"The next time Arabs and/or Muslims complain about the persecution they suffer at the hands of the Americans and Israelis, remember this...
"Since 1948, the number of Muslims killed by the Americans and Israelis combined is still less than the number killed by the French. And the number of Muslims killed by the French, Israelis, and Americans combined is still less than the number killed by the Soviets/Russians. And the number of Muslims killed by the Soviets, Russians, French, Israelis, and Americans, combined, is still about 1/3 of the number of Muslims who have been killed by Muslim states.
"I don't mean to minimize anyone's suffering, and as an Israeli I'm interested in continuing to pressure Israel to keep Arab casualties at a minimum while still protecting Israelis. But if the goal is to save lives, then to focus one's pressure on the deeds or misdeeds of Israel is to apply an incredible, ridiculous double standard, one clearly motivated by anti-Semitism and nothing more.
"If the goal is to spare Muslim lives, then the Muslims could start with themselves, and come back to us when they value each other. (Oh, and when they themselves don't think anymore that 1,000 of them is worth 2 of us.)"
Hmmm seems the suicidal tendancies of radical dogmatic Islam has attracted just about every military nation to the challenge of fulfilling their desire to render an unlimited supply of martyrs to Allah...there is only one UN "security council" member that has not taken a crack at joining the Ismaic martyrdom machine....think China is ready to step up to the plate?
A link to rabble.ca? Thanks, but no thanks. I can't imagine those fools have anything to say worth reading.
Here's the original blog entry, scroll down.
http://chayyeisarah.blogspot.com/
There's just no tiptoeing around it anymore - Islam is a cult of human sacrifice. Men, women, children, Sunni, Shia, it doesn't matter; in Islam, they're all targets.
That's an interesting fact about Islam, its focus on death as the location of 'the best life'.
It regards life itself as a daily and desperate struggle, a vicious and embattled experience, against all kinds of threats - including greed, other tribes. Death is the release from the terrible reality of the life experience. What kind of society or people come up with such an ideology? One that doesn't enable them to live productively, but only enables them to fight, confront, battle - and seek release in death.
My view is that Islam, which is not so much a religion as it is a social and political ideology, emerged in the 6th century as a reaction of a tribal pastoral economy to the spread of agricultural settlements. Agricultural settlements move into the land base of pastoral economies - which require vast land bases for their animals - and yet a great deal of this land base must be left fallow, to regenerate after the animals have eaten. Sometime the fallow period can be a year - and the land must be left.
Agricultural settlements move into this seeming 'empty land', and raise different crops, different animals. They don't migrate, as do pastoral economies.
I think that Islam, with its rigid lifestyle, is a pastoral economy. Note how the dress of both men and women is great for the blowing sands of the desert. It emerged to protect itself against the encroaching agricultural settlements, which were primarily Christian. Christianity is an ideology that promotes settlements, by encouraging peace between 'neighbours'. Islam is an ideology that insists on rejection of neighbours, unless they allow Islamic peoples to live their old way.
So, Islam is an exclusive tribal ideology, meant to reject otherness, reject interaction, reject collaboration - and kill, murder, drive out, anyone who comes near them.
Because it is set up as a rigid doctrine, with the authority that its beliefs and behaviour are not man-made but are the direct rule of god, then, it is very difficult for the Muslim to challenge and change these rules.
But, it has to be done; an isolationist ideology, that rejects all others, that insists on others submitting to it - and an ideology that rejects free thought, reason, individualism, science, and democracy - has no role in the modern world. And, a death cult, one that seeks release from life in death - that's pathological.
Let's not have the facts getting in the way of the good progressive sanctimonious appeasement and cowtowing (sp?) the left and MSM are hell bent on dragging the western civilization into.
JUST IN (Relevant because the PPG is often a terrorist apologist.)
Alan Fotheringham writes that; "Prime Minister Harper will win the battle against the Parliamentary Press Gallery because of Missus Blog from Moose Jaw". Kate ??
TC,Kowtowing. The other way means assisting a bovine via a rope around its' neck.
"has no role in the modern world."
ET, perhaps Islam is the sociological version of smallpox.
Jeffrey Simpson just headlines in the G&M; "Western Military Might Won't Stop the Jihadis".
Firewalled, so I don't know if he suggests we surrender or try appeasement or convert.
Easily got around The Simpson's firewall. Not worth even a free read. Something about Muslims should be Democracised, Bush was correct in persuing that, but Iraq made the Terrorists fight back. Oh, I get it. If you take on the enemy, they will fight back.
And people pay subscriptions for that ??
The question is not merely asking whether subscribers ought to pay to read Simpson but why he is given a salary for the mindless sophistry he writes.
To say that the Iraq War, with its agenda of democracy, 'made the jihadists' fight back, is to ignore, completely, the terrorist agenda of Islamic fascism which has been going on since the 1980s. Twenty years, long before the Iraq War. Bit by bit, they developed themselves - Sayyid Qutb, Bin Laden and al-Zawahiri and moved into declaring war on the west. They couldn't gain control of their own countries (Egypt, Saudi Arabia) and insert their 6th century utopian dictatorship and so, turned against the West, as a perversion, a 'fallback' from their original agenda.
An excellent outline is Lawrence Wright's 'The Looming Tower'.
See Duke's latest post at http://dukemcgoo.blogspot.com/
You can bypass the Globe's firewall by going to google news, search the columnist name you're interested in, and click the link from Google news.
I do that to read Margaret Wente, but I just checked the Simpson article, and you will not be shocked to find he advocates appeasement:
Giving the enemies of jihad in Muslim societies something to work with is the best hope for combatting terror. Ms. Azzam argues that the establishment of a Palestinian state with sovereignty over at least some parts of East Jerusalem represents the "minimum required to win over the moderate faction within the Muslim world." Almost everyone without a direct or psychological stake in the protracted Palestinian-Israeli dispute knows the Azzam assessment is correct: The minimum requirement to help more moderate Muslims triumph over jihadism is a viable Palestinian state.
And I'm reminded again why I don't bother reading his columns.
That remark by both Azzam and Simpson is utter ignorance and stupidity.
Islamic fascism is not about Palestine; indeed, most arabs are uninterested in Palestine and Palestinians. At the moment, they are using Palestine in their jihad, but they certainly don't want an arab, Islamic democratic Palestinian state in their midst.
Islam rejects democracy. Totally and completely. It rejects that individuals can reason (Benedict's speech was correct); it rejects that individuals have the right to make decisions about their own governance. The only correct way to live is within the rigid strictures of the Koran. Islam is not so much a religion as it is a doctrine of social and political tribalism.
If the Islamic peoples had wanted Palestine to be a state, they would have, long ago, enabled such a procress. I agree that Israel's rejection of the notion of a 'Palestinian people', their occupation and settlement of the Palestinian lands was and is wrong and contributed to this lack of a Palestinian state. But, I maintain that if the arab states had wanted a Palestinian state, they would have worked with Israel, to ensure its existence.
They don't want a Palestinian state; they don't want any Arab state to be democratic. The current arab states are all essentially dictatorships, and Bin Laden and Zahawiri's original intent was to make Saudi Arabia and Egypt a 'pure Islamic' -by the book - state. No democracy anywhere.
Simpson is Stuck on Stupid.
Right on, ET. Poor Pitiful Palestine is the gift that keeps on giving for the entrenched Arab dictatorships and the Islamofascists. The saddest dupes in this mockery are the Palestineans themselves. 60 years and counting, they could have reached an accommodation with Israel, had a free trade zone with them, shared services, gone to Israeli colleges and trade schools, built a modern infrastructure. A rising economic tide lifts all boats. Capitalism is color blind. The Palestineans would have found a measure of prosperity that their Arab neighbors could not access. Too late now.
But, having chosen the path of typical Islamic perpetual rage, Palestine is the sewer than it is by their own making. I have no pity for them.
penny, I think that the Palestinians were as brainwashed by Arafat and the other arab states, as we in Canada have been brainwashed into multiculturalism in Canada.
My point is that the entire Palestinian people didn't make the democratic decision to fight Israel rather than move towards a Palestinian state. It was Arafat and the other Arab states. Now, they are both brainwashed and pawns of the much different Islamic fascism.
We in Canada are only now emerging from the confines of our Animal Farm, put there by Trudeau, brainwashed for a generation, kept there by Chretien and the Liberals. And, we aren't out of it; we still have our MSM working away in The Farmyard, bashing people who think and insisting on allegiance to Newspeak.
put yer hand up if you have a 3' X 4' star of david flag hanging prominently in your living room.
( schmucks hand quickly goes up aaaaaand .......
no others.)
well aint that typical right wingers. all talk and no action.
blablablablabla
monday morning quarterback designations all 'round.
armchair critics abounding on ye olde SDA.
specializing in personal attack.
Kathryn: "A link to rabble.ca? Thanks, but no thanks. I can't imagine those fools have anything to say worth reading."
I made the original post at the top of that thread at Babble.ca and hoped there would be some substantive discussion.
Instead the moderator stepped-in to show me the door. Apparenty she has left the discussion open because she has reached for the equation: fundamentalist Muslim = Christian fundamentlist. How that fits the topic that I raised, I dunno, and she doesn't say.
Looks like an attempt to change the topic, instead.
Michelle: "I will leave this thread open because I don't have a problem with people talking about the huge numbers of people who get killed or harmed in the name of fundamentalist religion. We have lots of threads about Christian fundamentalists killing and harming people in the name of Christianity, so I don't feel the need to stop people from talking about fundamentalist Muslims who kill people in the name of Islam."
I've made only a few comments at Babble (re the Lebanon conflict and Clinton's Fox interview) and I contributed just two original posts. The second of which is about a BBC programme in which British Leftwingers, or "progressives", critique the growing tendency of the extreme Left and Right to make excuses for terrorism.
See:
"No Excuses For Terror," Aaronovitch.
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=002205
The response was to ban me from the forum.
Michelle: "What is this garbage? I'm so sick of right-wing warmongers coming onto babble and posting shit about how socialists and the left are 'apologists for Islamofascist terror'. "
I don't think she can substantiate her accusation that I am a "right-wing warmonger" or that I have baited and trolled there. Any reasonable reader would disagree with the moderator's over-reaction.
If you'd rather not visit Babble for the links to the original material, I could add them here, if you wish.
Chairm
David Aaronovitch says the following on his weblog:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/2006/09/dont_get_me_sta.html
"[The programme was] essentially - though not specifically - rebutting Ted Honderich's effort in the same series last week. It wasn't a subtle argument, that suicide terrorism is not our fault and that it is a choice made by murderous egotists, but bizarrely it's an argument that needs to be made these days."
* * *
For those interested, here is a link to Honderich's programme, The Real Friends of Terror.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15080.htm
Blurb:
Do Americans share with "Bin Laden" some of the moral responsibility for the attack?
What is the difference between the horror and the violence created by suicide bombers and the horror and the violence created by bombs dropped from 30,000 feet by airplanes?
Can suicide bombers ever be justified? Professor Honderich, Britain's leading moral philosopher, is unafraid to tell the truth as he sees it. Taking what he says is the betrayal of the Palestinian people as his starting point, Ted reveals who shares moral responsibility for recent acts of terrorism, and points a finger at the politicians.
* * *
Having viewed both programmes, I don't see why a reasonable Leftwinger would be unwillingly to also view both and discuss the issues entailed in both.
Aaronovitch v. Honderich
Check out heritage.org and a speaker named Brigitte Gabriel(Sept. 27),born in Lebanon, now living in USA. She shares her personal experience with Muslims and it ain't pretty.
Warning to schmuck if you go there...careful..reality bites.
oops sorry 'don't feed the trolls'
Looks like the originator of that thread (Chairm) has already been banned. It sure doesn't take those leftys long to stifle free speech. Amazing.
vf, 8:45 -- I just listened to the entire 58 min presentation by Brigitte Gabriel. A woman who went through the horrors of Muslim Lebanon. Definitely worth the time. Has she ever been interviewed by the MSM ??
Reminded me of the ANN FRANK story.
Two statements she made and then backed them up with facts and first hand experience, really stood out. Unlike most of the Talking-Heads we see on TV.
Brigitte Gabriel,.. "Take that Political Correctness thing and throw it in the garbage. We are losing our Democracy because of it."
"The media is a huge problem"
"Europe really is fast becoming Eurabia"
schmucky, you got such a first class mind. It really shoud be syndicated. Your reasoned and original content puts us all to shame. We feel so inadequate.
So, in that law practice of yours, you know, your "esq" self-designation, what exactly is it that you specialize in? I asked once before if you would define esquire, it didn't get answered, could it be Dungeons & Dragons where you got your inspiration?
Inquiring minds what to know, schmucky.
PS Bonus points if you can define syndicated.
Go for it.
Re: Brigitte Gabriel...I followed a link from 'Proud to be Canadian'. Never heard of her before. She's right up there with Wafa Sultan....two amazing women ..brilliant and outspoken...and probably never heard of 'National Action Committe on the Status of Women'
ET: Good posts. Fasciniating analysis of the pastoral/agricultural.
However, I think this sentence is all wrong/confused:
"I agree that Israel's rejection of the notion of a 'Palestinian people', their occupation and settlement of the Palestinian lands was and is wrong and contributed to this lack of a Palestinian state.".
There's no such thing as a "Palestinian people".
The word "Palestinian" was introduced only in the early 70s and is pure propaganda -- and highly successful!. Before that they were arabs pure and simple. Let's remember that 78% of British mandate Palestine became Jordan, and Jews were forbidden to settle there. 78%!. There's your "Palestinian" state. They had no "national aspirations" as we understand that phrase. None. That's mere neo-nazi-arab invention bolstered by the cowardly Euro-elites who beginning about 1973 began the semi-secret EAD (Euro Arab Dialogue) selling Israel (and ultimately themselves) down the toilet for a secure oil supply, big commercial markets and in a vain attempt to set up a power to rival the US.
You correctly position the Arab-Israeli conflict as jihad (the front line I think) and are absolutely correct in pointing out that the Arab-Israeli conflict is NOT about Palestine or land; but you really must give up the islamofascist propaganda term: "occupation". Are the arab-muslim countries, formerly Christian, "occupied" lands. Or are they "conquered" lands?
As Rumsfeld put it once: the arabs started a war, lost it, and lost a lot of real estate. No country defending itself against a war of anihilation gives back land captured in victory.
This is how you catch out the modern anti-semite: remind him that while it is not antisemitic to criticize Israel, it IS antisemitic to hold Israel to a standard not expected of any other country.
Suggested reading: Bat Ye'or's Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis.
"put yer hand up if you have a 3' X 4' star of david flag hanging prominently in your living room."
no...unlike the middle of backwardistan where you can find a few Danish flags,but no electricity or food...,they have a few to burn i have heard..
I do however have a campaign poster of Messr.Layton lining my cats' box..she's only 5 months old and that little pooper makes her statement on Jack!s nuanced approaches about 3-4 times daily.
There is a Palestianian state. It's called Jordan.
The right war, the wrong weapons.
We are right to go to war with those Muslims that our trying to destroy our civilization.
We were quick off the mark to use our powerful arsenal of advanced weaponry on our newly declared foe. We easily defeated the most powerful army in the camp of our enemy and thought this would instil in them such massive shock and awe that they would lay down their arms and embrace us a conqueror. The power of the US is undeniable and military victories are a given but still the war is not won.
The mighty Israel, since 1948, has waged a brilliant war campaign winning many stunning victories but has nothing but a future fraught with fear, death and despair to show for them.
The reason is simple: the US cannot as successful conquerors have throughout history, eliminate dissent by brutalizing the defeated enemy. They cannot put the men to the sword as the Romans and Greeks did, nor can they hang 100 of the population in the street for every German life taken as the Nazis could. They cannot, like Saddam Hussein, subdue and terrorize the population with poison gas, torture and firing squads.
It is, with the weapons being used to wage this war, an unequal contest. We have only the weapons of physical destruction with our F-16’s Apache Helicopters, Gun ships, Tanks and Missiles. Puny, ineffective means to win a war of words with.
Think about this: Muslim clerics for the last ten or so years have been roaming the west successfully proselytising young Muslims converting them to extreme Islam and martyrdom. They have convinced them that murder and suicide are gifts to God and will be rewarded in heaven. This is an incredible feat. We are fighting an enemy that is using thought control techniques to overcome our superior military capability.
They can and have remote controlled young people to commit heinous acts. We cannot identify or predict who will be the next attacker or how they will do it. They have implanted encoded time bombs ready to go off at a given cue all over the western world. We are at war with an enemy that has a philosophy of kill or convert, that shows no mercy and will resort to suicide bombing to further their twisted cause. We are in danger and we are at war, however we will not win this war with military might alone.
What is ironic is that we in the west have the superior means of winning this war. We have Hollywood and Madison Avenue in the US and its counterparts in every western country. We have the music and we have the beat that people love to hear, we have movies they love to see and we have the means to persuade via video, print, the internet and radio. The Mullahs fear our media more than they fear our guns in fact they love our guns because every bullet fired at them brings in a new convert to send into battle. They know that if we ever brought our media firepower to bear on them they would not survive the withering onslaught. That is why they have been so busy trying to get our media to turn their weapons on us and they have been quite successful in this enterprise.
Our messages delivered by our superior and sophisticated media would overcome the Mullahs, the hate and the deception quite easily. We could convince them that they are not going to please their God with murder, mayhem and suicide. We have the means, we have the professionals, and all we have to do is use it. There is a silver bullet and if we fire it we will win with a single shot all we have to do is convince the impressionable that they are going to anger their God if they kill in his name.
"If the goal is to spare Muslim lives, then the Muslims could start with themselves, and come back to us when they value each other."
Muslims killing Muslims: Civil war in Gaza. ...-
Rival forces battle in Gaza
Aljazeera.net - 34 minutes ago
One person has been killed and at least 12 injured in gun battles between rival Palestinian security forces in the Gaza Strip. Forces controlled by the Hamas-led government clashed with loyalists of Mahmoud ...
I think if you were to look up Jeffrey Simpson's background, you'd find that he knows 'somebody.' That seems to be the way that too many journalists reach their level of incompetence in the Canadian media, spouting their Trudopey-ian hogswill from the Orwellian barnyard--all the better to brainwash us with, my dears.
Great comments; I learn something at SDA everyday! The crux of the posting at babble (how did such an article get posted there, of all places?) is how this astonishing fact—of Muslims having murdered far more other Muslims than any other group has—hasn’t been reported in the international media. The media propaganda makes the opposite case.
The reason, of course, that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government are being given such a rough ride by the media is that, as Israeli lawyer and journalist Ben Dror Yemini states, freedom of the press has been replaced by the power of the press, with freedom of speech having been co-opted to serve the elites. Thank G*d, PMSH and his CPC government aren’t considered “elites”; they’re just ordinary Canadians who are working hard to try to rewind Canada out of the Trudopey-ian rabbit hole we’ve been down for too long.
I agree with Kathryn that "There's just no tiptoeing around it anymore - Islam is a cult of human sacrifice. Men, women, children, Sunni, Shia, it doesn't matter; in Islam, they're all targets." WE'RE all targets and the sooner we get this straight here in La-La Land, the better.
Muslim terrorists kill 15-year-old Muslim boy in Gaza.
al Bawaba use the terms, "Palestinians", "Palestine". There is no state named Palestine; ergo, there are no Palestinians. ...-
Gaza Strip: Three dead in Hamas - Fatah clashes
al Bawaba ^ | October 1 2006
Three Palestinians died Sunday in clashes between armed members from the ruling Hamas Party and security personnel loyal to Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, hospital officials said. At least 32 others were wounded in the clashes, including some bystanders. The three victims included a 15-year-old boy, hospital officials said. ...-
Have read/heard countless news items/articles/reports in the MSM with the word "Darfur".
The great majority of these reports do not mention that this is a Muslim genocide: Muslims killing Muslims.
Yes, Virginia; Muslims kill Muslims.
Islam: a religion of Muslims killing Muslims. What's new? ...-
Online NewsHour: Refugee Crisis in Sudan -- May 13, 2004
Refugees from the Darfur region of western Sudan have fled across the border into ... MICHAEL LADO: They say a Muslim cannot kill a Muslim, but now they are ...
www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/africa/jan-june04/refugees_05-13.html
Muslims killing Muslims. What's new? Quid nunc? ...-
Al-Qaeda fugitive killed in Yemen
BBC ^ | 1 October 2006 | BBC
Yemeni security forces have killed a key al-Qaeda fugitive who escaped from jail earlier this year, officials said. Fawaz al-Rabihi was sentenced to death last year for plotting an attack in which a boat laden with explosives rammed the French oil tanker Limburg. He was killed when security forces raided a house in the capital Sanaa. The October 2002 bombing of the Limburg, off Yemen's south-eastern coast, killed a Bulgarian crew member and wounded 12 others. Rabihi was one of 13 al-Qaeda-linked militants who escaped from prison in February. The Limburg attack echoed the attack on the USS Cole... ...-
free republic
me no dhimmi and norm potter
I disagree with your rejection of the reality of Palestinian people. Certainly, Jordan is not, in my view, a 'Palestinian state'. You are probably aware that Jordan refused to accept the Palestinian refugees. The area west of the Jordan River is not part of Jordan, and the reality is, that for centuries, there were people living in that area,over 500,000 by 1948, - and were called Palestinian, long before the 1970's.
I don't 'position the arab-israeli conflict as jihad'. I position the arab-west conflict as jihad. That's very different.
I'm unsure why you refer to the term 'occupied' as 'Islamofascist'. It is, in itself, not a political term and therefore, can't be associated with fascism or non-fascism. It's a reality - the lands set aside for the Palestinian state (1948) were occupied and governed by Israel. Fascism has nothing to do with this reality.
I'm very aware of the Eurabian agenda, and France's imperialist ambitions - but this has nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian situation.
Norm Potter is right: The "Palestinian" (always in quotation marks) state is indeed Jordan which comprised 78% of British Manadate Palestine, and where it was illegal for Jews to settle.
ET: While I find most of your commentary extremely valuable, you do have a blind spot here: your contention that the Eurabian agenda has nothing to do with the Israeli-"Palestinian" (quoation marks mine) situation is jawdroppingly wrong: it is the very CORE of the "situaion".
The Arab-Israeli conflict is the front line in the global jihad and has been from the very beginning. The "national aspirations" of the "Palestnian" "people" was never anything but Holocaust2. The "Palestinians" are essentially Nazis, only perhaps even more virulent. They sided with Hitler, with the Soviet Union in the cold war, and with Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War1.
This wrong-headed sentimentality for "Palestinians" is one of the great propaganda coups in world history. You will not be offended if I observe that your blind spot may simply reflect your feminine side trumping your evident euridition!
David Aaronovitch's blog:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/david_aaronovitch/
2006/09/dont_get_me_sta.html#comments
batb...that is exactly what Brigitte Gabriel is saying...and she has the experience to back up her statements.
heritage.org Sept.27 'view event'
me no dhimmi - of course I am offended by your statement; why shouldn't I be? Just because you conclude that I shouldn't be?
My conclusions about the Palestinians have nothing to do with 'my feminine side', to which, since you consider them erroneous, you are obviously attributing some illogicality or other problem. I resent such implications.
My conclusions about the Palestinians are based on empirical evidence and reason - which are, you may be surprised, rather evenly spread amongst the genders.
I also disagree with every point you make in your post. Might I point out that your opinions are stated without evidence or reasoning; they are just statements. That's hardly a viable argument.
I absolutely and totally disagree with your contention that the Palestinians are a 'group of Jordanians'; they had lived in that area for centuries and cannot be merged with TransJordan. That would be like saying that people who have farmed and living in New England/Nova Scotia are 'really' Midwesterners/ Albertans and should not be upset when turfed off their farms and told to leave - because, 'really, really' they are Midwesterners/Albertans.
I also totally disagree with your opinion that the Israel-Palestine conflict is 'at the front of the global jihad'. It has nothing to do with it; it is being used by the global jihad as a 'spark' to regress to when asked 'why are you so angry' - but the global jihad has nothing to do with that conflict.
As I've said before, my opinion is that most Arab states don't want an arab democracy in their midst; they don't want a democratic Palestine. For two reasons; one, is that most of them look down on Palestinians as illiterate peasants and two, democracy is incompatible with pure Islam.
The global jihad has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine but is an 'expression' of a dysfunctional social, economic and political morass of the arab states - the morass that is tribalism. I'm not going to repeat my many arguments on the nature of tribalism, the conflict between tribalism and a civic society, the incompatibility of an industrial economy with a tribal political system, the problems of the exponential increase in population in the ME, moving it out of the capacities of tribalism, the problems of the knowledge-deficit in the ME and so on.
I'm also not going to repeat my analysis of teh nature of Islam as a tribal dogma, developed to preserve a stable pastoral nomadic society, and rapidly, violently, anti-Reason, anti-individual, and therefore trapped in itself.
THAT is the cause of the global jihad - and Israel and Palestine have nothing to do with it.
ET: Honestly, no offence was intended. Even men have a feminine side by which I certainly didn't mean illogicality.
However, in this sentence, I see illogicality:
"The global jihad has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine but is an 'expression' of a dysfunctional social, economic and political morass of the arab states - the morass that is tribalism".
To my eyes, the Israel-"Palestine" conflict is itself a expression of that very dysfunctionality and morass to which you correctly refer. And as everyone knows Arab dictator thugs who care not one whit for "Palestinians" keep the hate pot boiling to distract attention from that very morass in their domestic constituencies.
I'm afraid I saw no "empirical evidence" in your post that would dissuade me from my very strong conviction and feminine intuition :) that the Arab-Israel conflict is anything but the front line in the global jihad and has been from the get-go.
Like Greg in Dallas, my views too are a work in progress. Bat Ye'or's book convinced me beyond a shadow of doubt (for now, that is!).
Civil war in Iraq? No.
Civil war in the Gaza Strip.
New York Slimes says the civil war is a "clash".
Some clash; 5 deaths; some clash.
Kathryn said:
"There's just no tiptoeing around it anymore - Islam is a cult of human sacrifice. Men, women, children, Sunni, Shia, it doesn't matter; in Islam, they're all targets."
Hamas and Fatah agree: Muslims killing Muslims. ...-
Update:
Palestinian Factions Clash, Killing 5
New York Times - 2 hours ago
Muhammed Muheisen/AP. Fatah supporters clashed with Palestinian police outside a government building in the West Bank town of Ramallah today after Hamas militias broke up a demonstration in Gaza. ...-
gppgle news
Here, from the mouth of the leader,
"The war with Israel is not about a treaty, a cease-fire agreement, Sykes-Picot borders, national zeal, or disputed borders," Ayman al-Zawahiri explained this year. "It is rather a jihad for the sake of God until the religion of God is established."
A very good site to explain this global jihad, which began long before 9/11, long before Iraq, and long before Israel, is the web site of Jihad Watch dot org.
Also read Lawrence Martin's book on The Looming Tower on Al Qaeda.
As I said, I wasn't going to repeat my analysis of the nature of tribalism in the ME, and its dysfunctionality. The conflict between Israel and Palestine is not about tribalism; it is about the existence of two states, the right-to-exist of each state, the borders, the definition of citizenship, the ownership of resources, etc and etc - and that has nothing to do with tribalism.
Global jihad is all about tribalism and the jihad has emerged because tribalism is a dysfunctional and dangerous mode of governance when the population has morphed into the multimillions and when the economy has moved into a perverted form of industrialism. Tribalism rejects a middle class, and industrialism requires a middle class. Tribalism rejects the individual, and industrialism requires individualism. The Islamic 'religion' (note the quotation marks) is an ideology devoted to maintaining a a tribal system; it's disastrous for an industrial state - and the tension between the realities of a massive population increase and a repressed sociopolitical structure - had exploded into global jihad. Nothing to do with Israel and Palestine.
So- we'll agree to disagree, since I'm sure you won't change your mind. But, my views have nothing to do with 'my feminine side' and your 'apology' is empty. After all, you claimed that my erroneous views were linked to my femininity - and the fact that you now claim to 'also' have a feminine side doesn't negate your original link of 'feminise' with 'erroneous'.
“This is forbidden in Islam, we are in the holy month of Ramadan,” said Majed Badawi,"
"We are victims because of both of them.”"
........
It's your fault. It's always someone else's fault. S'not my fault.
...-
Palestinian Civil War Watch
Fighting between Hamas and Fatah kills 7.
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Heavily armed Hamas militiamen’s efforts to break up anti-government protests on Sunday sparked gunbattles across the Gaza Strip that killed seven people in the worst internal Palestinian violence since Hamas took power.
Militants from the opposition Fatah group retaliated by torching the Palestinian Cabinet building in the West Bank. The violence comes amid growing frustration over forming a national unity government that could end crippling economic sanctions.
The fighting continued throughout the day and sent schoolchildren and other civilians in downtown Gaza City fleeing for cover.
33, who managed to escape after his car was caught in the crossfire. “It’s a shame on Hamas, who call themselves real Muslims, and a shame of Fatah as well. Why are they fighting and over what? We are victims because of both of them.” ...-
LGF
ET: Doesn't your quote from Zawahiri align exactly with my premise that the Arab-Israel conflict is the front line in the global jihad?
"The war with Israel is not about a treaty, a cease-fire agreement, Sykes-Picot borders, national zeal, or disputed borders," Ayman al-Zawahiri explained this year. "It is rather a jihad for the sake of God until the religion of God is established."
I think your stats are fudged. It's about 15 to 1 for muslims killed. It's still too many. There have been 4,000 americans killed in Iraq so many they don't release a number. How many
iraqi civilians have died? 50,000?/ And what for so George Bush can Goose step about the final solution?? You are all Facists,dangerous stupid people on this blog. You don't deserve to live in Canada. You are a disgace to humanity. I wish more of you would air your right wing beliefs on TV so the rest of Canada could see how utterly stupid you really are.
>> "How many iraqi civilians have died? 50,000?"
Even supposing that estimate is sufficiently accurate for you to claim it as a fact, how many of these deaths were at the instigation of Iraqi and Islamist fighters? Too many.
In any case, the additional 50,000 (if accurate) would not redress the bigger fact of millions of deaths due to the armed conflicts and repression of Muslim on Muslim and Arab on Arab since 1948.
But the namecalling in the previous comment, including the lame moniker (how witty!), is a self-parody of what stands for the other side of the public debate.
Arab News confirms: Muslim terrorists kill Muslim terrorists in Gaza.
But, ... it's your fault. Denial is a river running through Gaza. Woe to Gaza. ...-
Editorial: Insanity in Gaza
3 October 2006
SUNDAY’ bloodbath in Gaza was an act of communal insanity. For Palestinian to turn on Palestinian with guns, rocket launchers and grenades was total and utter madness. The only comfort that can be drawn from this appalling confrontation, which left nine dead and dozens injured, is that politicians from both sides recoiled in horror and steps were immediately taken to try and defuse the situation. The only beneficiaries from this tragedy were Israel and Washington, both eager to characterize the Palestinians as unstable, aggressive and incapable of statehood.
The anger and bitterness caused by this clash are sure to simmer. The greatest care must now be exercised to avoid further flash points. Political and community leaders have to use all of their influence to calm tempers and fears.
The plain fact is that the Palestinians, already regularly brutalized by Israeli occupation forces, have, since the democratic election of the Hamas government in January, also been pauperized by the Washington-led economic and aid boycott and the Israeli refusal to release funds belonging and owed to the Palestinian Authority. The Hamas administration has had no money to pay civil servants, including police and security forces. Decent hardworking Palestinians, already cut off from earning a living in Israel have been reduced to a subsistence economy. ...-
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=87556&d=3&m=10&y=2006