of his own people, and Mao murdered millions of his, yet you claim the US is the killer. What a joke! When people who think exactly like you had their way, and we were forced to leave Vietnam, the Communists showed their true face. Nearly two million Cambodians were killed, virtually decapitating the country. It will take centuries to recover. Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese fled the terror in their country in rickety boats, risking their lives to reach the shores of the "great killer" US. That's right, Karim, people who think just like you brought us that mass death and collaborated in it. They have never apologized for it. Instead, they blame the people who fought against it.
Your propaganda slogans and claims that we are going around the world gratuitously killing people are completely and palpably bogus. By siding with the real perpetrators of those crimes, you are COLLABORATING WITH THEM. It's easy to mouth propaganda slogans. We've just seen how inept you are in defending them in the case of the Indians. You are unused to, and, in fact, incapable of defending any of the hackneyed themes that make up your world view, because you spend too much time nodding heads with people who think exactly like you do. You are accusing my country of being an international murderer. Is it too much to ask that you actually think about what you are saying before you spout off such claims. Is it too much to ask that you actually show some faint awareness of the arguments on the other side before you start pointing fingers and accusing other people of crimes?
You are the problem, Karim, not the solution. You are the real killer. You live in a little ideological box, and are too cowardly to venture outside it because you fear the censure of your ideological soul mates. You are too lazy to think. You prefer to mouth your slogans and pretend that you are so much better and so much more virtuous than the evil Americans, those great enemies of all mankind who, for some strange reason, like to heavily tax themselves and sacrifice the lives of their children for the great pleasure they get out of going around the world gratuitously killing people. Give me a break! Stand up and think for a change.
Yes but it saved millions of lives both civilian and military. Oh yes and one other thing...last time I checked it was the Japanese that started the war by bombing Pearl Harbour.
I guess my posts hit a nerve, a big one.
Its typical how you blame the endless killings and destruction that your army is doing in Iraq on Iraqis themselves. The insurgents are mostly Iraqis, locals who like any people feel threatened by foreign invaders who bombed their cities, killed their loved ones, abused them, terrorized their children and women, etc.
All these people that your government is responsible for killing never attacked America.
When you write "if they stop fighting, we will leave". That is bull.
Your problem is not leaving Iraq or the faith of Iraqis that your army has been killing in the last 3 years, your problem is mainly pride and saving face in front of the world.
Right-wing American pride is quite fanatical and radical, which explains why Right-wing America generally looks down on foreign nations, and shows contempt for international institutions and regulations.
You quickly forgot who once said publicly that "half a million Iraqi children" were worth the price during the harsh inhumane sanctions. It was your shameful former secretary of state, Madeline Albright.
You also forgot that it was your Army again who "freed" Kuwait, and restored its dictatorship. Obviously, what was freed was cheap oil access without which you can't drive your big polluting SUVs.
Never said the US government was some "crazy government" that kills people for fun around the globe. The US government kills for their selfish interests, and sometimes few fanatics in your government would kill millions for ideological reasons (communism vs capitalism) as if America was given the duty to defend people from communism.
The Nazis were not crazy people. They justified the killings and their invasions for the greater good of their own people.
Why should I hold your government to standards different than say the highly civilized and developed Germans before they espoused Nazism?
What makes you so special? Its not like your past governments never abused innocent people. America has a nasty history of government sponsored racism and modern institutionalized slavery.
I am judging your government by its acts and policies.
Your government is still killing people as we speak.
Among all western nations, war is still an acceptable option in America, especially the right-wing side.
No it didn't.
It unnecessary killed thousands of people including children, women and elderly.
What you wrote is government propaganda that was fed to you in order to justify the killing of so many innocent people.
At the time (40s), the US government still officially discriminated against its own black people. This was a government that was already violating the human rights of millions of people.
Why do you apologize for it?
Was black discrimination also put in place in order to "save" future lives?
The suicide bombers bombed the market place. Blame America.
Kidnappers are killing all the doctors, businessmen, and enginneers in Iraq. Blame America.
Sectarian violence is causing hundreds of deaths. Blame America.
Genocide is taking place. Blame America.
The US military has killed thousands of terrorists. Blame America.
You've lumped all those deaths into the 100,000 dead since the beginning of war didn't you? FOR ONCE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS!!
The struggle in Iraq is showing something about Islam that the world needed to see. It's showing the ugly face of Islam. It's revealed that Muslim extremists are indiscriminate cold-blooded murderers, and their only goal is to prevent any reformation of Islamic faith and repressive Muslim regimes.
What has the Arab regimes done??? Racism is still state sponsored except it's based on religion instead. Slavery is still an institution. And genocide is an ongoing affair. The Arab world is just dandy compared to the US.
As far as I know, there has never being a single suicide bombing in Iraq until your lying President invaded it against the advise and the will of the entire world.
We blame the US government when we see US bombs killing innocent people and US troops, with no local language skills, occupying an entire foreign country illegally for some alleged WMDs that didn't exist.
No one blamed America for the killings going on in Sudan for instance.
So I am asking you to take responsibility for what your army is doing outside the borders of your country.
Either that or condemn it and denounce it along with the government that drives it.
Stop making apologizes for your government. It is not God on earth.
Is dropping bombs on civilian cities not an indiscriminate act?
How do think Iraqi children felt in Baghdad when your airforce was pounding the city?
If I remember well, the first "smart bombs" that were dropped on Baghdad on that faithful night, they missed their target and only innocent people were hurt.
What you don't want to understand is that this was a war of choice, not a war that was forced on America by some invading Iraqi forces.
It was a deliberate act. So all the smart bombs, and all that propaganda spewed by your government and your Pentagon (both of which were caught lying numerous times) is an invalid argument.
Your government clearly had the option of not going to war.
All your final rumbling has nothing to do with Islam or Muslims. You forgot that the former Iraqi regime was quite secular.
Besides, I have seen Iraqi Christians who were equally bitter about the US invasion. This has nothing to do with religion. It is about "Right-wing America vs the world"
Iraqi do not trust US intentions in the region, and they shouldn't.
Americans wouldn't trust their country with any foreign force, not even the world court which was opposed by your government.
Delusions of grandeur, Karim? You’re not likely to hit any nerves by mindlessly repeating hackneyed leftist talking points.
>>”All these people that your government is responsible for killing never attacked America. When you write "if they stop fighting, we will leave". That is bull.”
The only bullshiter here is you. I know my own country a hell of a lot better than you do, and there is absolutely no question that we will leave if the fighting stops, and the Iraqi people insist on it. How odd that you “failed to notice” my citation of infant mortality statistics that make it obvious to anyone who can think that America is saving lives in Iraq, in spite of the ongoing violence, not taking them. Those are not US statistics. They come from the UN, and from people in Iraq who hardly want to whitewash the US. When the drop in infant mortality since the invasion appeared “to big,” they simply fudged the numbers upwards for no good reason whatsoever. They still prove that hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children are alive today because of the US invasion.
Your “100,000 dead” number, on the other hand, is a joke. You simply repeat it, along with all the rest of your menagerie of worn out leftist talking points, because that’s what the puppet masters who pull your strings have told you to do. “Hit a nerve” Indeed! It’s painfully obvious that you haven’t devoted one iota of independent thought to any of the familiar old tunes you’ve been singing. Take the example of the Indians. When you saw you couldn’t defend your claim that 95% of the original population were deliberately massacred, we suddenly saw a massive row back. You fell back to the good old “Trail of Tears” yarn. Have you ever looked into the reasons for Jackson’s decision to move the Indian population east of the Mississippi? No! Have you ever critically considered the arguments that his decision was the most humane that could have been made under the circumstances, and one that was forced by events on the ground? No! Did you bother to mention that the Indian tribes had a long history of exterminating each other, and that many tribes had been the victims of genocide from other Indians before the whites even got there? No! You claim that the white Europeans were uniquely evil for doing exactly the same things that your own people and people in every time, and of every race, have done since the dawn of recorded history. And why? Because they won, and because you’ve chosen to hate them.
The same thing goes for the famous Madeleine Albright “500,000 children” canard. Good puppet that you are, you simply repeat whatever your puppet masters choose to feed you. Could you bother to take the time to actually read a transcript of what she really said? No! Could you bother, for that matter, to ever actually look into any such shameful and lying charge as that one if the person vilified were an American? No, of course not! Americans are always guilty until proven innocent in your book.
>>”You also forgot that it was your Army again who "freed" Kuwait, and restored its dictatorship. Obviously, what was freed was cheap oil access without which you can't drive your big polluting SUVs.”
I see, you’re all in favor of wars of aggression as long as they appear to oppose the interest of the US. Sure thing, Karim, it was “all about oil.” (We’ve heard that one before, too, haven’t we?) If that’s true, isn’t it a little odd that no American has any control over the production or sale of Kuwaiti oil? Isn’t it odd that we’ve dumped more money into Kuwait and Iraq than we could ever recover if we absolutely controlled their oilfields for the next 200 years? Isn’t it odd that the price of oil is now at record levels, and is constantly increasing? If it was “all about oil,” the US must really be singularly stupid. And yet you claim that a few of our CIA agents can make or break any of your governments at will! Pathetic!
It’s unbelievable that you even dare to mention slavery. Slavery is explicitly sanctioned in the Quran. Without the intervention of the Western culture you so revile, slavery would still exist unchecked in the world, as it still does in some Muslim countries. Hundreds of thousands laid down their lives to end slavery in America, while the Arab slave dealers, essential to the trade from time immemorial, carried on business as usual. For hundreds of years your cruisers scoured the coasts of Europe capturing slaves, and you dare to lecture me about slavery! Were sailors who happened to suffer shipwreck on Muslim shores given aid and sent home with smiles on their faces? No! They were enslaved, and often tortured until they adopted Islam. Tell us all about the great deeds of the Moslems to end slavery, Karim. What a joke!
Now you whine that the terrible American killing machine has to stop. Let’s see what effect that killing machine has had on Muslims. We brought thousands of tons of food to Somalia during a time of extreme famine. For that we were attacked and the soldiers who brought the aid were killed. We handed a whole country to the Moslems in Kosovo, stopping Milosevic’s genocide there. Moslems have forgotten all about it. We armed the Moslems who were trying to defend their country from Soviet invasion. The people we armed turned on us, and bit the hand that feed them. What incomparable ingrates you are.
Just keep dancing on your stings, Karim, mouthing the slogans your puppet masters feed you. After all, there’s no need to think if your purpose in life is only to be a mouthpiece for propaganda slogans. Just don’t embarrass yourself by puffing yourself up and pretending you’ve “hit a nerve” with your tired leftist phrasemongering.
I meant to answer your post earlier but got sidetracked by all the apologists for the US government in this thread.
You inquired about inter-faith marriages in Lebanon between Christian Lebanese and Muslim Lebanese. It is true that those marriages are not very common and people do not tolerate such marriages even though Islamic Sharia OKs marriage between Muslims (men) and Christians or Jews (women).
The example you gave about "Filipinos" or "South-Asians" in general is not accurate.
The discrimination you mentioned only applies to the Gulf (oil rich Arab states), and their discrimination is not confined to South Asians or dark people like you implied, it extends to all their immigrant-workers including from poor Arab states like Egypt, Yemen, etc.
Those governments must be pressured (again not through bombs) to respect international standards and the universal declaration of human rights.
This is the most naive crap I've ever seen. I dare you to defend your position.
And I am no apologist for the US government. I see the corruption and quid pro quo that goes on in the Congress and the White House. But in the War on Terror, in Iraq, I will make no apology. In fact I demand an apology from the Muslim community for their shameful behavior and their disturbance of peace.
So can you really say it, Karim? Since it seems like you are the spokesman for Islam, here.
Do you denounce terrorism? Do you denounce suicide bombing and suicide bombers? Are you sorry for the culture of destruction that your imams have taught?
The difference between laws of the secular west and the sharia of Islam is 1000 years of progress and enlightenment. Jealous Muslim extremists have made it quite clear that the two cannot co-exist. So the reply from the West has to be quite clear. Lose sharia or face extinction.
Karim, how can you justify this statement? Come on and try: I am interested to hear how you justify it.
You're quite good at putting labels and shouting slogans at everything I write, leftists this, islamist that, etc.
What is your "creed" in life besides worshiping your government? right-wing until death? relax and think outside the right-wing box for once.
For your shameful secretary of state, Albright, well she did apologize for what said later on. This is not an out of context issue. Albright was caught off guard by the interviewer (the leftists you hate), and didn't have time to put her "PC " mask on, basically your government propaganda.
No one should believe statistics coming from the US government because it is one of the aggressors. Besides, as Gulf War II proved, the US government does lie (no WMDs) to cover up its crimes. This is hardly news for us, foreigners, we know what your government (like many other governments) really stands for.
The harsh sanctions that killed many thousands of innocent Iraqi children was primary enforced by the US government. Most western nations, and most of the world, wanted them lifted or eased. Madeleine Ablright, who was the US ambassador to the UN, did everything she could to block it, including veto threat.
In the end, even Kuwait, Iraq's victim, opposed those sanctions. Kuwaiti had some humanity in them, but your ruthless government could care less as long as Saddam was not threatening the oil.
Note I am mostly directing the blame at your government (so that means your elected officials and others). In the case of the UN sanctions, I am sure that if average Americans were exposed to what was going at the time, many would have done something against it.
It is usually your government that acts on their behalf in foreign affairs. And usually, there is no accountability from the voters about foreign affairs.
The AT LEAST 100,000 figure was the result of an independent study. Your pentagon, that killing machine, did state that they "don't do body counts"...of foreigners of course. US casualties are counted, foreign ones, well who cares!
For the other points you tried to make, well if you were a Nazi, a fascist, a Stalin, a Saddam, you could always argue their case from the other side.
President Jackson was just a criminal like many others of his time. There is no justification for forcing natives out of their homes by the thousands to make place for white racist settlers.
You're shocked that "your country's" history is full of systematic violations. Basically, it is not history one should be proud of. But again, what should schoolkids learn? They (like every country) have to massage the facts at little bit, which I don't mind. I do however mind when you go around the globe lecturing and bombing people when you have a recent history of genocide and systematic violation of basic rights.
Most of the native Indians were killed by the settlers. The few scholars who studied the issue confirmed that. The native Indians are still bitter and still carry deep wounds for a reason. It is a taboo subject in the US, and we all know why.
It is of course about oil, what else is there?
Can you guess who said the following?
"Oil is too important of a commodity to be left at the hands of the Arabs".
It was your former secretary of state, Henry Kissinger.
For slavery, it did exist everywhere in the past.
However, there was no other nation (except the US and Apartheid South Africa), that put in place and voted for racist institutions in modern history.
In the 50s, America still forced all blacks to segregation.
For god's sake, even water fountains were segregated. That is sick. Find me one single Arab or Muslim nation that had such disgraceful regulations in the 50s.
Do "Jim Crow" laws ring a bell? Imagine if you were born black at the time. How would it feel? that you live in the greatest country in the world? or the most racist country in the world? you pick.
Perhaps I could remind you that I am not from Kosovo and that whether Kosovars were Muslims or not shouldn't matter.
I only mentioned I was Arab. Not all Arabs are Muslim. You probably believe, naively, that Arab-Christian love your government. Well you are wrong.
Pretty much no one, all religions and affiliations combined, likes your government in that region except for a good number of Israeli.
In fact, this extends to many parts of the world including Europe.
Once the US government starts treating foreigners as equals, then foreign people will start respecting it.
>>"What is your "creed" in life besides worshiping your government? right-wing until death? relax and think outside the right-wing box for once."
I'm right wing? I don't think so. I'm an atheist, pro-gun control, pro-choice, I consider what happened at Abu Ghraib torture and oppose the Bush Administration's complicity in torture, its illegal domestic spying...and the list goes on. You're the one who has a problem thinking out of the box. You haven't posted a single comment that's anything but a melange of worn out, naive, hackneyed left wing propaganda that anyone with a brain has seen repeated ad nauseum, and which can all be debunked with a few clicks on Google. When confronted, as about your "deliberate genocide of 95% of the Indians" claim, you are incapable of examining the facts, but just go on repeating the same old lies. You spend your life wading through sewers of propaganda lies to suck up the latest choice tidbit that confirms all your preconceived notions about America, and rationalizes your hate. You are deaf to the facts, and will never stop hating America until we curl up and die. Sorry, but we don't plan to do that. If you want to see the reason for war and death in the Middle East and the rest of the world, look in the mirror. I've spent enough time arguing against a brick wall. Your ideology requires you to hate my country. I return your hate, and that of others like you. Go home to your failed dictatorship of a country and nurse your hate. Once you run out of oil it will be all you have left.
Do you need any justification for pointing the finger at the wholesome slaughter of 120,000 civilians by your government by bombing 2 civilian cities?
Even killing that many soldiers with such brutality and force would be questionable.
It is amazing how far you could go in defending some of the criminal decisions made by your government simply because it is the government of the USA, the greatest country in the world!
Your approach in denying the near-genocide of the native Indians by the European settlers is similar to the one used by the holocaust deniers.
Your governments up to this day still have not come clean about the crimes inflicted on the native people of the US.
It is the big taboo subject in America.
For the 95% figure, well just look at the numbers. By the end of the 19th century, the total number of indigenous people in both the US and Canada totaled some 250,000.
Where did the rest go? well it was exterminated by various methods since the arrival of the Europeans. Wars, massacres, expulsions, diseases, etc.
The difference in opinion that exits among historians is about terminology. No one argues against the estimation of the number of victims (which by even low estimations is still close to 90%). Some argue that it should not be called a "genocide" since, they claim, European colonization was not about the deliberate killing the natives. They just killed them when they refused to evacuate.
Your governments behavior towards the other people, the colored people, including Indians, have not changed until the 20th century.
The way you look at and perceive what you've been chanting as "my country" can be characterized in similar terms as the way a child looks at his father.
The father is loving, caring, fair minded to his own child in his own home but when the father goes out, he becomes racist, brutal and abusive.
As to your comment about "supporting Israel" until the end, well it is more consistent with your views. Israeli have always reminded Americans who criticized them that they should first look at their history with the native Indians. You certainly can't criticize Israel, which was founded by European settlers who also evicted the natives, by defending their victims while whitewashing what happened to the other victims in your own country.
To your last story about some Amr who lived thousands of years ago, it is irrelevant today.
Today most people, except in good ole Right-Wing America, no longer want to fight organized wars. I've seen US army ads on American TV. It is very disturbing how they still market to civilians (including teenagers) the idea of war in the 21st century.
Today, people realize that victory in some war isn't just that. It is the killing of others, fellow human beings who have feelings and who suffer like everyone else. But in America, the President himself still celebrates such awful things like he did when he landed on that ship, cheered by many who were as excited as he was about their "accoumplishment of killing others". In America, it still often said that "war is ugly but necessary".
When you start talking about hate, it means you are taking a defensive position. It is your scapegoat.
When you accuse me of "wishing" the end and death of America as a nation, it means you are victimizing yourself.
Take a stand against your government for once. Let your conscience speak and free it from that near-fanatical patriotism that you have been indoctrinated with.
You only criticize your government for internal issues, something we as foreigners and as subjects of your foreign policy care less.
You tried to impeach a president for some minor misbehavior (Clinton), but you stand by him when he is involved in directing and launching an illegal war of destruction against a foreign country.
The imams you talk about are your scapegoats. Imams say a lot of crazy things but they don't train armies, they don't build deadly weapons, and they don't direct wars. When Imams get involved in planning criminal activities, they get arrested. Your government officials on the other hand get "medals of honor" and "thank you" notes for serving their country by killing foreign people.
Name me one Arab government that would not convict Bin-Laden and his gang. There isn't one.
But Your government pays war criminals to bomb other countries, bring suffering and hardship to their people, etc.
I have seen enough documentaries about how average Iraqis are suffering both physically and mentally, how children and women see guns and tanks pointed at them almost on a daily basis, how people are killed randomly by either gangs or your triggered-happy soldiers who can't even speak the language.
Even Iraqis who prefer the "diplomatic way", they always say "ok thank you for removing Saddam, now leave".
Criticize Andrew Jackson all you want, but the vast majority of the Native American population, whom you ridiculously contend were deliberately massacred, had died of disease centuries earlier, and yet you've continually ignored the other commenters' invitations to respond to this point. It's this sort of blatant dismissal of facts that don't suit your storyline that reveals you for the arrogant, ignorant self-righteous demagogue you are.
As for your comments on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they demonstrate a lack of knowledge about Japan before and during WWII that appears to border on total. Dropping those bombs was the ONLY moral choice Truman had: they were the ALTERNATIVE to genocide. Imperial Shinto was a fanatical death cult no less so than is al-Qaeda's version of Salafist/Wahhabi Islam. Once a foreign military had set foot on the sacred soil of the Japanese home islands, the Japanese military and civilian population would have fought to the last man, woman and child: it would've made what happened on Iwo Jima and Okinawa pale in comparison, and millions would have died, on both sides. Even Emperor Hirohito would have been powerless to stop it as he barely did in reality: had he tried, he would've been killed by the military, the assassins would have then killed themseleves, and the war would have continued in the name of his 12-year-old son. The other alternative to invasion would have been a complete naval blockade, genocide by starvation rather than direct action. Regardless, either would have meant, as Hirohito himself warned in his surrender radio address, the end of Japan as a nation.
Stop repeating your government propaganda that justifies the murder of so many innocent people.
I can't believe you wrote all that to explain to me how your government had to murder all those innocent people in order to save more lives.
The bombing of those 2 cities was simply an act of terror, US government terrorism.
Even Al-Qaeda didn't kill that many people when they could have hit more soft targets than what they targeted.
There is a reason why most of the world has little respect for your government and why many accuse it of imperialism.
It is because of thoughts like yours. You may not realize it but more people in this planet are getting familiar with the disturbing way many Americans think.
I myself have changed my views about your government (from positive to negative) once I got familiar with the ruthlessness aspect of your government both external and even internal (death penalty is still acceptable in America).
Hollywood did a good job whitewashing "American nasty politics" for many people, including myself, who naively and genuinely judged the US government based on what we saw in movies. With the spread of globalization and global media, I came to know the truth that Hollywood hid from me.
My kids however will not fall into the same trap.
The negative reaction from the rest of the world is because the US is the greatest power in the world right now, and invariably someone will direct that power towards a most nasty cause.
It's easy to be powerless and well-behaved. Being powerful and well-behaved is difficult, and it's even more difficult when there is no one to enforce good behavior.
I read through the arguments and I've come to the conclusion that Karim is a Troll and here is my evidence.
1. There is no consistency to his logic or his morals. He critique the death penalty as it is applied in America, but there is no critique of the more numerous death penalties that are matter of fact in Islamic Sharia.
He criticizes the US government for sending in 19-year olds to fight, but there is no criticism of teaching teenagers to become suicide bombers.
It seems like he is bent on criticizing the US even a similar criticism of Islam in general would be orders of magnitude more harsh.
2. Shallow knowledge is used to make judgements on complicated situations.
The dropping of the atomic bomb did kill civilians and many of them. There is no discussion that both sides of World War II dropped conventions of war limiting civilian casualties. When contrasted with the Rape of Nanjing, the firebombs of Tokyo, the fight for Okinawa, and the Holocaust, the deaths caused by the atomic bombs was relatively minor. The high military strategic value of Nagasaki and Hiroshima are not even mentioned. This doesn't make the atomic bombs any less of a tragedy, but if you were to rank Hiroshima and Nagasaki among the crimes against civilians, they wouldn't rank among the top ten of World War II.
Karim merely grasps at straws for ways to criticize the US government. It'll get you angry.
3. There is blatant denial of factual evidence.
Which Arab government didn't prosecute Usama bin Laden? The Taliban.
Any and all evidence contrary to his own assertions are spurned as propaganda. That's the sort of thing that the Communist party does to silence its opposition.
It is another tactic common to trolls.
SO DON'T FEED THE TROLL.
1- China was ranked first in terms of executions. The US, that claims to be the greatest country in the world, was ranked 3rd way ahead of pretty much all Muslim countries in the world.
In case you didn't know, in America the government poisons convicted killers, and many of them happen to be black even though blacks are only about 13% of the US population.
Also remember that the US government also convicts minors (below 18) but carries the execution when they are over 18.
2- In that case, using your twisted logic, Al-Qaeda's attack that killed 3000 people is nothing.
3- Well here is some news for you: Taliban was not an Arab government. Look up Afghanistan in a map.
You should try to understand that your repressive government in China is no different than the repressive government of the US outside of US borders. The US government changed its attitude towards its decade-long oppressed black community only because it was forced through protests, etc.
What makes you think that only Chinese government officials can be "repressive", authoritarian and evil?
Is it because Chinese people carries some "repressive gene" than Americans don't?
They are the same people, left unchecked, they will commit crimes, oppress weaker people and even kill them if necessary like they are doing today in Iraq.
Stand up to injustice and stop apologizing for such repressive governments.
Absolutism would say that it was entirely evil. Pragmatism would say that it was the only moral option.
As for being Terrorism, it has no pragmatic or logical result to be anticipated. Terrorism doesn't seek to end anything end, just to intensify and continues them.
It must be said that the bombs were a lesser of two evils. Do you still consider it evil that the bombs were dropped? Or was it a necessary tragedy? The US is not innocent nor can it be, even when acting as morally as they can here.
Difficult questions like this are faced by the US government all the time in foreign affairs. Why, because the US is place in an area in which they are the only ones able to do anything on the ground outside of their country. (Can the UN peacekeeping? (hah) They are 90% American.)
At times, there is a moral necessity to do something even if harsh means (War) are used. Imposing law and order means that any other law and order must be done away with. The issue becomes do the ends justify the means. How are the results weighed.
You paint the US as black when it is the world is a shade of grey. Western civilization is evil just as any other civilization. Man is not an angelic creature. By virtue the question is, "which one is the one of lesser evils?" I would have to again say Western Civilization, including American hegemony, is lesser than any other evil.
The US has had to face worse decisions precisely because the rest of the world hasn't. The criticism from the right in the US about the US foreign policy says that US is acting too much like the world's Policeman. It is against the hidden notion that the world should be policed by totalitarians. Yet, the are many instances that people cannot sit around and watch crimes be done.
Yet, it has been an American policy since ever the world wars to intervene. The world would be much different if Germany or Russia ruled vast stretches of land, extending even into the Middle East. The darkness that was behind the Nazi-fascism and Stalin-like communism. It need not be mentioned. It is no comparison to the acts of America.
Take it or leave it the Americans were the ones who were responsible for stopping it all with use of violent means. There is a debt to Americans that the World is not worse off. Even those countries in the Middle east, would be subject to colonial rule and subjugation from Germany or Russia. An enemy's enemy is a friend. Europe should know this the most. It is precisely because of same American tendancies. Yet, not just Europe but the world. It need not be brought up too often.
Next, since this is about the Islamic civilization and America. I personally question, Iraq on many issues, the war was of choice and of long term strategic importance. Don't be fooled. The gamble taken was for long term military strategic value. Not oil stability, 60% of American oil comes from the Gulf of Mexico. (It is rather expensive to secure oil this way. The money could have went directly to subsidizing oil, we would be better off.) Europe and China gets more oil from the Middle East. American exports are a low fraction. (7%?)
The gamble which Bush made in Iraq is one he made only because he thought it was the right thing to do. I find the price too steep right now, until I see some tangible results. Ones that may take years. There are very few right now. Yet, Bush has gone all in. Even if he has been dealt a bad hand (by taking this risk on faulty info), he can't back out or he loses it all anyway.
The question is, "Was it moral for him to take this risk when the price is paid mainly by other people (and possibly his own people if the risk backfires)?" or "Was it right for him to act in what he thought was the best interests of his own Country?" I am on the fence. History will be the judge. I am neither for the war or against it. I only support the troops who are dieing over there daily so that there can be at least some semblance of order in a country of disorder. I don't attribute anything more noble to them than that.
Next, Someone mentioned the killings in Sudan earlier. If I remember right it is Arab Muslims in the government are killing black christians. Some accounts amount to genocide. Who can do anything about it? Only the Murders themselves or the Americans.
Finally, the false idea of peaceful Islam. Lets look at history. Early Islam attacks with Byzantine are unjustifible. Jerusalem was taken for religious/Muslim reasons not for any other. After the goal was achieved, it went further. It was still conquest. This was not the end of the battles with the Eastern Romans. Within one generation (40 years) of Mohammad, the capital of Byzantine itself, Constantinople, was attacked. There was a constant onslaught for the next 400 years as the Byzantines shrunk until the were not even a threat. Then, they were practically killed off.
Within 100 years of Mohammad, the mores had established themselves in Spain. That is a very difficult feat when Egypt and other strongholds were on the way there. Especially difficult for a passive/non-imperial religious/political civilization.
I hope, you enjoy our site.[/url]
[url=http://free-elite-hosting.info] Free hosting/mails and subdomains[/url]
[url=http://big-ass-matures.info] Insurance[/url]
[url=http://public-blog.info/credit]Get fast credit[/url]
What a cute site you have here. ,lesbian lovemaking ,lesbian lickers
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/lesbian-sistas.html =<>= lesbian sistas
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/freelesbian.html =<>= freelesbian
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/sapphic-lesbians.html =<>= sapphic lesbians
What a cute site you have here. ,lesbian lovemaking ,lesbian lickers
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/lesbian-sistas.html =<>= lesbian sistas
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/freelesbian.html =<>= freelesbian
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/sapphic-lesbians.html =<>= sapphic lesbians
What a cute site you have here. ,lesbian lovemaking ,lesbian lickers
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/lesbian-sistas.html =<>= lesbian sistas
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/freelesbian.html =<>= freelesbian
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/sapphic-lesbians.html =<>= sapphic lesbians
What a cute site you have here. ,lesbian lovemaking ,lesbian lickers
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/lesbian-sistas.html =<>= lesbian sistas
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/freelesbian.html =<>= freelesbian
http://www.feyalegria.org/brasil/dili/sapphic-lesbians.html =<>= sapphic lesbians
I can't pist a message yesterday may be cause site was down.
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://cheap-flights-thailand.bestfindout.org
http://wedding-rings.bestfindout.org
It's a very interestinf thee. Thank you!
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://pleasure.bestmatchpoint.org/angelina-jolie-naked.html
http://entertainment.bestmatchpoint.org/emma-watson.html
http://shopping.bestmatchpoint.org/fruits-basket.html
Your site have a vrey good design. What theme is using?
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://naked.thegoodmatch.org/carmen-electra-naked.html
http://lyrics.thegoodmatch.org/tamara-hoover.html
http://family.thegoodmatch.org/bipolar-disorder.html
not http://ilxonvo.info/sitemap0.html [url=http://tdworyu.info/sitemap1.html ]were[/url] sense http://llkjdz8.info/sitemap2.html [url=http://ie6t6he.info/sitemap2.html ]and[/url] common http://ilxonvo.info/sitemap0.html [url=http://vukhhro.info/sitemap2.html ]from[/url]
assistant want to commiserate with with BBcode :( for me does not refashion out to manufacture references to the attractive pictures and video on the topic. Or scrap down tie-in on this topic
http://infostore.org/info/5358423 icq êïê
http://infostore.org/info/5358430 Darkest.Fear.Grim.Oak2.jar
http://infostore.org/info/5358540 ñêà÷àòü áåñïëàòíîå ïîðíî ñ ìîëîëåòêàìè
http://infostore.org/info/5358390 áàããè ëà2
http://infostore.org/info/5358403 ñêà÷àòü çàñòàâêè ê ìîáèëêå
http://infostore.org/info/5358412 ïîðíóøêà ñàáàêàìè take want to catch on to with BBcode :( for me does not revolt out to manufacture references to the absorbing pictures and video on the topic. Or heave up b abandon down fasten together on this topic
link:êíèãè êïê
link:Checkers_S60v3.sis
link:Íàñèëüíûé ñåêñ
link:äèñêåòû ìóçûêàëüíûõ ñòèëåé äëÿ ñèíòåçàòîðà ÿìàõà 1100
link:êîä àêòèâàöèè Effecton Studio áåñïëàòíî ñêà÷àòü
link:äðàéâåðà äëÿ ôèëèïñ 639
healthy sites
search google key sexy angels
nude amateur grannies and sex
porn sex pics
movie sample sex
mature oral sex
pedo sex
15 age sex
alt sex stories
anel sex
asian sex video
bath tub sex
big black sex
black sex videos
boys having sex with mom
bungee sex swing
celebrity sex stories
christi lake sex pics
comix sex
dad has sex with son
disney hentai sex
dry hump sex
exhibitionist sex
fat women having sex
first time sex tips
fun sex
girls having sex with animals
guide to sex
hidden sex cam
homosexual sex
housewife sex
illustrated sex position pics
interracial sex wife
jessica simpson sex tape
kinky sex
lingerie sex
mad sex
massive cock sex
mermaid sex
moms have sex with their sons
nanny sex
odd sex
outdoor group sex
peehole sex
picture sex positions
priest sex
real sex magazine
sailor moon girls having sex
secretary sex
singapore sex
sorority sex
streaming sex
taktaz sex
theater sex
totally free sex stories
uncircumcised sex
very young girls having sex
web cam sex chat
women having sex with dogs
yaoi sex
free black teen sex
teen boys having sex
animal having sex
dog sex movies
free asian sex pics
free female sex movies
free indian sex stories
free online sex movies
free sex comic
free sex preview
free sex web cam
hard core lesbian sex
horse sex women
lesbien sex
preggo sex
sex action
sex auditions
sex changes
sex directories
sex films
sex granny
sex in kitchen
sex teens
sex mp3
sex on the side
sex positions free guide
sex sex sex
sex stories with pictures
sex tools
sex vacation
sex with dad
sex workers
sexy young teens
sexy college girls
teen sex education
free lesbian dildo sex
free sex gallery old women
hardcore black sex
hot chicks having sex
hot teen sex
teens having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/index.html sexy angels
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/1.html nude amateur grannies and sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/2.html porn sex pics
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/3.html movie sample sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/4.html mature oral sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/5.html pedo sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/6.html 15 age sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/7.html alt sex stories
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/8.html anel sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/9.html asian sex video
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/10.html bath tub sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/11.html big black sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/12.html black sex videos
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/13.html boys having sex with mom
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/14.html bungee sex swing
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/15.html celebrity sex stories
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/16.html christi lake sex pics
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/17.html comix sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/18.html dad has sex with son
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/19.html disney hentai sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/20.html dry hump sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/21.html exhibitionist sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/22.html fat women having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/23.html first time sex tips
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/24.html fun sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/25.html girls having sex with animals
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/26.html guide to sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/27.html hidden sex cam
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/28.html homosexual sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/29.html housewife sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/30.html illustrated sex position pics
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/31.html interracial sex wife
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/32.html jessica simpson sex tape
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/33.html kinky sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/34.html lingerie sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/35.html mad sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/36.html massive cock sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/37.html mermaid sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/38.html moms have sex with their sons
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/39.html nanny sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/40.html odd sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/41.html outdoor group sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/42.html peehole sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/43.html picture sex positions
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/44.html priest sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/45.html real sex magazine
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/46.html sailor moon girls having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/47.html secretary sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/48.html singapore sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/49.html sorority sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/50.html streaming sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/51.html taktaz sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/52.html theater sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/53.html totally free sex stories
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/54.html uncircumcised sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/55.html very young girls having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/56.html web cam sex chat
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/57.html women having sex with dogs
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/58.html yaoi sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/59.html free black teen sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/60.html teen boys having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/61.html animal having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/62.html dog sex movies
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/63.html free asian sex pics
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/64.html free female sex movies
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/65.html free indian sex stories
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/66.html free online sex movies
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/67.html free sex comic
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/68.html free sex preview
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/69.html free sex web cam
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/70.html hard core lesbian sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/71.html horse sex women
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/72.html lesbien sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/73.html preggo sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/74.html sex action
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/75.html sex auditions
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/76.html sex changes
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/77.html sex directories
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/78.html sex films
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/79.html sex granny
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/80.html sex in kitchen
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/81.html sex teens
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/82.html sex mp3
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/83.html sex on the side
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/84.html sex positions free guide
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/85.html sex sex sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/86.html sex stories with pictures
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/87.html sex tools
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/88.html sex vacation
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/89.html sex with dad
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/90.html sex workers
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/91.html sexy young teens
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/92.html sexy college girls
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/93.html teen sex education
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/94.html free lesbian dildo sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/95.html free sex gallery old women
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/96.html hardcore black sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/97.html hot chicks having sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/98.html hot teen sex
http://freevideopic.sexshopusa.us/99.html teens having sex
http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/vladisor/ free porno video
free porno video