« Q&A #5: Jolly Time | Main | Almost Home »

Fear and Self-Loathing in America

Pre-ramble: I've been listening to the 9/11 hearings and I'm sort of disgusted at the whole thing. I think it bears repeating what I said yesterday. In fact, maybe I'll post this every day. I love the blaring headlines that say "9/11 Who's to Blame?" I thought perhaps we could blame, oh...al Qaeda? Maybe, just maybe, both Clinton and Bush both did all they could with the intelligence they had and 9/11 - or another day like it - were just inevitable. Just a thought. Ok, got that out of the way. One other note: Maybe you just want to skip this whole, long-winded post and go read this. Actually, that's an order. Just read it. Come back if you feel like it. If you’re still thinking that the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians have nothing to do with you, it’s time to take your head out of the sand. The death of Sheik Yassin on Monday has only served to prove what those of us who have watching the situation closely have been saying: They are all around us. Who is they? The radical Muslims, for want of a better phrase. The Islamists. I’m always careful to put a disclaimer in front of the words Muslim. Radical. Militant. Something that sets those crazed, suicidal, murderers apart from the peace-loving, people-next-door who practice the same religion. The problem I’m having with that now is I see less and less of the latter. I have yet to see any of the moderate Islamists (is there such a thing?) stand up and condemn their brothers for their acts of violence; violence done in the name of Allah, their god. I can define myself in many ways; atheist, Republican, Yankee fan. Whenever anyone in those groups does something I find offensive, I distance myself from them. I make sure to stand up and say “Hey, I’m an atheist, but don’t lump me in with those other atheists. I do not condone what they are doing.” So where are the followers of Islam who do not condone the branch of their religion that is being practiced by those who see suicide belts as a fashion statement? Do they even exist? If any event can shed the light on how some have underestimated the strength and numbers of the followers of radical Islam, it is the death of Sheik Yassin. Suddenly, the whole world is mourning and chanting and throwing stones. They protested his death in Jordan, Lebanon, Yemen, Egypt, Sudan and Iraq. They burned flags in Beirut. Yes, you say. Of course. Those countries mainly practice Islam. Ah, but it doesn't end there.
More than a hundred people carrying Palestinian flags and protest signs marched outside the Israeli consulate in New York on Tuesday to condemn Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President Bush after the assassination of Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin. "I'm here to demonstrate as an American that I'm so tired of Israel and their crimes and I'm disgusted in our government," said Rajee Mustafa, a 51-year-old electrical engineer from Jersey City, New Jersey. ... At the evening rush-hour protest across from the consulate, demonstrators carried signs such as "Sharon and Bush -- War Criminals," and raised chants including, "Sheikh Yassin, rest in peace, Israel will never sleep." Later at a memorial gathering in Brooklyn, speakers praised Yassin, founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, as a freedom fighter who had dedicated his life to the Palestinian struggle. Among those addressing a hall crammed with several hundred people was anti-Zionist Rabbi David Weiss.
Anti-Zionist? Is that what they're calling it these days? So here are these people in New York, praising a man responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent people. Sheikh Yassin, rest in peace. Spiritual leader. Freedom fighter. What do we know about this "spirtual leader?" Israelis call him the Palestinian Osama bin Laden Co-founder of Hamas Was responsible for dozens of suicide bombings from 2000 to the present, resulting in the deaths of over 400 people Favorite quote? The so-called peace path is not peace and it is not a substitute for jihad and resistance. These people who live just miles from me praise this man. They cry over his death. In fact, they wail. They curse Israel, curse America and wish death upon everyone but themselves. Where are their leaders, the ones who claim to be moderates and wonder why people walk on the other side of the street from them? Speak up. Tell us that you denounce Yassin and Arafat. I'm not asking that they turn around and praise Israel or defend her actions, I'm just asking that they show me who they are, that there are Muslims who do not fall to their knees in despair when a despicable mass murderer dies. One Brooklyn protester said: "People are so angry now, and I know they are going to try to explore that anger somehow. Sheik Yassin was not a terrorist. He was a spiritual leader for all Palestinians." And now that spiritual leader is dead and another one replaces him. Meet the new boss. Worse than the old boss. Abdel Aziz Rantisi (also Rantissi) A Hamas hard-liner who has pushed for accelerating attacks on Israel and rules out all compromise was elected Tuesday as the new leader of the Islamic militant group in Gaza after Israel's assassination of its founder. Take a deep look into the psyche of this Rantisi:
We hear the readiness of youth," says Abdel Aziz Rantisi, a local Hamas leader. "Some young people clearly say that they want to be martyrs. We hear that and choose from these people." Rantisi's recruits have paid dividends. Among the suicide bombings Hamas has claimed responsibility for: the Sbarro pizzeria bombing in Jerusalem last August, which killed 15 Israelis, including seven children; and the March 27 suicide bombing that killed at least 20 people who were sitting down to a Passover meal at a hotel restaurant in Netanya in northern Israel. But Rantisi seemed caught off-guard when his oldest son, Mohammad, 23, who is a medical student in Iraq, said he, too, would be "honored to be chosen to become a martyr." "He doesn't know what he is saying," said Rantisi, with a dismissive smile. "He is only saying this because of his youth. "Some men must grow up to become doctors," Rantisi said. "But for that to happen, others have to sacrifice themselves and become martyrs."
Kill one roach, another takes its place. I am continually suprised and disgusted by the depth of hatred these people have for Jews and for all free people. I should no longer be shocked by this behavior. Tell me, who was it that bombed the WTC the first time? Who bombed the Kohbar towers? Who bombed the USS Cole? Who pushed Leon Klinghoffer overboard? Who took hostages in Tehran? Who bombed the embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut? What about the embassy in Kuwait? Or the hijackings of Flights 221 and 847? Who bombed the disco in West Berlin? Flight 103? Anyone see a pattern here? We need to confront these people in order to stop them. We don't need to talk or coddle or appease or make nice. Confrontation is the only way now. Everything else has been tried. While some of those attacks were made by Palestinians and other by different Islamic factions, they can be lumped together because they themselves do that; when one terrorist dies, the supporters of all terrorist groups mourn. Witness the people in Iraq and Syria and other place mourn the death of Yassin, praise the Palestinians and burn Israeli flags. One in the same, as far as I'm concerned. It's become a common theme of mine, one I repeat almost daily now, that we are in the path of an unavoidable war. A world war, a war of civilizations, pitting the haters against the hated and I suppose which side is which depends on where you are standing. From where I stand, we are the good guys. We do not blow up buses or schools. We do not purposely target children. We do not think that people who do not praise our God are infidels and they should die, nor do we think our Gods are the kind who would want us to do such a thing. They flew airplanes into office buildings. They blew up embassies. They are the "them" in the us v. them. Say what you want; call me racist, call me bigoted. I don't care anymore. I have given so much benefit of the doubt to the Muslims who walk the same sidewalks as me. I thought that they were different, that they did not want us dead. But look, there they are, crying for Yessin, burning American flags. The others remain silent, never standing up to condemn what their fellow Muslims are doing. They are accepting Rantisi as the new Hamas leader in Gaza. They will praise him, they will follow him and their counterparts in Gaza will die for him. Or send their children out to die.
This is from Tal G's weblog, June 23, 2002.Here is a picture of a Palestinian kindergarten student with her hands raised and dyed red to recall the lynching of 2 Israeli soldiers in Ramallah. The article describes the kindergartens run by the "Islamic Charitable Association" in Gaza, which are attended by about 5000 Palestinian children. The article describes a "graduation exercise": The kids burned and Israeli flag and recite: "in the name of the martyr Muhamad Al-Dura and the infant martyr Iman Haju, we pledge to continue the Jihad in resistance and in intifada" A girl raised her "bloody hands", then a child dressed as Hamas leader Hassan Nasrallah recited a few lines about how the Hizbullah fought the Israelis and were rewarded from above. The kids carry toy rifles.
Read the rest - there's a translated article describing in detail what the Palestinians are teaching their kids. Is it any wonder that the violence goes unabated? Is it any wonder that the cycle never ends? Just today: bq. A Palestinian teenager wearing a suicide bomb belt was detained Wednesday as he approached a crowded West Bank checkpoint in an apparent attempt to kill the soldiers there, the Israeli military said. It's not just the Palestinians. It happens in all Muslim areas, even right here in New York, where kids are taught that violence and hatred are ways of life, and that death is their reward. Whether you realize it or not, we are in the midst of a world war. It only escalates from here. Today, I have walked farther down the slope than I ever thought I would. I have begun to hate. I can no longer pick out the good from the bad, I can no longer pick and choose the practioners of the religion of peace that I will or will not condemn. I don't want to be here, but I've been more or less pushed. I hate myself for feeling this way, but I would hate myself more I didn't try to explore why I have these feelings. I am afraid. Anyone who reads this space knows that by now. But the fear gets greater with every day, with every bombing, with every sign that an American holds up, calling their own country evil and deadly. They don't know what deadly is. If they did, they wouldn't be parading around in their Birkenstocks praising our enemies. The world gets more dangerous by the day. When I was young, I thought the world would be headed in the opposite direction and we would be headed towards peace by now. We would be embracing our fellow man. Little did I know that our fellow man would never embrace us back. Where have all these multi-cultural and inclusion programs gotten us? What have we gained by welcoming this culture into our country and accepting its people as Americans? Nothing. It has not worked. It has only made it easier for them to walk among us, plotting, planning and spitting on our flag. And Islam is not the only culture that permeates our society to the point of disaster. There is the culture of hate, spawned by Americans themselves, the ones who teach Palestinian kids to hate the USA, the ones who side with dictators, the ones who praise our enemies and tell people to not support the troops. The clash of civilizations is not just between two peoples, but three. It's us, them and those who are the bridge between us and them. You know who you are. Our own government isn't helping. It's time to stop sitting around pointing fingers and laying blame on things that happened in the past. Instead, we should be concentrating on trying to stop those things in the future. We should be pointing our fingers at our enemies and going after them with all the zeal that our representatives are going after Bush and Clinton and whoever slept in the White House in the past twenty years or so. I'm done. If you've gotten this far, I thank you for indulging me in my moment of rather distasteful truth. I've become all the people I used to shake my head at with disgust. Can you blame me? Now, you may shout at me, send me hate mail, turn your back on me. I probably deserve it. But remember, I did not get to this place easily, nor with any sense of pride. Many of these links were found on LGF, or brought to my attention by Allah Update: Tactitus tackles the same subject.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fear and Self-Loathing in America:

» A Must Read from Nickspace Blog
A Small Victory is a must read today. Do not pass go, do not collect anything. Just read and think.... [Read More]

» http://www.allahpundit.com/archives/000458.html from Allah Is In The House
Of all the websites that cover the media, the one Allah would most like to capture and sell into white slavery is Honest Reporting. You keep fucking with Allah, chumps, and soon enough you shall see the mighty skull and... [Read More]

» We're doing to News, what News is doing to you! from Who Tends the Fires
Mike Hendrix on Richard Clarke in Much ado about even more nothing than usual. Heh. I don't understand what makes Dick Clark such a noted source on anything? Hosting the Times Square New Years party for the past 200 years... [Read More]

» ROP? from Inoperable Terran
Michele wants to see some proof about this whole Religion of Peace thing. Pretty much the only major group of Muslims I can point at and confidently say they're not gonna try to blow us up is the Kurds. That's... [Read More]

» ROPMA loses another mind from Dodgeblogium
Michele has had a crisis of confidence and finds herself hating Muslims. Her lengthy explanation of her reasons is a jolly good read. I agree with her 100% and have found the lack of response from moderate Muslims deafening. In... [Read More]

» Two world wars from the True Nature of Reality
Michele, in a very clear-headed post, offers us this: And Islam is not the only culture that permeates our society to the point of disaster. There is the culture of hate, spawned by Americans themselves, the ones who teach Palestinian... [Read More]

» Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Advocate of Population Control from Blogs
A successor to Islamic terrorist Sheik Ahmed Yassin has been chosen: Abdel Aziz Rantisi, a 54-year-old pediatrician, told tens of [Read More]

Comments

who could hate you for your honesty...?
not me.

Thank God I'm not the only one who's not afraid to hate the Muslims. They have a lot to prove to us given all their rhetoric.

sigh
Well put, and something that I have been trying to put into words for some time... Thanks for your honesty.

Welcome to the trap that I find ATS ensared in.

I'll chew your leg off, you'll chew mine off, okay?

We'll hop to freedom.

Wow, I agree. It would be nice to see the vast majority say something, anything.

The problem is that although the vast majority of Muslims (there are several billion) disagree with the radicals, they don't feel the need to get up and denounce them.

When was the last time a priest got up and said "hey child molesting priests, some of us have to stop molesting children"? When was the last time the Pope got up and said "hey crazy 'pro-lifers', some of us have to stop shooting abortion doctors"? When was the last time regular Americans got up and said "hey government, some of us have to stop invading countries like Grenada, and stop supporting fascists like Pinochet"?

You know why they don't? Because they don't feel the need to apologize for the actions of the minority. You want to lump all Muslims together? You have one answer to the useless question 'why do they hate us wah wah wah' right there.

You want to lump all Muslims together? You have one answer to the useless question 'why do they hate us wah wah wah' right there.

Which came first, Vince?

I've been asking for months - when am I going to see an 'Allah Bless America' bumper sticker?

And where in Islam are concepts comparable to the Good Samaritan, or Turning The Other Cheek, or Love Thy Neighbor As Thyself? These ideas resonate with people of peace (even atheists, I think!)

Yes, there's brutal stuff in the Bible - if you cherry pick your quotes, and stick to the Old Testament, especially...but the Koran doesn't seem to have the redemption of the New Testament, that I can discover.

When the way I believe in peace and love makes you want to kill me - indeed, makes you willing to kill yourself - you've lost me, somehow...

On rereading this, it seems a bit confused. I'll post it as is, though - I AM a bit confused about all this.

Vince, you are concentrating on the religious leaders of the groups that you mention. What about the lay groups of Catholics that denounced the priests? What about the families that left churches because of the crimes that were committed there? There is condemnation, right there. It doesn't have to be the Pope saying something is wrong for it to count.

I have yet to see the same thing happening in the Islamic community. Instead, there is either silence or support for the terrorists.

"Which came first, Vince?"

I've a bit of Italian in me. There was a time when people actually thought that all Italians were in the Mafia. Those days are long gone, but still revelant. Some cities had anti-defamation groups, but the vast majority didn't.

Now, law-abiding Italians disliked two things. Obviously, they disliked the Mafia for obvious reasons, although the greatest reason wasn't the negative association with the law-abiding. Moreover, it was the robbing, beatings etc. Mob stuff.

The 2nd thing law-abiding Italians disliked?Stupid, ignorant cake-eaters that couldn't distinguish between the law-abiding and the criminal.

Michele,

Im glad you had the guts to state in no uncertain terms what some of us have been thinking all along. Millions upon millions of Muslims standing by, mouths shut, eyes closed while their fellow Muslims go about terrorizing the world. It isn't only sad, its truly sickening.

Jon,

If you can name some of the dissenters you mentioned, please do. I'm sure there are a few. They don't get press time. Just like there are probably Americans who renounce their citizenship because of the evil things America has supported, just as how there are Muslims who renounce their leaders and the evil they supported, just how there are gays who renounce their pride parades becuase of the shenanigans going on.

"hey government, some of us have to stop invading countries like Grenada, and stop supporting fascists like Pinochet"?

Vince,

These last to jabs at conservatives are double non-sequiters. Invading Grenada FREED people; how does this align with a "minority" of a group doing something reprehensible. Pinochet, please! We have apoligized and been ashamed of those incidents (by both liberals AND conservatives), but those must be taken in context with the Cold War.

Are you saying these countries would have been better off with communist governments. Chile is probably the most stable country there is in South America.

Vince -

Notably, Peggy Noonan, of WSJ Opinion Journal - see Article here...

Vince

1st of all, the days when people thought that all or most Italians were in the Mafia are not long gone. The Sopranos is proof of that.

Rudy Giuliani made his name fighting the mob.

As far as the Catholic Church, Bill O'Reilly and Peggy Noonan off the top of my head, are two national figures who have taken a hardline on the pedophaelia scandal.

> "hey crazy 'pro-lifers', some of us have to stop shooting abortion doctors"?

Every time a pro-life person is interviewed by US media, said person that shooting abortion doctors is wrong.

I wonder about someone who criticises others for not doing something that they're already doing. Perhaps they confuse the need for an argument with having one.

So where are the followers of Islam who do not condone the branch of their religion that is being practiced by those who see suicide belts as a fashion statement? Do they even exist?

Irshad Manji is a Canadian Muslim who certainly falls into that category. She's gotten plenty of death threats for her efforts. I'm sure there are many others who share her views, but not her courage.

Excellent rant.

Vince, you asked Jon for examples. Why don't you provide some examples of those "evil things America has supported"? Can you provide any from the entire 20th century outside the context of fighting larger evils?

Vince, I am really tired of you turning every comment thread into your personal fighting ring.

Stay on topic of the posts, stop with the ridiculous analogies and, if you desire attention so much, get your own blog. That's what the rest of us did.

"the ones who praise our enemies and tell people to not support the troops. The clash of civilizations is not just between two peoples, but three"

I learned of your blog via Yglesias, and you said I wouldn't like you. Been lurking ever since. Can't say I am in tune with any Danzig fan, but I liked this post, and will paste it over at Tacitus, who talks of the same event. I favor the war in Iraq, but can't stand Bush, so maybe you think I am one of the third group. Whatever.

What? I came here for an argument!

Oh, well, this is abuse.

Michele,

You have a comment section. I made a comment. People responded back (and how!). It's not my fault I'm interesting.

I don't comment on your fluff entries. I comment on the vital stuff, the stuff that matters. You want cheerleaders, or undissenting views? Say so at the top!

Bob, you are not in the third group. Lots of people can't stand Bush. In fact, there are many things about him I don't like.

The third group would include people like Ted Rall, Chomsky, Fisk, ANSWER, Ramsey Clark, MoveOn.org and the like - those who aren't exactly terrorists but certainly encourage them.

VInce, this had nothing to do with dissenting views. I encourage them.

You're a topic de-railer and camera hog.

Vince -

Two headed calves are interesting, too - and their posts wouldn't be very good, either...

I believe that what Michele would like is informed, well-reasoned, well-written commentary - or, say, two out of three.

In your next post, try for at least ONE out of three, and see what a difference it makes!

Poor Vince. Everyone is ganging up on him. Keep strong Vince keep strong.

Vince -

And your father smelled of elderberries!

har har har.

how does it feel to have vince bothering YOU now, Michelle? I had no idea he was even OVER here. This is better than I could have ever possibly imagined.

tee hee hee.

Thinking... if it is our fault for 911, isn't it Hamas' fault for Saruman's death?

"Two headed calves are interesting, too - and their posts wouldn't be very good, either..."

snort

Parker went and made me snort for the first time today. There's a gold comedy star in the mail for you!

We are very close to a genocide. If the Islamists succeed in getting a serious biowar or nuke warhead into this country the response will be unspeakable. The American people would demand it. The Islamists are making the same mistake that Hitler and Tojo made. They see the essential good nature of America. They forget that the good nature of the American people can, and has, turned to a cold rage. We have slaughtered those who would attack us, whole cities turned into rubble. Tokyo, Hamburg and Dresden can testify, much less Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
If Islam wants to survive as anything other than a footnote of history, they need to change. The ball is in their court.
The Vinces of the world will beat their breasts and rend their clothes. They will not stop the B52s if it comes to it.
Americans did not climb into the B17s and B24s over Europe with glee. We didn't sing happy songs as the B29s crowded the skies over Nippon. It was a dirty and distastefull job. It was not a job we took lightly, slaughter never is. We did it. We can, if we must, do it again.

The people who share a duplex with the husband and I are Muslim. They're originally from Pakistan, by way of Dubai. They're both doctors and they have a lovely little eighteen month old little boy. He's adorable. They strive to be American in every way possible. They drive a Volkswagen and have Elmo hanging over the car seat so Adam has something to play with during the commute. You couldn't find two immigrants who want to fit in more than this couple, but they still cook a mean curry.

But ask them about the Palenstinian Cause and you'll get an earful. I think it's rote learning. I honestly do. Neither one of them has ever been to Palestine; both of them are from privileged families; but do they ever sympathize with the poor Palestinian people. What's even worse is when the Jewish reformed- hippie couple who lives next door jump in on the conversation and condemn Israel, too. They don't want to be associated with Israeli cruelty simply because they share a religion. It's really quite astounding. One example of rote learning; one example of fighting anti-establishment---and they all think we deserved 9/11. Different reasoning, same conclusion.

Just from observing our alley's little cross-section of America, it makes you wonder if we've gotten to a point where a consensus about what is good and what is bad is completely out of reach? And more importantly, what is it going to take for everyone to get on the same page? More concentration camps? A dirty bomb? What act is bad enough to declare that it's indeed bad? What will get people to stop rationalizing the hate?

I completely understand where you're coming from Michele.

that should say "fighting the establishment."

ooops.

"I love the blaring headlines that say "9/11 Who's to Blame?" I thought perhaps we could blame, oh...al Qaeda? Maybe, just maybe, both Clinton and Bush both did all they could with the intelligence they had and 9/11 - or another day like it - were just inevitable. Just a thought."

Anyhow that's the whole point right? I think it was inevitable, the odds that the US was going to stay free of a mass-casualty terrorist attack were zero. By the way, did you read the Time 2002 article on this? Just curious.

But the real point is what has happened since then? Have the post 9-11 policies pursued since make this country or its citizens more difficult to harm. While the main thrust of Clarke's book is that the Bush Admin didn't take the threat of terrorism too seriously, I'm more concerned with the post 9-11 responses to the threat and what Clarke is saying about that.

Although I confess I haven't had much time for that.

I am afraid Peter is right.We will do all we can,even to our own detriment to avoid such a conclusion,but I fear they will give us no choice because we are fighting a pseudo religion that was designed for world domination,and they do not desire to learn another way.

I understand what you are saying, but hate is what happens when you turn reason off and let emotion take over.

Hate fuels the basest of human acts, including using children as weapons. If you give in to it, you become One of Them.

"If you give in to it, you become One of Them"

What does this mean?

[quote]Today, I have walked farther down the slope than I ever thought I would. I have begun to hate. I can no longer pick out the good from the bad, I can no longer pick and choose the practioners of the religion of peace that I will or will not condemn. I don't want to be here, but I've been more or less pushed. I hate myself for feeling this way, but I would hate myself more I didn't try to explore why I have these feelings.[/quote]

I argued with my girlfriend about this the otherday, she tried to get across the "peacefull" message but could not. She is not a left wing nut, and is in fact very right leaning but when I began declaring "islam is evil, and does not want peace" she felt she had to try to defend them from such a blanket statement... She still hasnt shown me any evidence of their 'peacefullness'...

Very well written and starkly truthfull.

AM, who are you? Spock?

I've been trying to tell people that this is about hatred for a long time. The hatred that Muslims have for nonMuslims. The hatred they teach. The hatred they require.

The Salafis say it directly. Salafis are required to hate nonMuslims.

The rest of them have that problem, they teach it, they require it, but slightly less visibly...

The Muslim world hungers for blood, the way the Germany hungered for blood in the 30's,perhaps more so. That's something I see.

Our society, America, has one of the world's best record for defusing hatred. We had slavery. Now we do not. We had Jim Crow. Now we do not.

But the political descendents of those who rode to the south and confronted hatred there seem to have absolutely no stomach for confronting hatred in the Muslim world. They are not only cowards, they are being coopted into that hatred through their cowardice!

Of course that's not enough. It will take force of arms as well.

Sigh..

Ted

It's just like how all of the black slaves who hated their oppressors also became while slave owners, and like how all of the Allied soldier who hated the Nazis also became Nazis and opened their own death camps...

What that didn't happen. Maybe AM is full of shit.

Hate fuels the basest of human acts, including using children as weapons. If you give in to it, you become One of Them.

So, if I hate the terrorists, I'm going to start sending my kids out with bomb belts to kill little babies?

Not likely.

while/white whatever :)

Anyway Michele, how can you not hate people who hate you, attack you and require their children to do the same?

I'd worry about you if you didn't hate them.

Again I recommend Lee Harris'Civilization and Its Enemies.

He covers the psychology of people like AM. And why society has to recognize that we do have enemies.

You're exactly right, Michele. That's pretty much how I feel (but you said it better).

By the way, one good thing I'm seeing in the hearings is that some democrats (well Bob Kerry is a former democratic senator) are ripping the Clinton administration a new one.

Perhaps the partisan wrangling will end as the hearings make the Bush team look better and better.

Anyway, stupid hatred is wrong. But you need some anger to steel yourself to the point where you won't take any shit.

Peter, actually they don't see our good nature. They read Hadiths that say that nonmuslims are evil and that God wants them to kill us... The rest follows.

Anti-semitism fuels this raging hatred. And you can argue they are Anti-west for supporting Israel. But that's not the only reason. Even in Europe, where support for Israel is almost non-existent, the terrorists still strike.

Like you, I really want to hear the impassioned repudiation of the violence and hatred from non-radical Muslims. I don't hear it.

On the hearings - it troubles me insofar as it lets us ignore what we should fix, in a rush to find scapegoats. After Pearl Harbor, Congress held the same kind of hearings and investigations. There were certainly political undercurrents. The careers of two fine officers, Lt. Gen. Walter Short and Admiral Husband Kimmel were ruined. Only after their deaths, were their reputations restored, being cleared of the charges "dereliction of duty".

I am not interested in blaming Bush, or Clinton. I'm interested in fixing the problems.

"So, if I hate the terrorists, I'm going to start sending my kids out with bomb belts to kill little babies?

Not likely."

Well, of course not - you don't have to. You have the most powerful military in the world to do your dirty work for you.

One more thought. Islam is a religion that teaches Muslims to care for people and be ethical.

But unfortunately in that system only other Muslims are considered people.

I think we've all noticed by now that the worst criminal, if he is a Muslim, is generally considered vastly superior to the best Nonmuslim. For instance, think of Muslims attitude toward GW getting rid of Saddam.

That's why the less radical Muslims won't speak up. It's beneith then to care about infidels.

That is what has to change.

Well said TJ. Glad you understand that.

TJ, is protecting your own always "dirty work?"

Can't protecting your family, your freedom ever be considered ethical?

TJ won't understand your sarcasm, Ted.

"Well, of course not - you don't have to. You have the most powerful military in the world to do your dirty work for you."

You must be confused. This military does not send 10 year old kids out to kill little babies.

Big difference, sparky.

Josh,

I guess he just dropped in for that.

I fully understand Michele's rage. I am not quite there yet, but I think we all have a point where we can get there.

Well TJ brings up the important point that a HUGE proportion of Americans have no concept that we have a duty to protect our own. They can't imagine protection being ethical, if protection ever requires being proactive...

That's something we should work on.

Applase

Well said.

"You must be confused. This military does not send 10 year old kids out to kill little babies."

Again, that's because this military doesn't have to.

This military has other, more humane ways of achieving the goals of its citizens. And we use them.

And yes, from my point of view, that does make us better than the terrorists.

But think about this for a moment - if the only way you could see to protect yourself and the ones you love would be to strap a bomb to somebody you care about and send them off to blow up innocent people - would you do it?

You'll probably answer no. Most people would. But that's because they absolutely cannot fathom being in a situation like that. In America, we don't have to face situations like that. We have other options available to us.

I don't condone what they do. But, in a sense, I can understand it.

"- if the only way you could see to protect yourself and the ones you love would be to strap a bomb to somebody you care about and send them off to blow up innocent people - would you do it?"

TJ, you have bought into some incredibly popular propaganda. Propaganda, not oil is the middle east's main export.

The situation you describe exists ... nowhere. That has no relationship to what has ACTUALLY been happening in Israel/Palestine.

"I have begun to hate. I can no longer pick out the good from the bad, I can no longer pick and choose the practioners of the religion of peace that I will or will not condemn."

And this is exactly what the terrorists want.

The terrorists do not simply seek to make us afraid. They want to provoke us into actions in kind, targeting innocents on their side.

You see, the terrorist not only disregards the lives of his enemies - he disregards the lives of his so-called friends, setting them up as retaliatory targets so that, when the unjust reaction comes, the hatred will spread and more people will be willing to be terrorists.

If we wanted to play that game, we could probably eradicate terrorism. If we were willing to stack up the bodies of innocent people at 1,000 to 1 ratios or worse.

And at that point, we would so fully have espoused their methods and so taken their toxin to our hearts that we would truly and literally be no better than they. We would beat terrorists only by becoming bigger and better terrorists than they, and we would never be the same for it.

We would be, not just as bad as them, but worse than them, by being better at their own game.

TJ, one thing that may help you understand is the PLO charter. It says that "violence is the only legitimate form of resistance".

Why did they specify the method to be violence instead of specifying a goal? Because the purpose of the PLO was not rights for Palestinians, it was the complete genocide for the Israelis Jews, and Arafat's main fear was that peace could break out, and accord could be reached and Palestinians could live peacefully with Jews...

The political structure of Palestine was set up by the surrounding states to prevent the possiblity of peace, to incite violence and to indocrinate the Palestinians to be genocidal monsters - and to oppress the Palestinians as well, free people might find another role for themselves.

They have been completely successful. All danger of peace has been avoided.

And the propaganda drums beat on, filling the world with lies.

michele--great job. I think you understated the point, the common dread lurking in many, many of us educated-to-a-fair-thee-well, open-minded, good-natured, tolerant American types: We are going to have a protracted war against Islamist societies. We are going to have fight them, and probably, kill many of them. it will not be cheap.

yes, I refer to a clash of civilizations. The world cannot abide Western Civ, as it is currently constructed, and the expansionist nihilistic impulses of societies that would argue that the pictures you clipped contain acceptable expressions.

I hate myself for acknowledging it, but the sooner Israel cleans up its hit list, the sooner we force the iranian Mullahs to their knees, the sooner we capture or kill the leadership of Al-quada, the better off the world will be.

"They want to provoke us into actions in kind, targeting innocents on their side"

That's what separates the good from the bad, TJ. They are basically bred for this purpose: to kill and to hate. We do not do that here. At least not the civilized among us.

As far as taking action, this is a far as my action gets, TJ. I write. It's all I can do. At this stage in my life, I've pretty much learned how not to kill people I don't like. That's probably because my parents didn't see fit to dress me in grenades and blood when I was a baby.

I'm afraid, I'm pissed, I'm a lot of things. But inhumane is not one of them.

"The situation you describe exists ... nowhere. That has no relationship to what has ACTUALLY been happening in Israel/Palestine."

For the most part, I agree.

But regardless of the reality of the situation, the fact is that many people believe things have reached that point. And as long as that belief is out there, you will have mothers strapping bombs on their sons and daughters and sending them off to murder and to die.

That belief is what we need to fight against.

But think about this for a moment - if the only way you could see to protect yourself and the ones you love would be to strap a bomb to somebody you care about and send them off to blow up innocent people - would you do it?

...What?

(stunned silence)

I guess I'm just morally simplistic and all, but exactly what part of this fantasy you're spinning makes sense? The Palestinian suicide bombers target civilians, not the Israeli military. Military deaths tend to take place when a bomber is caught and prematurely detonates himself. Exactly how does slaughtering Israeli civilians "protect" anyone?

Y'see, you're assuming the Pali's goal is to "protect." It isn't. It is to kill.

You'll probably answer no. Most people would. But that's because they absolutely cannot fathom being in a situation like that.

Y'know, there are oppressed groups all over this planet that manage to deal with their horrible situations without strapping bombs to their goddamn children.

In America, we don't have to face situations like that. We have other options available to us.

Well, there's that, and there's the fact that we find the whole idea morally reprehensible.

I don't condone what they do.

Yes, you do. That's just what you've spent your post doing... you're condoning it, because you feel those poor Palestinians don't have any other choice. You're making excuses for their behavior.

But, in a sense, I can understand it.

Good for you.

"If we wanted to play that game, we could probably eradicate terrorism. If we were willing to stack up the bodies of innocent people at 1,000 to 1 ratios or worse."

You're right. But these people have hundreds of millions of followers. They have brainwashed entire nations (Palestine, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt).

And they are an extreme danger to us as well as to themselves. And their societies are getting WORSE not better. I just read that in Saudi Arabia, parents are freightened of the blood thirsty fanaticism of their own children.

So TJ, do you oppose the Liberation of Iraq. Do you think we have a right to meddle or should we just wait for those blows that may lead to holocaust?

One more thing, it sounds like a paradox, but I think we can be allowed to hate people who hate and destroy without reason or measure.

TJ,

You make a good point. However, the way to break this belief is to show that terror will NEVER get them anywhere. It means that they should realize that terrorism is not "protecting them" or their families.

This is why gaming theory falls apart. We have too many people that will continue the same behavior despite the fact that past experience has shown it does not improve their situation.

Vince--I simply have no idea where you get your news. varying degrees of dissent is tolerated and encouraged within most religous institutions, outside of Islam.

Don't beleive me? Look at National Review, a magazine founded by, and still largely staffed by, traditional Roman catholics. they were, and are still, at the forefront of the Clerical child abuse scandals, with both critical commentary and breaking news.

Abortion doctor shootings? the culprits were hunted and prosecuted by largely catholic prosecutors, juries and judges.

Oh, and Vince, there have been about a whopping 10 deaths due to clinic related violence in the past 25 years. the example was lame.

There are no similar analogs in Islam away from that canadian woman, who operates in fear for her life, and maybe, Stephen Schwartz, a Sufi(?) convert from Judaism, who writes for the Weekly Standard.

There is the fact that Islam is a religion with a singularly unified political and cultural worldview and tradition. There isn't a lot of dissent because there aren't a lot of dissenters. Note: I am not accusing Muslims of being OBL clones; rather, I am saying that things like the Pali intifada, or even the legitimacy of the Saudi kingdom are not questioned because they are apparently acceptable, broadly put, to most Muslims.

"Yes, you do. That's just what you've spent your post doing... you're condoning it, because you feel those poor Palestinians don't have any other choice."

Read my post again.

"...if the only way you could see to protect yourself and the ones you love would be to..."

They think that blowing up civillians is the only way they have of making things better for themselves. They think that, if they blow up enough civillians, it'll scare the population into giving in to their demands.

The reality is that it won't work. But they cling to the belief because they don't see any other way.

Get rid of that belief and you've gone a long way toward solving the terrorist problem.

But regardless of the reality of the situation, the fact is that many people believe things have reached that point. And as long as that belief is out there, you will have mothers strapping bombs on their sons and daughters and sending them off to murder and to die.

Well, that's not quite it. I should look up the exact Hadith but it's something like "The day of Judgement will not come until Muslim kill the Jews".

They believe that God wants them to kill Jews. They believe that God wants them to raise the flag of islam over the whole world.

The rest is rhetoric. There are Hadiths that state that Jews and Christians cheat Muslims... They don't need any newspaper headlines telling them this - they think GOD is telling them this. This is a society that considers science - testing reality - to be heresy. If God says it, then it's true. And when there is no reality to it, they will write headlines saying that it's so anyway, because that's what piety demands.

Israel should have killed the leaders long ago to make space for something else, but Israel was afraid of the world.

Anyway we seem to actually be close to agreeing on the reality.

But I think we need to put all pressure on American Muslims to become American and to do their duty to break the Muslim world of its bigotry. We need them. And they're NOT showing any loyalty yet.

We need to shame them

That's why I refuse to disagree with Michele here.

TJ, let me put this to you simply. They kill innocent people in Israel because THEY HATE JEWS.

End of story.

"They think that blowing up civillians is the only way they have of making things better for themselves. They think that, if they blow up enough civillians, it'll scare the population into giving in to their demands."

They would know that reality if they allowed freedom of speech and had honest newspapers.

Killing all of the leaders and imams might create enough of an opening for that... Or not. These people have become facists. It's not just the leaders who are facists. It's the people.

I think that the Europeans have it backwards. Palestine will be the last spot on earth to become civilized. We can reform the WHOLE MIDDLE EAST and it will STILL take generations for civilization to trickle into Palestine.

So in my estimation the only way to denazify Palestine, is to denazify the rest of the middle east first.

I hope that what happens from this clash of civilizations will be the eventual spark of a reform movement within Islam. I'm no expert on the history of it all but when was the last time Islam experienced a Reformation? A reformation certainly requires progress-minded leaders, however, and perhaps the times we live in - and the conflict our generation does and will endure - will serve to inspire and train those leaders for the next generation. I think we're not at the end of history - only in the middle - so we just need to "hang in there", confront evil where it presents itself, and continue the call (just as you're doing) for peaceful and progressive Muslims to step forward and take back their faith. As a Christian myself, it sickens me to look back over history and know the violence and misery that people espousing my own faith have visited upon those who are different. I think that chapter in the history of Islam is not quite finished but I do believe it will end and that eventually Muslims will look back with the same bewildering disappointment in their ancestors that I have for those who conducted the Inquisition.

Great post and great site, Michele.

I thought the world would be headed in the opposite direction and we would be headed towards peace by now. We would be embracing our fellow man.

We are moving towards peace, what's being "discussed" is who's definition of peace, Western or Islam.

Did the Japanese who carried out the rape of Nanking ‘cling to their belief because they don't see any other way.’? Did the Germans slaughter millions of people in the Holocaust because they were desperate?

At the beginning of WWII, American soldiers were horrified by the brutality of the Japanese soldiers. They didn’t play by the rules – they slaughtered prisoners, brutalized civilians, convinced their own population that it would be better to commit suicide then be conquered by the Allies.

Should the Allies have tried the hand waving idea of ‘getting rid of their false beliefs?’

The Allies were brutal in response. And they came home, they raised families and became the what some call ‘the greatest generation’

They did what they had to do. It doesn’t mean deliberately targeting innocent people. It means targeting combatants and killing them. That's what you do if you want to win. If you don't want to win, you can apoligize for terrorists and visualize world peace. ontificate.

oops-should have previewed..

"Well, that's not quite it. I should look up the exact Hadith but it's something like "The day of Judgement will not come until Muslim kill the Jews".

And the Bible says it's okay to keep slaves. Yet you don't see too many Christians doing that these days.

Just because Islamic religious texts may say something about killing Jews, doesn't mean very many Muslims would do it or condone it if they didn't think they had other, more immediate reasons for doing so.

I mean, you don't see too many Muslims blowing up synagogues in Canada, do you?

The ignorance and political demagogurey going on in Palestine right now has inspired far more terrorism than the Koran ever will.

--Anyway Michele, how can you not hate people who hate you, attack you and require their children to do the same?

I'd worry about you if you didn't hate them.--

How about if you're Christian, we love them to death????

They want death, I see no reason not to give it to them.

"They kill innocent people in Israel because THEY HATE JEWS."

And how many of them hate Jews because their religion tells them to, and how many hate Jews because they believe they are responsible for reducing the quality of their lives and their children's lives?

Or, put it another way - if Israel had never been founded, how many Muslims would even give a damn about Jews today? My guess is, very few.

"Should the Allies have tried the hand waving idea of ‘getting rid of their false beliefs?’"

That's a bogus comparassion. WWII was winnable through other, more conventional means. The war on terror isn't - not unless, as I said, we're willing to pile up innocent bodies like cordwood.

I'll share two stories with you.

25 years ago I worked with a naturalized Jordanian engineer. There was a headline type criminal trial going on in NY. Talking about the trial he said to me, 'In my country we wouldnt waste time on a trial. The family would take care of it." It wouldn't occur to him to say that we had a system of law here and it would be nice if his old country adapted something like that.

I was in
Tehran in 1978 just as things were heating up.Riots and daily gunshots around the city. I was in a car with my Iranian driver. On the floor in front of the passenger seat was a picture of the Shah which could be put in the windshield. Under it was a picture of Khomeini. the driver told me he needed them both: "depends which mob is in the street" He was a survivor. And that is how he thinks. Whoever wields power will be his leader.

Come on TJ - it's centuries of violence against the infidels.

And I'm not waiting 'very many muslims to do it or condone it', I'm waiting for them to renounce it.

Post war Japan renounced the use of force as a means of political competition, forever. Forever. They didn't do it because they came around to our way of thinking. They did it because they saw the absolute ruin, the complete and utter destruction their warring ambitions brought down on them.

Mary, I hate to weaken my own case...

But what we had to do in WWII was much worse than just "targetting combatants and killing them".

Targetting combantant is what Israel has been doing and it isn't working for them either.

The Israeli economy made Palestinians the wealthiest Muslims in the region before the Intefada (by median income not average - so the princes don't throw off the numbers). They had 4 times the income of Syrians before the Intefada now they have 1/4. Poverty is the result of fighting, not the cause, and it isn't slowing them down.

In WW2 we firebombed Dresden.

In WW2 we firebombed 67 Japanese cities before we hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

We killed 100,000 people in Tokyo in one night.

THAT may be what it takes to make a people give up on facism. They have to hurt SO much that even with their insane myths of being sent from God, they lose all faith in war.

I don't know what it would take to make the Palestinians lose faith. Years of filtering has made them the worst of the worst. It may be that ANY group of Palestinian survivors, however small will always have Jihadis who refuse to give up the fight.

But for the Muslim world as a whole, if it comes to total war, we will have to target more than combatents if we ever want the fighting to end.

I reform works... Otherwise I think H-Bombs will be the shock and awe we promised before but didn't deliver.

TJ – Islamist terrorism is state supported. Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran are supplying most of the cash, madrassas and paramilitaries for this movement. It’s the way these states fight wars now.

Terrorism and fundamentalist dogma is their weapon because their military force is fairly useless. Belgium could probably deal with Syria and Iran. This doesn’t even take into account how much more precise our weapons are.

The Japanese were brainwashed by their government in a similar way to the Islamists. How did they react when it fell?

Can you name a single fascist movement that was stopped by hand waving, getting rid of false beliefs and an investigation of root causes?

We can fight back or we can let our families and friends be stacked up like cordwood. Sometimes you have to make a choice between war and allowing oppressive groups to commit genocide. Which would you choose?

"And how many of them hate Jews because their religion tells them to, and how many hate Jews because they believe they are responsible for reducing the quality of their lives and their children's lives?"

Wrong tact, TJ. As I pointed out above, it's Arafat and co who done the worst for the quality of their lives and their children's lives.

In this society indocrination not reality is the key.

Actually they've been indocrinated to the point where they encourage children to become maimed and killed just because it makes the best propaganda. Songs on the radio... Shows on TV... Teachers in schools try to get the kids out there and maiming Israeli soldiers with rocks - in order to entice those soldiers to shoot back! Terrorists surround themselves with crowds of children, both at home and when they are firing on Israelis soldiers.

Palestinians aren't valuing life much. To me it's the most alien culture on earth.

But I'm sure it's an artificial creation - a very recent creation. This isn't natural even for Arabs - I hope.

But it's wrong to blame the Israelis for this monstrosity.

Joshua Scholar - Israel does target combatants, but they kill one at a time (well, eight) Their skill is impressive, but it's like they're fencing with a bear. Hopefully the next time they strike Hamas, they get more of them.

Attacks stopped for months after Israel bombed Syria. States like Syria aren't strong like Japan & Germany were. They're really weak. It doesn't seem that we'd need such massive firepower.

"The ignorance and political demagogurey going on in Palestine right now has inspired far more terrorism than the Koran ever will."

Hadiths are scriptures that aren't actually in the the Koran.

Unfortunatly there are hundreds of thousands of them that are widely believed and many of these collections have the most horrible stuff imaginable.

Islam was developed to unite the arab tribes into a cohesive fighting force,and it is designed from top to bottom as a warrior code.They tried a while back but were pushed back into submission.Oil made them rich enough to think they could win this time. if we must kill them all to protect our own is not sinking to their level,it is our moral imperrative

Much of the problem we face today was caused by Western leftists--primarily academic leftists--in Europe and the U.S. If it were not for these people, a modus vivendi between Israel and the Palestinians would likely have been arrived at long ago.

Mary, I don't know, because I don't know the depth of what it will take to break their will to fight. I just know we haven't applied it yet.

VDH discusses how the battle of Okinawa shaped our tactics, in his book "Ripples of Battle". He makes the point that the firebombing of Japan, the atomic bombing, were both pretty direct responses to Japanese kamikaze tactics, thus: if the Japanese had convinced themselves that it was better to die killing any Americans that came in reach, if they were really going to have suicide bombers blowing up our troops from among the general populace, then we should simply deny them that opportunity by killing them as quickly as possible in ways that would not ALLOW them to respond.

His second point was that when the Japanese realized that was our intent, and we had the capacity to do it, they gave up. Whether we can carry out a similar program today is debateable, because the tech for mass lethalness is more available, and those who would carry it out are not confined to a limited geographic region.

Furthermore, the supply of suicide pilots became ever more difficult to sustain as the potential recruits realized that not everyone (ie the leadership) was undergoing the same sacrifices. We've seen some of that in Israel and Iraq already.

Well to cheer you all up, here's a very rare glint of honesty from another Arab war. The war against women. Perhaps the honesty of angry women can lead to other honesties.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/407998.html

Wow -
you say "I am continually surprised and disgusted by the depth of hatred these people have for Jews and for all free people"
So the same deep hatred many if not most Jews feel towards Arab peoples is OK?
Now you're scared of any Muslim, period? Did you know the largest population of Muslims is Asian? Better watch out for all those Asians "in your neighborhood", too - as you continue to live in your culture of fear and hysteria! Actually, since Jews and Arabs share the same blood, genes, and ancestors - you better watch out for them also!

Yeah, go figure. People have strong emotions about others who want to kill them.

So.

This will probably be my last post to this blog.

... I'll wait while the rejoicing dies down...

I had thought that you were open to opposing views, even though many of your "members" are not.

Your comments regarding Muslims in todays post have finally served to show your true colors.

The Muslim community has been denouncing the actions of the "Islamists" (as you put it) for quite some time now. Especially (but not solely) the American Muslim community.

I'd hate to risk sounding like Otto when he claimed I get my news from MTV, but I suspect you've been paying Bill O'Reilly a bit more attention than he deserves.

For you to claim ANY knowledge of the issue and in the same breath claim that Muslims as a whole support the actions of these groups, is ridiculous and ignorant.

You seem to want every Muslim to defend their religion over the extreme actions of a few members (and, sorry but that's the deal.) Where is your indignance over the Crusades? The horrors perpetrated in the name of Christ over the past 2000 years have no comparison in human history. Yet we don't blame all Christians for that behavior... hmm.

You're an atheist, but favor one religion over another.... interesting.

The most distressing thing about his blog though is the "safety net" you operate in.

Many of the regular visitors here, "DAVE IN TEXAS" being one are quite astute, and willing to discuss the issues. I had thought you were among that group until today.

If you claimed an allegiance to a specific religion your instant, glaring prejudice toward Islam would be easier to accept than it is when you claim Aitheism.

It might be a strong wake-up call to some of you, but Evil doesn't discriminate. The list of people who have perpetrated horror in the name of God is long and distinguished. To single out one group is just silly.

Considering that you're all too scared to contact me directly and have a true debate, I'll try to sum up my feelings in one last statement. (How any of you earn a living is beyond me).

What I've realized is that even if Dubya came out tomorrow and said "We screwed up... we should have maintained our presence in Afghanistan. We should NOT have deferred so many troops and so much money to Iraq..." You would STILL support the war in Iraq.

You claim to be an atheist, but from what I've heard - FOX News is your God. Regardless of reality, you all find a way to twist it.

None of you have answered my repeated questions about Nuclear preeeminence. None of you have suggested a resolution of any kind. You're all REAL proud that we kicked the shit out of Iraq, but just like Dubya, none of you care about the aftermath.

Will North Korea or Pakistan be the first Nuclear target? I'm starting a Pool.. figured you folks would be the logical experts.

When I first came here, I thought I'd finally found some "Rightees" (to use Otto's term) who were thoughtfull.

I've come to realize that you guys are why the bi-partisan process is so important. You just process and regurgitate whatever you're fed. Bush could tell you that the Earth is flat and you'd buy it. Regardless of the information to the contrary.

Richard Clark... 30 years in government service. Registered Republican. A man who has shown NO partisan professional bend in his entire career.

And you're willing to ignore what he has to say?

You're a bunch of lambs. Pissed off (Otto), errudite (DAVE, Mary) and confused (Michelle)... but lambs none the less.

No offense intended. I just call 'em as I see 'em.

No one has approached a single question I've posed.

Has it occured to you that I'm here to learn why you feel this way in spite of the evidence?

No.

Instead I'm treated to a personalized version of whatever Bill O'Reilly or Don Rumsfeld said earlier in the day.

Isn't it ironic how you all know what's going on, when none of you have bothered to venture outside the safety net?

I'm glad that you were all able to vicariously berate me through Otto (at least he had the balls to do it). Granted, he's scared of me... but at least he ranted.

In closing I'd like to point out that I was supportive of the invasion of Iraq at the time. Very soon thereafter I began to learn some truths about the war. Since then I have been researching the history of the situation.

I'm sorry that most of the info I've gleaned comes from the Bush administration itself. I didn't plan it that way... it just happened.

Meanwhile, you guys will continue to harbor hate against a people who have never harmed you. Just as you've been instructed to.

Hitler's regime was built in the exact same way.

I don't say that to offend. Just making a point. You folks are not exercising your engrained freedoms. Look around. Stop making decisions based on what you are told. Start making decisions based on reality.

Ignore your prejudice and experience your neighbor.

I've always left my email address open when I've posted here. I'll leave it so now. None of you have ever bothered to address me personally anyway, so what's the bother?

I don't care who you vote for. But when you support a politician based on the message from his campaign, I wonder about you.

Take care, all. I know we all want the same thing.

~Kev

P.S: If you want to reach me, it has to be through email. I will not be returning to ASV. Any one who emails me will receive a reply.

Kevin sure got a lot of slander and bullshit assumptions into his parting shot.

Bye, I guess.

I don't like to see one of the deepest threads on this site ended with a long piece of disinformation that slanders and misrepresents the rest.

It discourages people from reading the thread.

I hope Michele deletes Kevin's post.

Joshua, I won't delete it, that would be wrong. Kevin is typical of a lot of people who come here to dispute what I have to say: He makes a whole bunch of assumptions, misinterprets the post at hand, paints everyone with the same brush and leaves.

I'm sure he's watching, though. They always are.

Peace only occurs once in the Koran.

Islam is a warrior religion. They do not aim to evangelise and convert the world, but conquer and forcibly convert. There are two realms in Islam: the one of Islam and the realm of war.

And finally Islam is judenhass. The Prophet tells them vehemently to be so inclined.

Kind of says it all doesn't it. Remind me again exactly how Islam is the religion of Peace?

Mmm. I wonder if we could divorce from the rhetoric and maybe concentrate on the the actuality of the killing and suffering.

Obviously, you've thought very tough about your current conclusion, re: all people who follow an extreme religion should be eradicated from this Earth -- I sympathise with this point of view, since, I've often woken up and wondered "why can't we just Bomb Red China?"

I think it would be hard put to face any religious text and avoid regeneration through blood, then again, it would be hard put to face any problem in a human condition and wonder how and why it has become this way.

Maybe, perhaps, your own reaction (and mine regarding Red China) is the same. I'm conflicted on this score, because I wonder what would happen if we bombed Red China with all those people. In the same vein, I do believe that the entity X (which could be the Islamists in your case, and Red China in mine) could believe the same thing about all of us folks.

We have morality and right on our side, I know so because that's what I know and believe, and have been told, as well. So in this case, even though "X" may think we're wrong, we can't be. So maybe if we could all exert our influence; use our affinity for knowing morality and right and being told so, to initialize a new front in the War on Terror with these people, whose only wish to engage in this manner is through sending their progeny to fight in distant lands.

And, fighting isn't just bombs. Look at how Red China sends all their populous to be educated here. And, look at how the borders are open to allow a free flow of talented people from those traitorous Zeropean countries. This has got to stop. The founding Fathers, whose ancestors were born in this land, need to be illicited again. Perhaps invoking a new and trustworthy consitution.

personally I like it that the PRC is so dependent on our economy and trade. keeps them in reasonable check.

I don't need to hate them, any more than I need to hate a rabid dog.

No hate, just a grim resolve to destroy any threat to our civilization. I'd rather see them change their ways and make nice, but if it comes to slaughter, then so be it.

It's their decision. If they reformed tomorrow, we'd quickly forget our animus, like with Germany and Japan. If they press the issue, they'll find out what the term 'Arsenal of Democracy' is all about.

I see only two possibilities;

Either

1) Islam is an ideology of murder, slaughter, perversion and violent conquest, practiced in varying degrees by its followers

OR

2) Sheikh Yassin was an abomination to Islam and nobody would ever support him, let alone call him an influential spiritual leader.

But we know that 2 isn't true. Yassin was supported and loved by just about all the muslims. He sent children to kill. He sent adults to kill children. He called for violence, murder, and conquest every day that he lived, and the promise of course, was that in the afterlife, there would be group sex. He had some kind of special something that appealed to muslims of both the Shia and the Sunni faith. And hey, he even had the slimy Europeans in his fan club at the end, there.

As has already been observed-- the palestinians are not weeds. They will not simply keep coming back twice as strong. They'd like everyone to believe this, because it's scary, and palestinians love terrorising people. But it isn't true. Each dead terrorist mean one less terrorist. And dead terrorist leaders and ideological masters like Yassin are worth even more.

There are no more soviets to arm them. There are no more Al Queso training camps to train them. The wahabbists in SA are being eyeballed for their funding of terrorists. Iran is being scrutinized for it's funding of terrorism. The money and the weapons are drying up.

This is a war that can be won, and the way to win it is go out and kill the bad guys in massive numbers- which is entirely possible. Yeah, they get stirred up like cockroaches the next day. They march around. They yell. You get a scathing article in the NYT. But that's it.
Terrorists- and especially palestinians-- cannot fight without lots of money, lots of training camps, and lots of weaponry.. and that stuff is gone. It's time to kill some motherfuckers.

Another propaganda victim, Kevin.

"Where is your indignance over the Crusades?".

Would that be the Crusades against the Orthodox Eastern empire, or the Crusades to remove the Muslim conquerors from somebody else's land?

"It's just like how all of the black slaves who hated their oppressors also became while slave owners, and like how all of the Allied soldier who hated the Nazis also became Nazis and opened their own death camps..."

The message of Martin Luther King was more influential than the message of Malcolm X.

I don't think that hatred informs reason. I think it fuels dogmatism, as with the Nazis, the radical feminists, islamofascists, the radical left AND the far right.

I can't waste my time hating those who wish to destroy me. It would debase me, and draw me down to their level of robotic fanaticism.

I am also an atheist, and as far as I can tell, it is the dogmatism of ANY religion, secular or otherwise, which spreads misery in the world. I don't consider Islam a religion of peace--the only peaceful religion is the one which acknowledges it DOESN'T have all the answers and doesn't seek to create uniformity in humanity.

AM

Bye, Kevin, and good riddance. You know what they say about heat and kitchens.

So, okay. Pop quiz time.

If I'm a Muslim and I condemn the 9/11 attacks and Palestinian suicide bombers and I read Michele's post I'm going to:

A) Try to reason with Michele, in spite of her proclamation that "I have begun to hate. I can no longer pick out the good from the bad, I can no longer pick and choose the practitioners of the religion of peace that I will or will not condemn."

B) Become as right-wing as possible, to try and put myself in the good graces of self-admitted haters like Michele.

C) Stop telling people I'm a Muslim and go into hiding until this all blows over.

D) Be very afraid of Michele and start viewing her as the threat to my personal liberty and safety that she obviously may become.

Hm. Tough call.

A, provided you make clear you condemn the 9/11 attacks and suicide bombers.

TJ, let me put this to you simply. They kill innocent people in Israel because THEY HATE JEWS.
End of story.

Is that the end of the story?
Really? Is that all there is to it? That's the whole reason?
And we're talking Jews here? Not Zionists or even Israelis. But JEWS?
And that's end of story?
Then I guess there'd be no point in elaborating on the story with "history". Nope. Whatever the historical antecedents may be, the fact is that those Palestinians are just a bunch of Jew-haters now.

And Michele can be forgiven for two-dimensional thinking because she's scared. And the United States has suffered a terrible attack.

call me bigoted. I don't care anymore.

Whatever. You're scared and it's shut down your brain. If you agree with some of your supporters (Joshua Scholar and his hydrogen bombs), you're ready to commit genocide in order to feel safe again. I don't agree with it, but I'm not particularly surprised by it. All bigotry is based in fear. Crimes against humanity are generally motivated by bigotry. Really, the only thing I find a little mystifying is how you can be this scared, as comparatively safe as you are, and not understand why Palestinians and Arabs lash out at Israel and the United States.

Or you do understand it and you just don't care. Equally appalling in its own right. And it does address something else in your rhetoric: it doesn't really matter who's right or wrong. You're scared, and you're going to kill the people who scare you so you can feel safe. And that's your ultimate motivation, it seems.

So for god's sake, don't bore us with anymore of these didactic proclamations about freedom and democracy. That's obviously not the point.

Dave in Texas:

TJ: I don't condone what they do.

Evil Otto: Yes, you do. That's just what you've spent your post doing...

So, I admit that I may be over generalizing here, but it seems that, in this forum, opposition to the party line is taken as endorsing suicide bombers. I mean, that's Evil Otto's response to Joe Blo internet guy. What if TJ's name were Emir? I'm not saying I personally wouldn't keep trying. I'm just saying that pretty much any choice besides A would be, all things considered, understandable.

I mean, that's Evil Otto's response to Joe Blo internet guy. What if TJ's name were Emir?

I'd say the same damned thing.

Joshua#2

You just proved that one of the things that make someone a troll is very low reading comprehension.

Well that combined with implacable arrogance.

You know why we can't take your arguements apart?

Because we already have, and you didn't even notice.

And you won't notice the next time or the time after that.

This is why people ignore trolls. There's no point even talking to you.

You do manage to get more wildly arrogant and insulting on each pass, though.

Troll.

Joshua Scholar:

You haven't taken apart anyone's arguments. You've laid out a lot of anecdotal evidence, circular logic and opinions presented as statements of fact. You don't have the guts to debate; you just light into people you disagree with, call them stupid, and draw erroneous conclusions about them based on your spectacularly lopsided perception of their theses.

For example:

It's just like how all of the black slaves who hated their oppressors also became white slave owners, and like how all of the Allied soldier who hated the Nazis also became Nazis and opened their own death camps...

Wait that didn't happen. Maybe AM is full of shit.

A) Your examples are patently disingenuous. Nothing in AM's thesis suggested that black slaves would become slave owners (much less white slave owners), nor did it suggest that Allied soldiers would become Nazis.

B) Your conclusion rests on a deliberate misinterpretation of AM's thesis. And, oh, hey, surprise, it's also an ad hominem attack.

Did you prove anything? Did you address AM's point in an intelligent thoughtful way or did you perpetrate a massive rhetorical slam and call it good? I think the answer's obvious, even to your allies.

Or, hey, look, another personal attack:

TJ won't understand your sarcasm, Ted.

Or another one of your opinions-disguised-as-facts, with a sprinkle of personal attack:

TJ, you have bought into some incredibly popular propaganda. Propaganda, not oil is the middle east's main export.

Weirdly enough, I didn't see that statement followed by any proof. No links. No evidence. Nothing but your attitude.

And they are an extreme danger to us as well as to themselves. And their societies are getting WORSE not better. I just read that in Saudi Arabia, parents are frightened of the blood thirsty fanaticism of their own children.

Here again: no history. No proof. Anecdotal evidence you "just read". Where'd you read it? And be clear about what I'm not saying here: I'm not saying your statements above aren't true. I'm saying they aren't proven. They don't constitute and argument. They're empty rhetoric.

One more thing, it sounds like a paradox, but I think we can be allowed to hate people who hate and destroy without reason or measure.

I think "paradox" is giving it too much credit. From where I'm standing it looks like plain old garden variety hypocrisy.

You do manage to get more wildly arrogant and insulting on each pass, though.

Arrogant as in, "never offering proof to support my statements"? Insulting as in, "poor reading comprehension", "implacable arrogance", not getting "sarcasm", or just plain "full of shit"?

This is why people ignore trolls. There's no point even talking to you.

Look.
If I say, "The sky is purple,"
And you say, "The sky is blue! Ha! Boy, you sure are full of shit! You're not even worth talking to."

Did you just "tear" my point "apart"? No. You might be right, but you haven't proved your point. You haven't offered any evidence. You've just been incredibly rude and insulting.

With a very few rare and notable exceptions, this is all I ever see from you.

Joshua#2
I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I want to argue with you.

For future reference, when someone calls you a troll and says "there's no point even talking to you" that probably means that they aren't going to bother reading any more of your posts.

For reference I didn't bother to read your whole post and don't intend to.

Yeah Joshua, that's pretty much it. They hate Jews. Not Zionists. Not Israelis. Jews. The other nouns are distinctions that are absolutely lost on them.

The rest of the Arab nations herded them up after '48 and shipped em off (or killed them outright) to "stolen Palestine". They didn't give a damn if they were Zionists or not, and "Israel" was just a place to send em. "We'll dump em in the sea in a few years".

As if the rest of the world has treated Jews any better since the dispersal.

Frankly, I'd say the "Palestinians" have a bigger beef with Britain and France, Syria, Egypt, Saudi, Iraq, Iran, Jordan (etc.).

I don't care about their bitterness. I don't care about their perspective. I quit caring when they started murdering. You know something funny? I think the Brits treated the Irish like shit. Unconscionable oppression, for centuries.

I still don't think it gives them a right to blow up Protestant children. I never will.

Dave in Texas:

The thing is, Israel doesn't have the moral high ground in this argument. They regularly kill Palestinian children. They're at war now because one of their own right-wing whackos murdered Yitzhak Rabin. Their current prime minister was held responsible for the massacre of hundreds of Palestinian civilians in two refugee camps that were run by the Israelis and removed from his office as Israeli defense minister by an Israeli tribunal. And that wasn't Sharon's first massacre.

Before Israel was a country with an army, they had gangs of terrorists that carried out bombing and assassination campaigns in the name of Israeli sovereignty. Some of these groups are recognized and honored by the Israeli state.

For some reason that's never been entirely clear to me, many people seem inclined to brush all that aside with a blanket ruling that "it was a long time ago" and "mistakes were made on both sides". While I agree that mistakes were made on both sides, I find the conceit that Palestinians should just forget about it and move on unreasonable at best and dishonest at worst. Especially in light of the fact that Israeli terrorism was, by the standard most right-wing pro-Israeli advocates seem to use, "rewarded" with statehood for Israel.

To be clear: I am not suggesting that moral parity between the actions of Palestinians and Israelis can be measured to some positive determination. I don't think it would be meaningful, even if it were possible, to pile murdered civilians on scales and use that to decide who should get the occupied territories. But the notion that the Palestinians now or have in the past have used some tactic that puts them significantly farther beyond the pale than the Israelis is, to my eye, preposterous. What they are mostly guilty of that the Israelis aren't is a string of spectacularly bad diplomatic decisions and misguided political alliances.

Of course, the farther this situation goes, the worse it gets. But with Ariel Sharon running the show in Israel, I think it's a mistake to assume that the Palestinians are alone in their descent into violence and hatred.

ps- Since Joshua Scholar has evidently decided to take the "sticking his fingers in his ears and singing 'mary had a little lamb' whenever I start talking" approach to debate, could you ask him for me how he manages to type without a spine? I'm just wondering.

Thought I would share this piece I posted earlier to the latest piece in the OPED piece on TCP.

Do follow the links. It could be educational.

Sorry I didn't hypertext the links. Next time maybe.

r

*****

Folks chew on this one for a while. This is a post I sent yst to the Committee of Concerned Journalists at:

www.journalism.org

I guess I’m a little of an idealist. But folks with all the finger pointing and smoke, the real threat we all now face is going uncovered. I don’t much think this is a Dem/Rep thing. We need to get our act together now and damn quick!

03-24-04

The Devolution of the American Press

To the Committee of Concerned Journalists:

I just posted a reply to the OPED Section of the WSJ in support of a letter running today by the prime minister of Spain on the subject of world terrorism and appeasement:

http://hspig.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=624

Even though they do seem to get the story, I will be amazed if they do indeed run it.

Our media has collectively let us down on the coverage on the War on Terror. It has failed to connect the dots of a significant story on the very real threat we now face. The trail is clear on the Internet that bioterror weapons may have reached the Middle East from the stocks of the former Soviet Union via an underground railroad in exchange for cash

The media seems collectively obsessed with the issue of not finding any WMDs in Iraq. They collectively paint the picture that President Bush has lied to the American people to win their support for the invasion of Iraq. In so doing they have failed to see the forest for the trees and to see this trail now emerging:

A Story of the Real, the Imagined, and the Wished
http://hspig.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=495

They seem as though they have been cheated in one way or another. They have all but ignored the crimes against humanity that were perpetuated on the people of Iraq by Saddam as if this is of no justification in and of itself for removing him from power. Has the Holocaust faded that far from our collective memories?

Blessed by for the Internet:
http://hspig.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=549

These are the hard questions that our media has failed to seek the answers which has left the American people in the dark.

Our Cold War allies seem to have gotten cold feet. Do you suppose for a moment this is about real conflicts of economic interest? Perhaps playing both sides against the middle while at the same time espousing lofty idealistic principals and diplomatic solutions?

France: A Western Rogue State?
http://hspig.org/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=622

The UN, the world’s mediator, could not reach a decision of enforcing it’s own rulings that Saddam was flagrantly violating. Did they suffer from some personality disorder? Perhaps they were conflicted like Robert DeNero was in, “Analyze This.” Did this confliction stem from who was on the take from the UN’s sanctioned and run, Oil for Food Program? The time had clearly come and gone for Saddam to lay his cards on the table but for reasons only know to him he continued with his schoolyard bully bravado at the expense of the Iraqi people.

Could this all be about the control of oil by the multi-national energy conglomerates plagued by ethical lapses - Enron? Maybe there is more truth than fiction to last season’s “24 hrs,” with Kiefer Sutherland. Have the chickens come home to roost? Was our government 's choices in the governments we chose to support in this region, unduly influenced by the conglomerates that needed stability to developed oilfields? Might this have created a disenfranchised underclass ripe for the picking by the Osama bin Ladens of the world?

The threat that Al Qaeda now posses is very real, it’s here now, and we need to be ready and prepared. The time for action has arrived!

Come on! There is a Pulitzer here somewhere. Doesn’t that have any worth anymore?

Ron Wright
Advisory Board, Security Council Member
Homeland Security Policy Institute Group
www.hspig.org

Dave in Texas:

Did you ever see Disney's "Winnie the Pooh?"

Imagine Rabbit hammering in a sign while huffing:
"DON'T! FEED! THE! TROLL!"

"Since Joshua Scholar has evidently decided to take the "sticking his fingers in his ears and singing 'mary had a little lamb' whenever I start talking" approach to debate, could you ask him for me how he manages to type without a spine? I'm just wondering."

I would have sent this to you privately but your web page is down and I have no email address.

Anyway here's a free clue.

"Troll" is just a polite word for "unbearable asshole."

Trolls don't drive people away by the force of their arguments but by the unpleasantness of their personalities.

There's a lot of people on the internet, some of whom engage in civilized conversation. Why should anyone waste their time on those unfortunate personality-challenged people who are blissfully unware that any social limits exist?

I know you think I broke rules too... Only when someone else broke them first. For instance AM telling Michele that she's no better than a terrorist was an insult.

Some notes on how not to be a troll

No one is responsible for your education other than yourself.

It's rude to demand that people prove every statement they make, because that's an unreasonable request. Such a demand is a demand that they spend hours or (in some cases, years) doing hard work for you personally.

And the only thanks they will get in return for all that work is that they answered some asshole's insult. And then got ignored as a reward.

I've done that way too many times in the past. I've spent many hours putting together educational materials for online trolls. The results are consistant. You're rewarded with having your work ignored, as the asshole goes looking for easier targets.

Anyway only the basest creep would demand work from a stranger without even asking politely...

The POLITE thing to do is to assume for the sake of the arguement that the person you're talking to is neither dishonest or stupid. If you want more information (or wish to test his judgement) then politely ask for more information or politely ask how he learned this information or whether he has any coroborating experience... The point is that you can ask for more context politely as if you were actually interested in the other person, rather than as an overbearing creep who's trying to put everyone down.

But in general the politest, and rarest thing on this horrible internet, is to take someone's statments as true so as not to bog down the conversation and demand extra work that you don't deserve.

But rude arguements are the least of your problems.

Some of your posts to Michele are so rude, arrogant and poorly thought out that it's hard to think of anything to say. How about, "stop being an overbearing asshole."

I hope this post has brought illumination into your politeness-free existance. If so, then I've done the world a favor.

By the way Joshua#2, that wasn't an invitation to continue conversing.

I really doubt that you're capable of even pretending to be polite... Since the essence of that is actually caring about the person you're talking to.

If people don't want to talk to you, then you've failed socially - you didn't offer them anything they wanted. And that's your failure, not theirs.

Believe it or not, there isn't a huge market for your insults!

And get this through your head. No one online owes you any explanations. You have to EARN the work you get from people. People have to like or respect you enough to want take the trouble.

Cluemeister, out!

No problem JS, it doesn't take long to refute.

Joshua, read about the Irgun and the Altalena. It's all you need to know about which side gets credibility in this fight. When you rein in your terrorists, you get cred. in my book. The PLO doesn't do it.

The whole situation is pretty clear to me:

We're not going to go to war again because of those hippy liberals,
and then in at MOST 20 years they're going to use nukes on us in multiple
cities - it'll be just like 9/11 again, you'll wake up, go to work or
school or whatever, and somewhere in the day you'll hear from somebody
that something happened, only this time it'll be serious, REAL SERIOUS,
not just one building knocked down, but millions of people killed. And
EVEN THEN the disgusting hippy liberals are going to say we shouldn't
go to war too much and worry about the enemy instead of us.

Seriously, some serious shit is going to happen - that is what has
ALWAYS happened THROUGHOUT history when one side appeases a warlike
enemy's ways. WW2 is just one prime example, read Winston Churchill's
"The Coming Storm"

Maybe after that serious thing happens the regular, normal,
working, non-hippy people of America will say "alright that's
it - we're ending terrorism right here right now - fuck what anyone
else thinks, they'll just have to deal with it if they're too sissy
to handle that fact that sometimes creatures need to defend themselves"
(don't get me wrong - I'm not a religious conservative or anything like
that, - I believe in pro-choice and the gay rights movement, but
GOD DAMNIT these hippies are insane)

We need to launch nukes, we need to kill nearly all of the muslim
world, if not nukes then lots of normal bombs (no wasting money on
computer-guided shit) - that's the only way to stop terrorism. We
can't beat them by "police work" or "diplomacy", we need to get in
there and get rid of them, LIKE WE DID WITH JAPAN AND GERMANY, but
even more so since this enemy is so extremeist and religious. If you
kill almost everyone, you will have also killed the terrorists and
ended the whole militant islamic culture.

But if you dick around and masturbate screaming "oh poor arabs,
america is the oppressor, we got what we deserved, we have to go to
war but only replace the regime" like a stupid hippy liberal, you
WILL NEVER end terrorism.

REGIMES AND TERRORISTS THAT ARE DESTROYED ARE QUICKLY REPLACED
BY NEW ONES IN THE MUSLIM WORLD - the fact of the matter is they
just can't fathom democracy, they might SAY they want democracy,
but it's just not going to happen. When you give them the choice,
I mean REALLY give them the choice, they'll pick Islam over democracy
- they just can't handle the fact that freedom means allowing people
you disagree with to continue to disagree with.

Let's say you replace a regime of one of these countries with a free
government with a constitution that protects individual rights and
upholds a secular government (like we supposedly are doing with Iraq),
and then somebody tries to exercise his freedom by admitting that
he/she is gay, or that he's an atheist, or even that he slightly
disagrees with the modern interpretation of some part of the Koran,
what do you think the people of this newly freed Arab Islamic country
do? Embrace it? Dislike it but tolerate it (as one can do in the West)?
No. They'll do what they always do, they'll take the guy out and
stone him to death.

You see, THEY JUST CAN'T FATHOM POLITICAL FREEDOM - IT IS CULTURALLY
BEYOND THEM - THEY'VE LIVED THEIR WHOLE LIVES LIVING AS PEOPLE DID
HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO - WE CAN'T EXPECT THEM TO CHANGE ANY MORE
THAN THEY CAN EXPECT US TO REVERT TO THEIR WAY OF LIFE - FOR A
CULTURE TO CHANGE IT NEEDS:
1) A SHITLOAD OF TIME (i.e. DECADES TO CENTURIES)
2) MOST IMPORTANTLY, THERE ACTUALLY HAS TO BE A MOVEMENT FOR CHANGE,
AND THAT JUST ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE ARAB WORLD AS A WHOLE, EVER
- THE ONLY CHANGE THEY'LL GO THROUGH ON THEIR OWN IS MORE REGRESSION
AND MORE TOWARDS US - LETS FACE REALITY, PEOPLE

That's why after we got rid of Afghanistan's and Iraq's regimes,
they STILL wanted to have Islam as a central part of the government.
AS I SAID BEFORE, THEY GREW UP WITH AND WERE INDOCTRINATED IN
(MILITANT) ISLAM, THEY LOVE ISLAM TOO MUCH TO EASILY ACCEPT MODERN
FREE CIVILIZATION - THE ARAB WORLD JUST CANNOT HANDLE MODERN FREE
CIVILIZATION AND WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT UNTIL YOU RIP APART THEIR
LIVES, MINDS AND SPIRITS BY SLAUGHTERING EVERYONE THEY KNOW AND
LEAVING ONLY A FEW (let's say kill 66% to 90% - around there)

Again, THIS IS WHAT WE DID TO JAPAN AND GERMANY - WOULD YOU COMPLAIN
ABOUT SLAUGHTERING THE NAZIS, EVEN IF THEY ARE CIVILIANS? SO WHY IS
THIS ANY DIFFERENT? Yes you can say that we didn't kill as many
germans/japanese as I'm saying, but THEY WERE USED TO CIVILIZATION,
DESTROYING THEIR GOVERNMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE MADE THEM GIVE UP -
BUT NOT SO WITH MILITANT ISLAM, MILITANT ISLAM HAS NO CIVILIZATION,
IT HAS NO SOCIAL STRUCTURE, INFRASTRUCTURE, OR GOVERNMENT, IT'S JUST
A BUNCH OF PEOPLE OUT TO SLAUGHTER ANYONE WHO ISN'T THEM, AND THEY
ARE MORE DEVOTED THAN POSSIBLY ANY HAS EVER BEEN IN HISTORY (SERIOUSLY,
YES, I'M REALLY CLAIMING THAT - THESE GUYS ARE SO DEVOTED TO THEIR
CAUSE - OR RATHER ANTI-CAUSE)

Now you might say that what I'm saying is wrong - it's horrible,
bloody, and difficult to get yourself to do - but is it actually
WRONG?

Well, let's look at it:

let's make a list of some truths:

1) The number of people dead does not determine the morality of
the action - the situation does - for example if somehow there was
a crowd of one hundred million people running towards some dude named
Bob because they wanted to kill him, and Bob has a machine gun with
loads and loads and ammo, and Bob kills them all to defend himself,
Bob didn't do anything wrong because he was just defending himself -
JUST BECAUSE GROSS NUMBERS OF PEOPLE DIED AND THERE WAS MUCH
SUFFERING, DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION WRONG - THE SITUATION DETERMINES
IF THE ACTION IS WRONG

2)(this one is just a statement of fact) - what I'm saying (slaughtering
nearly all of the arab world) is the only way to get rid of islamic
terrorism COMPLETELY and do it RIGHT NOW with AS LITTLE DAMAGE TO US
AS POSSIBLE - it may not be pretty but it's reality

3) there is no "living with terrorism" - nobody has to "live with
terrorism" or "accept that there will always be terrorism" - all
individuals have the right to life (and when we talk about
countries and religions we're talking about groups, but remember
groups are made up of individuals)

4)There is nothing wrong with self-defense - and this does not
interfere with the right to life - for example, if Bob is about
to shoot you, But you shoot Bob first and kill him, you did not
violate his right to life (since he rejected the concept of rights
when he decided he was going to kill you and so he lost his rights
- the right to life REQUIRES the right to self-defense)

5)Nobody is morally required to sacrifice or even just RISK
his life and limb for anybody else when being attacked, and
he especially doesn't have to risk his life for his attacker
- again this is a REQUIREMENT of the right to self-defense,
which is in turn with a requirement to the right to life

6)If a third party dies when one person or party defends
himself/themselves from a second person or party, the first person
or party is not morally in the wrong for having done this - this
is a requirement of the right to self defense - think about it -
if some terrorists hijack a plane filled with passengers and
YOU KNOW FOR SURE that they are going to crash into a building,
you obviously shoot down the plane and 200 passengers die but
you did it to save even more lives - are you in the wrong for
shooting down the plane? of course not. If you WERE in the wrong
then that would mean you would have had to let thousands of
people die instead of just 200 - and nobody would claim that
as the moral choice

7)Of course you have to be responsible when defending yourself,
for example if you are being attacked by someone in a busy street,
you can't just blast randomly in the guy's direction with an M16,
since you might hit other people - but you ONLY HAVE TO BE
CAUTIOUS OF HURTING THIRD PARTIES IF AND ONLY IF YOU CAN EXERCISE
THAT CAUTION WITHOUT RISK OF INJURY TO YOURSELF - in the same example,
you wouldn't be taking a risk if you took the very quick second to
aim exactly at your assailant - but if that you don't have to take
that extra second if that extra second actually puts you at risk,
such as in the case that the assailant has a gun that is already
pointed at you (he could press the trigger in that one second of
cautiousness that you could take)

8)these rules are all derived originally from the right to life,
and each individual has the right to life (unles of course,
he is an agressor, in which case he has forfeited his right
to life) - and so these rules apply to groups of people
- i.e. war

CONCLUSION:
So, if one group goes to war in self-defense, there is nothing
wrong with that in and of itself. Of course a group can't
go to war in aggression, but it CAN go to war in self defense.
Normally, in war, we want to try to minimize enemy civilian
causualties (preventing harm to third parties - since there
may be non-aggressors in the civilian population) - but we only
have to try to minimize enemy civilian casualties ONLY IF WE
CAN DO SO WITHOUT RISKING OUR OWN LIFE AND LIMB. And again,
the only way to COMPLETELY ERADICATE the islamic terrorist
threat RIGHT NOW is by slaughtering them - combine this
with the fact that every day the we do nothing, we risk our
own lives, and as in the derived rule number 7, we don't have
to risk our own lives for the sake of third parties (though
they may be third parties/innocents)

Do you get what I'm saying? Why the hell should we even take
the slightest risk when the militant Islamists are the ones
who agressed us and we just want to defend ourselves? Why?
Why do we have to risk our own lives for third party bystanders,
though they may be innocent? It's the MILITANT ISLAMIST'S WHO
AGGRESSED - our primary concern is saving our own lives with
as little risk as possible, and that involves killing innocents.

Of course none of this plain obvious logic matters the the hippy.
People dying bothers the hippy, and so he's going to be against
ever doing anything, no matter what the circumstances. The
disgusting liberal hippy says that we should have let Hitler take
over the world while we all masturbate to a fantasy of world peace
singing "kumbaya." He lives through emotion, he never bothers
to use reason.

It's war; nobody said it was pretty, but god damnit we have a right
to defend ourselves while taking as little risk as possible, even
if it means slaughetering the arab world (since this involves
the least risk)

and oh yeah, on the hate thing. Who cares about hating them? We
just need to stop them - it might be useful to use our anger
when attacking them, but other than that it's stupid to hold
onto hate - they're just a bunch of religious terrorist assholes.

The whole situation is pretty clear to me:

We're not going to go to war again because of those hippy liberals,
and then in at MOST 20 years they're going to use nukes on us in multiple
cities - it'll be just like 9/11 again, you'll wake up, go to work or
school or whatever, and somewhere in the day you'll hear from somebody
that something happened, only this time it'll be serious, REAL SERIOUS,
not just one building knocked down, but millions of people killed. And
EVEN THEN the disgusting hippy liberals are going to say we shouldn't
go to war too much and worry about the enemy instead of us.

Seriously, some serious shit is going to happen - that is what has
ALWAYS happened THROUGHOUT history when one side appeases a warlike
enemy's ways. WW2 is just one prime example, read Winston Churchill's
"The Coming Storm"

Maybe after that serious thing happens the regular, normal,
working, non-hippy people of America will say "alright that's
it - we're ending terrorism right here right now - fuck what anyone
else thinks, they'll just have to deal with it if they're too sissy
to handle that fact that sometimes creatures need to defend themselves"
(don't get me wrong - I'm not a religious conservative or anything like
that, - I believe in pro-choice and the gay rights movement, but
GOD DAMNIT these hippies are insane)

We need to launch nukes, we need to kill nearly all of the muslim
world, if not nukes then lots of normal bombs (no wasting money on
computer-guided shit) - that's the only way to stop terrorism. We
can't beat them by "police work" or "diplomacy", we need to get in
there and get rid of them, LIKE WE DID WITH JAPAN AND GERMANY, but
even more so since this enemy is so extremeist and religious. If you
kill almost everyone, you will have also killed the terrorists and
ended the whole militant islamic culture.

But if you dick around and masturbate screaming "oh poor arabs,
america is the oppressor, we got what we deserved, we have to go to
war but only replace the regime" like a stupid hippy liberal, you
WILL NEVER end terrorism.

REGIMES AND TERRORISTS THAT ARE DESTROYED ARE QUICKLY REPLACED
BY NEW ONES IN THE MUSLIM WORLD - the fact of the matter is they
just can't fathom democracy, they might SAY they want democracy,
but it's just not going to happen. When you give them the choice,
I mean REALLY give them the choice, they'll pick Islam over democracy
- they just can't handle the fact that freedom means allowing people
you disagree with to continue to disagree with.

Let's say you replace a regime of one of these countries with a free
government with a constitution that protects individual rights and
upholds a secular government (like we supposedly are doing with Iraq),
and then somebody tries to exercise his freedom by admitting that
he/she is gay, or that he's an atheist, or even that he slightly
disagrees with the modern interpretation of some part of the Koran,
what do you think the people of this newly freed Arab Islamic country
do? Embrace it? Dislike it but tolerate it (as one can do in the West)?
No. They'll do what they always do, they'll take the guy out and
stone him to death.

You see, THEY JUST CAN'T FATHOM POLITICAL FREEDOM - IT IS CULTURALLY
BEYOND THEM - THEY'VE LIVED THEIR WHOLE LIVES LIVING AS PEOPLE DID
HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO - WE CAN'T EXPECT THEM TO CHANGE ANY MORE
THAN THEY CAN EXPECT US TO REVERT TO THEIR WAY OF LIFE - FOR A
CULTURE TO CHANGE IT NEEDS:
1) A SHITLOAD OF TIME (i.e. DECADES TO CENTURIES)
2) MOST IMPORTANTLY, THERE ACTUALLY HAS TO BE A MOVEMENT FOR CHANGE,
AND THAT JUST ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE ARAB WORLD AS A WHOLE, EVER
- THE ONLY CHANGE THEY'LL GO THROUGH ON THEIR OWN IS MORE REGRESSION
AND MORE TOWARDS US - LETS FACE REALITY, PEOPLE

That's why after we got rid of Afghanistan's and Iraq's regimes,
they STILL wanted to have Islam as a central part of the government.
AS I SAID BEFORE, THEY GREW UP WITH AND WERE INDOCTRINATED IN
(MILITANT) ISLAM, THEY LOVE ISLAM TOO MUCH TO EASILY ACCEPT MODERN
FREE CIVILIZATION - THE ARAB WORLD JUST CANNOT HANDLE MODERN FREE
CIVILIZATION AND WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT UNTIL YOU RIP APART THEIR
LIVES, MINDS AND SPIRITS BY SLAUGHTERING EVERYONE THEY KNOW AND
LEAVING ONLY A FEW (let's say kill 66% to 90% - around there)

Again, THIS IS WHAT WE DID TO JAPAN AND GERMANY - WOULD YOU COMPLAIN
ABOUT SLAUGHTERING THE NAZIS, EVEN IF THEY ARE CIVILIANS? SO WHY IS
THIS ANY DIFFERENT? Yes you can say that we didn't kill as many
germans/japanese as I'm saying, but THEY WERE USED TO CIVILIZATION,
DESTROYING THEIR GOVERNMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE MADE THEM GIVE UP -
BUT NOT SO WITH MILITANT ISLAM, MILITANT ISLAM HAS NO CIVILIZATION,
IT HAS NO SOCIAL STRUCTURE, INFRASTRUCTURE, OR GOVERNMENT, IT'S JUST
A BUNCH OF PEOPLE OUT TO SLAUGHTER ANYONE WHO ISN'T THEM, AND THEY
ARE MORE DEVOTED THAN POSSIBLY ANY HAS EVER BEEN IN HISTORY (SERIOUSLY,
YES, I'M REALLY CLAIMING THAT - THESE GUYS ARE SO DEVOTED TO THEIR
CAUSE - OR RATHER ANTI-CAUSE)

Now you might say that what I'm saying is wrong - it's horrible,
bloody, and difficult to get yourself to do - but is it actually
WRONG?

Well, let's look at it:

let's make a list of some truths:

1) The number of people dead does not determine the morality of
the action - the situation does - for example if somehow there was
a crowd of one hundred million people running towards some dude named
Bob because they wanted to kill him, and Bob has a machine gun with
loads and loads and ammo, and Bob kills them all to defend himself,
Bob didn't do anything wrong because he was just defending himself -
JUST BECAUSE GROSS NUMBERS OF PEOPLE DIED AND THERE WAS MUCH
SUFFERING, DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION WRONG - THE SITUATION DETERMINES
IF THE ACTION IS WRONG

2)(this one is just a statement of fact) - what I'm saying (slaughtering
nearly all of the arab world) is the only way to get rid of islamic
terrorism COMPLETELY and do it RIGHT NOW with AS LITTLE DAMAGE TO US
AS POSSIBLE - it may not be pretty but it's reality

3) there is no "living with terrorism" - nobody has to "live with
terrorism" or "accept that there will always be terrorism" - all
individuals have the right to life (and when we talk about
countries and religions we're talking about groups, but remember
groups are made up of individuals)

4)There is nothing wrong with self-defense - and this does not
interfere with the right to life - for example, if Bob is about
to shoot you, But you shoot Bob first and kill him, you did not
violate his right to life (since he rejected the concept of rights
when he decided he was going to kill you and so he lost his rights
- the right to life REQUIRES the right to self-defense)

5)Nobody is morally required to sacrifice or even just RISK
his life and limb for anybody else when being attacked, and
he especially doesn't have to risk his life for his attacker
- again this is a REQUIREMENT of the right to self-defense,
which is in turn with a requirement to the right to life

6)If a third party dies when one person or party defends
himself/themselves from a second person or party, the first person
or party is not morally in the wrong for having done this - this
is a requirement of the right to self defense - think about it -
if some terrorists hijack a plane filled with passengers and
YOU KNOW FOR SURE that they are going to crash into a building,
you obviously shoot down the plane and 200 passengers die but
you did it to save even more lives - are you in the wrong for
shooting down the plane? of course not. If you WERE in the wrong
then that would mean you would have had to let thousands of
people die instead of just 200 - and nobody would claim that
as the moral choice

7)Of course you have to be responsible when defending yourself,
for example if you are being attacked by someone in a busy street,
you can't just blast randomly in the guy's direction with an M16,
since you might hit other people - but you ONLY HAVE TO BE
CAUTIOUS OF HURTING THIRD PARTIES IF AND ONLY IF YOU CAN EXERCISE
THAT CAUTION WITHOUT RISK OF INJURY TO YOURSELF - in the same example,
you wouldn't be taking a risk if you took the very quick second to
aim exactly at your assailant - but if that you don't have to take
that extra second if that extra second actually puts you at risk,
such as in the case that the assailant has a gun that is already
pointed at you (he could press the trigger in that one second of
cautiousness that you could take)

8)these rules are all derived originally from the right to life,
and each individual has the right to life (unles of course,
he is an agressor, in which case he has forfeited his right
to life) - and so these rules apply to groups of people
- i.e. war

CONCLUSION:
So, if one group goes to war in self-defense, there is nothing
wrong with that in and of itself. Of course a group can't
go to war in aggression, but it CAN go to war in self defense.
Normally, in war, we want to try to minimize enemy civilian
causualties (preventing harm to third parties - since there
may be non-aggressors in the civilian population) - but we only
have to try to minimize enemy civilian casualties ONLY IF WE
CAN DO SO WITHOUT RISKING OUR OWN LIFE AND LIMB. And again,
the only way to COMPLETELY ERADICATE the islamic terrorist
threat RIGHT NOW is by slaughtering them - combine this
with the fact that every day the we do nothing, we risk our
own lives, and as in the derived rule number 7, we don't have
to risk our own lives for the sake of third parties (though
they may be third parties/innocents)

Do you get what I'm saying? Why the hell should we even take
the slightest risk when the militant Islamists are the ones
who agressed us and we just want to defend ourselves? Why?
Why do we have to risk our own lives for third party bystanders,
though they may be innocent? It's the MILITANT ISLAMIST'S WHO
AGGRESSED - our primary concern is saving our own lives with
as little risk as possible, and that involves killing innocents.

Of course none of this plain obvious logic matters the the hippy.
People dying bothers the hippy, and so he's going to be against
ever doing anything, no matter what the circumstances. The
disgusting liberal hippy says that we should have let Hitler take
over the world while we all masturbate to a fantasy of world peace
singing "kumbaya." He lives through emotion, he never bothers
to use reason.

It's war; nobody said it was pretty, but god damnit we have a right
to defend ourselves while taking as little risk as possible, even
if it means slaughetering the arab world (since this involves
the least risk)

and oh yeah, on the hate thing. Who cares about hating them? We
just need to stop them - it might be useful to use our anger
when attacking them, but other than that it's stupid to hold
onto hate - they're just a bunch of religious terrorist assholes.

They say Americans love life.....we love death!

Why do they run when death comes looking for them then?

When bombs are falling out of American B-52's.....why are they not chasing the bombs?

IF they hate life.....love death and we oblige them.....why do they refuse to oblige us on what we want......life?

If everyone of them were killed.....would they not thank us?

They are full of shit.

we love death my ass....then love the death we bring...be of good cheer.sick

No instead what do they do.....One "spiritual" leader was killed because he preached death and destruction to all jews and americans. We must kill more of them for their crimes.

Crimes....according to the man's message....we gave him what was good!

Believe it or not folks....as sick and twisted this shit is. I am not afraid.

I have been foretold of these people.

Wait a minute.....I wonder if my statements are similar to theirs.

I was raised to love even those who hate you.....one thing to say it these days...another thing to live it.

To live such a philosophy will mean death.