Few things produce darker and more warped comedy than when the U.S. government launches new propaganda campaigns to “win the hearts and minds of Muslims.” Remember when George W. Bush dispatched his longtime political aide, Texas’ Karen Hughes, to the Middle East as a State Department official to change Muslim perceptions of the U.S. and that promptly (and predictably) resulted, as Slate put it, in a “jaw-dropping display of ignorance and malapropism that made her the laughing stock of the region”?
In fairness to Hughes and the State Department, she was vested with an impossible task. How do you convince the people of that region to like you when you’ve spent decades bombing, invading, and droning them; arming and propping up the tyrants who suppress them; lavishing Israel with the weapons, money, and U.N. cover used to occupy and brutalize Palestinians; and just generally treating their countries like your own private plaything for war and profit?
As a 2004 Rumsfeld-commissioned study about the causes of Terrorism put it: “Muslims do not ‘hate our freedom,’ but rather, they hate our policies,” in particular, “American direct intervention in the Muslim world,” our “one-sided support in favor of Israel,” support for Islamic tyrannies in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and “the American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.” As a result, trying to change Muslim perceptions of the U.S. without changing U.S. policies of imperialism and militarism is the ultimate act of futility.
Destined though they are to fail, the propaganda efforts don’t have to be quite so comically bad: The government could, for instance, put people in charge of these campaigns who actually know something about the part of the world they’re trying to propagandize. Yet these efforts seem only to get worse. One of the most embarrassing tactics is when the U.S. government (and its media allies) select people whom they hold out to the Muslim world as the people they ought to follow; invariably, the U.S.’s selected “leaders” spout views and engage in conduct more anathema to the overwhelming majority of Muslims than the U.S. government itself is.
Last year, the State Department announced with great fanfare a new social media campaign to counter ISIS’ online messaging. They called it “Think Again, Turn Away,” and created Twitter and Facebook accounts in that name. Its self-described purpose on Facebook: “Our mission is to expose the facts about terrorists and their propaganda. Don’t be misled by those who break up families and destroy their true heritage.”
It was a massive comedic failure from the start. And that failure continues. Yesterday, Think Again, Turn Away’s Twitter account promoted and hailed someone they think will serve as an inspiring thought leader for Muslims around the world:
#LantosPrize #HumanRightsDay pic.twitter.com/7fI3fp4LBg
— Think AgainTurn Away (@ThinkAgain_DOS) December 14, 2015
Is Ayaan Hirsi Ali likely to be the effective messenger to the Muslim world that the State Department envisions her to be? Last year, she revealed her choice for who should win the Nobel Peace Prize: Benjamin Netanyahu. “He does what is best for the people of Israel, he does his duty,” she said. “I really think he should get the Nobel Peace Prize. In a fair world he would get it.”
Earlier this year, she told a gathering hosted by the Israeli Consul General that she previously tried to convert to Judaism and hoped one day to try again. She has spouted some of the most virulent anti-Muslim bigotry, the worst of which may have been her 2007 interview with Reason, where she said she rejects the notion that “we” are at war only with radical Islam but instead are at war with Islam generally. Behold the State Department’s chosen ambassador to the Muslim world:
Can you hear all the Muslim hearts and minds changing throughout the world yet? Other than ISIS, who does the State Department think is going to be remotely excited about and receptive to this message? To combat ISIS’ message, the State Department is promoting someone who has articulated a bloody, vicious vision of global war against Islam that coincides perfectly with ISIS’ greatest dream.
If the U.S. government were actually serious about trying to change how it is perceived around the world, it would change its behavior that — as its own study found — causes massive anti-American sentiment around the world. In lieu of that, it continually attempts to propagandize people into changing their views, and the only thing remotely surprising about that choice is how remarkably inept the government is at doing it.
Top photo: The U.S. State Department’s top official for public diplomacy, Karen Hughes, reads a book with Kashmiri earthquake survivors during her visit to a tent school in Muzaffarabad, Pakistan, Nov. 14, 2005.
No argument with your thesis, Glenn. I am a veteran and I love my country. Despise this government though and its actions over the last 50 years since Vietnam. BUT, the lady is right. However we got into this mess, we had better fight without quarter until these people are crushed or we will be the crushees.
The more you crush, then more and more and more.
And let’s not forget tgat Ms. Ayan Hirsi Ali is the spouse of the Economist and US-supporter Niall Ferguson, who constantly chamions the importance of the WEST at the cost of any humanity. Ouch Mr.President,,,, talk about keeping it in the family ! Yuck….I think I need a shower.
Thanks for this Glenn. The US “Dept. of Status-Quo” is spending hundreds of millions of dollars try to cjange “hearts and minds”…. and yet they constantly get NOTHING in return except egg on tbeir faces and BEW enemies. Instead of giving out bags of millikns of dollars to local Afghan chieftans and Iraqi strongmen, these US Treasury funds would be better used to shower everyone in both Afghanistan and Iraq with $ 50 cash a week. It would create MORE goodwill and instill a better understanding of capitalism and better relations between nations than a 12 year war bombing hospitals, schools, and weddings. And if ISIS and the Taliban did kick out the allied forces, the people would be heard in the kazbahs complaining, ” a couple of extra months of US cheques and I wpuld have bought that Honda motorcycle for my son, damn it !” But that’s a paradigm that the US can’t grasp: helping 1 dictator is easier to control than an entire population. Sad really… because changing a million peoples’ lives is more powerful and lasts longer than enriching 1 dictator.
OMFD satire might be dead, but there is no end to this parade of absurdity!!!
Snowden didn’t do due diligence, because if he did, he wouldn’t have picked Greenwald to release the intelligence data. I say this because this is where Greenwald got his “credibility” en masse.
Greenwald is a panderer, and his career has been to allow women and children in the Middle East to die so long as he gets his word out about how great of a guy he is for defending – what is essentially – the far right wing of the Middle East.
I expect that anyone remotely qualified for the job turned it down.
I have read 3 of Ms. Hirsi Ali’s books; especially liked “Infidel”. Last I checked, she is an Atheist as are all rational people. She apparently has gone over to the dark side, conservatism and has worked for conservative think tanks in the USA. Religion is all mind control supporting the elites; has been since the shamans of the tribe with 10members. Interestingly, Ayn rand, a saint of the conservative capitalists was an atheist and a feminist but hey, just take the part you like. Greenspan was her executor and used to spend a lot of his free time in her apartment….that explains a lot. As to Islam, it is by far the most misogynistic of the major abrahimic desert sky god religions but, hey, women still can’t get into the Officer class of the RCs or any orthodox religion as far as it goes. The POTUS kills, the Ayatollah kills, the Commissars killed; it’s just part of being a leader, almost all of whom are conservative sociopaths. Regan and Thatcher were both sociopaths, one smiled as he screwed you, the other scowled but the end result was the same. Personally, I think the human race is on it’s last legs because we have way too much power for our common Violent Chimpanzee brains to handle responsibly.
it’s very close to Christmas 2015 and my friend Glenn Greenwald still believes that it is his homeland which makes certain Muslims mad. And that is true – that our homeland makes certain Muslims mad – but it is also true that being a gay American lawyer or wearing my Bikini makes certain Muslims mad – and my wish for the New Year is – that my friend Glenn Greenwald finally finds his peace and realizes that all kind of things make certain people mad.
Amen! All kinds of things make people mad. God damnit.
As Students of the Abrahamic Religions and People Concerned about Gays, here is a letter asking advice from Dr Laura, by a Member of the Abrahamic Religions, pre-Islam kind:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp
Pieceofcake and Bob, Happy Winter Solstice to you both.
Quit comparing the Contras with Islam. Islam was created in the seventh century and has a history of conquering by the sword. Islam conquered half of Europe without any US foreign policy help. What have the Contras conquered? The problem is that you want to relate everything to US policy in South America (except Ukraine which you cannot seem to understand why the Ukrainians might rebel against their Russian masters).
Islam has been a powerful force in the Middle East, Asia and Europe. There was sectarian violence, bigotry, hatred, racism, misogyny, death sentences for gays, and so on before the US became a country. The rise of Islamic extremism had nothing to do with the US in Iraq. However, the US invasion paved the way for an offshoot of al-Qaeda to gain territory. This was, in part, the responsibility of the Shia government which marginalized the Sunnis out of the government. The Arab Spring also created some openings for ISIS and al-Qaeda. The Syrian conflict – supported by the Russians and Iranians – also allowed ISIS to thrive.
Quit the bullshit. The US is not responsible for everything wrong in the world – no matter how hard you try to make it so.
No matter
– CraigSummers
The reply lightly [edited] for accuracy:
“[You’re not] comparing the Contras with Islam. [Your analogy was between two radical groups that with US support terrorized and slaughtered scores, but since I don’t have a rational argument to make, I must argue a straw man:] Islam conquered half of Europe without any US foreign policy help. What have the Contras conquered? [How is that related to US actions that – by different mechanisms – enabled both the Contras and Islamic radicals? It’s not; t]he problem is that [I want to avoid anything] relate[d to] everything [that is wrong with] US policy[, so I have to argue straw men, like] Ukraine[; that’s a straw man too, but I] cannot seem to [produce a coherent thought process].
Islam has been a powerful force in the Middle East, Asia and Europe. [I’m an excellent driver]. There was sectarian violence, bigotry, hatred, racism, misogyny, death sentences for gays, and so on before the US became a country [Now I have an insubstantial claim to make that does not follow from anything before:] The rise of Islamic extremism had nothing to do with the US in Iraq [even though it was] the US invasion [that lead to the rise of ISIS] This was, in part [to put it mildly], the responsibility of the [US] government which marginalized [oppressed, and slaughtered Muslims by the score and so] created some openings for ISIS and al-Qaeda. The Syrian conflict – [long planned, instigated, and supported by the US]– also allowed ISIS to thrive.
Quit the bullshit[; bullshit’s my job, dammit!]. The US is not responsible for everything wrong in the world – no matter how hard you try to make it so.
[Oh, you didn’t try to make it so?! Well,] no matter.”
Sorry Doc
You are not going to get away with comparing every US policy to the Contras. That’s ridiculous – and even you know that. You can be as sarcastic as you want, and it is still not going to fly. It is completely inane.
“…….The Syrian conflict – [long planned, instigated, and supported by the US]– also allowed ISIS to thrive……”
This statement by you clearly implies that the US is behind the war in Syria (actually was involved in planning the war). That is exactly what I mean when I say the radical left is driven by irrational anti-Americanism. So it was the US (CIA) that initiated the widespread protests across Syria for political rights. What does that say about the Syrian people? The extreme left victimizes Muslims to western/US policies so much that they have created this amazing racism of low expectations.
And what about the crackdown by Assad which was documented by Amnesty International which initiated the civil war? Another US conspiracy? Bashar al-Assad chose the same path as Hafez al-Assad when he met widespread protests in 1982 with a brutal crackdown (Hama Massacre). Between 10,000 and 40,000 people (Muslims mostly) were killed. The decision by Bashar al-Assad to meet protests with a military crackdown is what “instigated” the civil war currently in progress.
The US did not support the jihadists, and remained on the fringe of the civil/regional conflict for several years before developing a failed policy of supporting the rebels. The US passed up a golden opportunity to bomb Syrian in favor of removing the chemical weapons.
Put the blame where it belongs: the Assad regime is being propped up and supported by Russia, Iran and Lebanon. Numerous documented war crimes has been committed by Assad. Assad alone is responsible for initiating the civil war. The US had nothing to do with it. The US until the last year or so has been a minor player in this conflict which began in 2011. So I would love to see your source on how the US “instigated” the Syrian conflict. I’ll be anxiously waiting.
You would do well to just keep doing “sarcasm”. You are good at it. However, anytime you wonder from your trademark, you show a distinct lack of knowledge irrationally driven by classic anti-Americanism.
Thanks.
Wow, Craig. You are so passionate about Syrians in general… why is that? They are not even JEWISH! They couldn’t possibly matter…They are only BROWNIES! Why do you bother yourself about the fate of Syrians? Why exactly is it that you give a shit about the fate of a bunch of (more or less) Muslims?
Why are you so obsessed with Assad? He has nothing to do with Israel…
The post lightly [edited] for accuracy:
“You are not comparing every US policy to the Contras. That’s ridiculous – and even [I] know that. [But that’s my straw man.] It is completely inane.
“…….The Syrian conflict – [long planned, instigated, and supported by the US]– also allowed ISIS to thrive……”
[Syria, like Iran, has been a US “target” for years.] That is exactly [why I invoke straw men like:] So it was the US (CIA) that initiated the widespread protests across Syria for political rights. What does that say about [my intellectual capacity and honesty? They warrant] low expectations.
And what about the crackdown by Assad which was documented by Amnesty International which initiated the civil war? Another [straw man, of course]
The US did not support the jihadists, [except that it did, both directly and through its client states. But so what?].
The US passed up a golden opportunity to bomb Syrian in favor of removing the chemical weapons. [God, how I love repeating that. I’ve said it many times before:] The US also had a (real) interest in bombing the fuck out of Assad, but turned that down. . .The US also had a (real) interest in bombing the living piss out of Iran, but negotiated a nuclear agreement instead. . .The US also had a golden opportunity to bomb Syria into the stone age. . .The US even turned down a golden opportunity to bomb Assad and really set the regime back militarily. . .The US turned down a golden opportunity to bomb the fuck out of the Assad regime. . .
I would love to see [more violence against Muslims;] I’ll be anxiously waiting.”
A poorly thought out irrational response, Doc. You were dead wrong in your assessment. What is your fall back position? An unsubstantiated statement:
“…… The US did not support the jihadists, [except that it did, both directly and through its client states. But so what?]……”
Source(s), Doc? Again, the racism of low expectations (after all, they are just Arabs). The Arab states are fully capable of formulating their own policies – sometimes in disagreement with the US. If the Arab states are supporting ISIS, then we are bombing them at the same time. That makes a lot of sense, Doc.
“……The US passed up a golden opportunity to bomb Syrian in favor of removing the chemical weapons. [God, how I love repeating that. I’ve said it many times before:] The US also had a (real) interest in bombing the fuck out of Assad, but turned that down. . .The US also had a (real) interest in bombing the living piss out of Iran, but negotiated a nuclear agreement instead. . .The US also had a golden opportunity to bomb Syria into the stone age. . .The US even turned down a golden opportunity to bomb Assad and really set the regime back militarily. . .The US turned down a golden opportunity to bomb the fuck out of the Assad regime. . ….”
Irrelevant Doc since I don’t make US policy. But it is always a good idea to change the subject when you are wrong.
Everything; heck no but only because they can’t but the USA has sure screwed around in the world a lot. Took over from the Brits before them. Washington fought for freedom with 400 slaves; Churchill fought for freedom with an Empire the sun never sat on (also did the first terror bombing of civilians …in Iraq). Face it, humans by their nature are nasty, violent and controlling at the top of any society; the US just has the most toys these days.
Doc, I very much like your takedowns of our local Netanyanu fan.
It is certainly true that the US is not responsible for everything that happens in the world, but it certainly is for much, if not most, of the chaos that envelops the Near East. I would recommend a couple of references from the past.
“A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” was written by a bunch of neocons, Richard Perle included, for Netanyahoo sometime in the läte 1990’s. That paper advocated “containment of Syria by excercising proxy warfare”. Specifically, Syria was a growing threat to Israel’s preeminence in the region.
This same buch of neocons, past and present Likudniks, many of whom are still around and influential, and still pushing the same policies, organized the “Project for a New American Century”. The documents produced by this organization included many of the ideas put forth in the “Clean Break” paper.
The policies outlined in those papers directly led to foreign policy decisions, the consequences of which are playing themselves out in the NE today. Support for Israel is preeminent, as is action, including military, against any country that may threaten Israel’s preeminence in the region.
Paul Bremer is the person most directly responsible for the creation of ISIS. It is he, as the Czar of post-war Iraq, that took the decision to disband Saddam’s Armed Forces. All those thousands of war-hardened men, together with their weapons, were set adrift, with no means to support their families. It is these men that became the nucleus of the Sunni armed opposition, it is these officers that trained ISIS. Many are still active in the ranks of ISIS.
Oh yes, the Project for a New American Century admits that the ideas proposed therein have no chance of success unless some cataclysmic event, akin to Pearl Harbor, occurs in the USofA.
Thanks for that background.
Paul Bremer now sells his oil painting of New England landscapes at http://www.bremerenterprises.com
http://bremerenterprises.com/id66.html
True.
And it wasn’t just America’s illegitimate use of military force and the “debaathification” of Iraq that fueled Islamic extremism; the rise of the Islamic State was “a willful decision” by the Obama White House.
Plans to take control of Syria – and several other ME countries – were made years before:
When did Ayan became Muslim thought leader? Ayan is considered recreant and anything to do with her will further antagonize those DoS want to make ”peace” with. Amerikans at DoS are high on pot.
Oh my god this is fucking hilarious. The DoS “hearts and minds” and “anti-radicalization” campaigns reminds me of the utterly ineffective DARE and MADD anti-drug campaigns in high school. Solemn lectures and patronizing platitudes are a sure winner! If that doesn’t do it the inspiring photo of a 1970s office block on the DoS website will do it. Oh but wait, here is a virulent anti-Muslim who will win over Islamic hearts and minds! I guess Pam Geller wasn’t available?
These April Fools moments have become part and parcel of US government bungling in the Middle East. Seriously for a moment, I think a big problem facing the West, besides having its collective head up its own fundament, is the glaring lack of an inspiring narrative to counter ISIS’s vision, for which people are willing to kill and be killed. Consumerism and (declining) stability and security and rule of law just doesn’t get the blood flowing, ya know?
Jose
“……It’s simple: Islamic extremism is not strictly a reaction to American foreign policy (I don’t know who you believe claims that), but it practically wouldn’t exist without it. An analogy: The Contras in Nicaragua didn’t exist strictly as a consequence of American imperialism, but they would’ve been practically irrelevant and non-existent without it. It’s not too difficult to put 2 and 2 together. ISIS is an abomination that only exists because of the Iraq war….”
Quit comparing the Contras with Islam. Islam was created in the seventh century and has a history of conquering by the sword. Islam conquered half of Europe without any US foreign policy help. What have the Contras conquered? The problem is that you want to relate everything to US policy in South America (except Ukraine which you cannot seem to understand why the Ukrainians might rebel against their Russian masters).
Islam has been a powerful force in the Middle East, Asia and Europe. There was sectarian violence, bigotry, hatred, racism, misogyny, death sentences for gays, and so on before the US became a country. The rise of Islamic extremism had nothing to do with the US in Iraq. However, the US invasion paved the way for an offshoot of al-Qaeda to gain territory. This was, in part, the responsibility of the Shia government which marginalized the Sunnis out of the government. The Arab Spring also created some openings for ISIS and al-Qaeda. The Syrian conflict – supported by the Russians and Iranians – also allowed ISIS to thrive.
Quit the bullshit. The US is not responsible for everything wrong in the world – no matter how hard you try to make it so.
No matter
Happy holidays to all.
“…(Hirsi Ali) said she rejects the notion that “we” are at war only with radical Islam but instead are at war with Islam generally. ”
Spot on. The US government has been waging a religious war since Dick Cheney blew up the twin towers and blamed it on bin Laden. She might be a bad propagandist, but she states an obvious truth to people in the Middle East, and one which Americans need to acknowledge.
The State Department’s delusional failure fits born fraud Hirsi Ali to a T.
– NY Times: What books do you find yourself returning to again and again?
– HA: Charles MacKay, “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.” Speaks volumes!
@Samaddoon: “She consistently hijacks highly charged issues, sells her conscience to the highest bidder, repeatedly and unblushingly says what they want to hear and moves on when greener pastures appear at her door”.
Well said! She indeed regularly exploits and then deep-sixs everyone and everything that crosses her path – from family and friends, through country/culture and creed, to ideals and ideology (left-wing AND right-wing)… Who’s next?
For people who want facts re Hirsi Ali:
http://www.alternet.org/media/anti-islam-author-ayaan-hirsi-alis-latest-deception
“In May 2006, the Dutch TV programm Zembla thoroughly debunked the dramatic story Hirsi Ali had told to advance her career, concluding that Hirsi Ali had sold the Dutch public ´a story full of obscurities´”.
Not only is she an admirer of Netanyahoo, she had kind words to say about Breivik.
Nothing this person has said about her past is true. And she’s still selling and people are still buying . It’s not only the State Dept that is delusional.
Is it also a lie that she has been targeted by Muslims because of her views on Islam?
It is a ONE a simple question that requires a simple answer.
So, does that justify all Ali’s lies and her nice words about Breivik?
If you were not buried in Greenwald’s ass to find logic, then you would understand that you should answer a question first if you expect others to answer yours. But since you are a very stupid and a very ignorant individual I shall make an exception and answer yours.
1) Dutch authorities and the people already punished Ali for her lies
2) As a free individual she can say nice words about Netanyahu, Breivik, Bush..whomever she wants. It is not that different from Greenwald saying nice words about Hezbollah or Hamas. Do you guys support freedom of speech?
So again, is it also a lie that she has been targeted by Muslims because of her views on Islam?
The fact she lied or said nice words about anybody is completely irrelevant to my question.
Lola: The issue at hand is not Ms. Ali’s speech, which she is certainly welcome to use in any lawful way she sees fit. Nor is the issue at hand one of whether or not Ms. Ali is being targeted by Muslim extremists, which many people are and have been, including normal Muslims who speak out on the wrong topics, like Salman Rushdie or Malala Yousafzai. The issue is whether or not the DOS should be affiliating itself with Ms. Ali in an effort to counter Daesh. First, Ali isn’t a Muslim (anymore), second, she’s a far right-wing anti-Muslim extremist, third, she’s a political partisan. She is not the kind of person the DOS should be affiliating themselves with as an agency representing the entire American people.
“Lola” is a troll on its fourth or so incarnation here. When I answer it is generally only for the benefit of other readers who may not have its number. Lola has agreed Ali was punished by the Dutch for her lies. The rest is just its usual hand-waving trollery meriting no substantive response.
“……When I answer it is generally only for the benefit of other readers who may not have its number. Lola has agreed Ali was punished by the Dutch for her lies. The rest is just its usual hand-waving trollery meriting no substantive response…..”
Time to have him/her banned yet again Mona. You are easily the most disingenuous person that post regularly on this site.
Since I am a troll, can you point ONE factually incorrect statement that I wrote here.
By the way the State Department clearly stated in 2013 and years before that, that journalists cannot use the Visa Waiver Program.
https://travel.state.gov/content/visas/en/visit/visa-waiver-program.html
So, what exactly did you “debunk” from me?
Actually, the Dutch never had the chance to deport this liar. She fled from The Netherlands in anticipation that this would happen. In other words, the Dutch concluded she was a liar, so she found a more fertile ground for her lies in the USA — the US State Department, the Enterprise Institution, and Lola, who apparently has a case of logorrhea. There is no point in engaging with someone with an affliction.
The issue is not whether I agree with the State Department choice. I disagree with most of the US government decisions anyway. The issue is how Greenwald and his favorite supporters denigrate others who have different opinions. I could say Malala Yousafzai is not the kind of person US elected officials should be affiliating themselves with because she is against drone strikes that most Americans support. That would be stupid. It is the same with Mrs Ali. She has her own political views (and, no she did not support Breivik) like Malala, and they are both targets of Muslim extremists.
I just think it is weird for Greenwald or Mona to present the argument that they “understand” why some Muslims use terrorism because of American foreign policy or France foreign policy (I am not sure about Sweden foreign policy), but they seem incapable of understanding why some former Muslims would hate Islam because Muslims tried to kill them in the name of that religion.
” It is a ONE a simple question that requires a simple answer. ”
TO A SIMPLE MIND.
Then give the simple answer to the simple mind. That is if you have a mind.
Is the State Dept. serious? Ayaan Hirsi? Her own family outed her as a liar several years ago, that she was never forced into a marriage, and all the other horrors of her previous life were pure invention. Then the Dutch discovered that she had lied on her immigration/asylum application, they were preparing a court case when she fled to the USA and into the waiting arms of the Heritage Foundation. And now she’s hobnobing with Netanyahoo? Apparently, the State Dept. does put much effort into background checks.
Talking about winning the hearts and minds of Muslims reminds me of the what Abraham Lincoln once said:
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
The U.S empire is constantly trying to fool all the people all the time and keeps making a fool of itself all the time.
@CraigSummers
My ‘ reply ‘ button is not working.
” Don’t confuse the Afghanistan Taliban and Pakistan Taliban. ”
The so called Pakistan Taliban is simply a segment of Taliban that settled in Waziristan and later, in other parts of Pakistan, translocated there by war pressures.
Their goals are identical. Their allegia ce is to their Allah and to each other. Their mission is the same.
Ask Pakistanis. Ask Afghans. They do not theorize from the comfort and safety of their living rooms, across oceans, thousands of miles away.
Rather, they actually live the experience. And likely laugh at how we always seem to excell in getting it all wrong.
Over there, and everywhere else.
@Candace
Great comment. My ‘reply’ button is not working.
” The number of casualties resulting from terror attacks has increased by 4,500% over this same time period. ”
One has to wonder how far north this percentage goes when casualties from state terror, a much higher number, is added to the mix.
From BI:
The same ego, ignorance that thought we would be greeted as liberators in Iraq, made the official decision that Islam had to be the only reason why they were wrong.
“Hearts, Minds, and Dollars 2005
In an Unseen Front in the War on Terrorism, America is Spending Millions …To Change the Very Face of Islam
http://www.globalissues.org/article/584/hearts-minds-and-dollars
“Because America is, as one official put it, “radioactive” in the Islamic world, the plan calls for working through third parties—moderate Muslim nations, foundations, and reform groups—to promote shared values of democracy, women’s rights, and tolerance.”
Hey hey, shared values! but with what is now considered only the left leaning territory.
Why is it western militarists love “moderates” in the Middle East but cant stand them in their own country?
“In at least two dozen countries, Washington has quietly funded Islamic radio and TV shows, coursework in Muslim schools, Muslim think tanks, political workshops, or other programs that promote moderate Islam. Federal aid is going to restore mosques, save ancient Korans, even build Islamic schools. This broad engagement with Islam has raised questions about whether the funding is legal, given the constitutional line between church and state.”
Laws are supposed to represent and protect our values. If our government (and contractors) break a law to get what they want or sneak change them then what they wanted is an advesary to the law they broke. That goes for anyone.
And you can see the results of that in what the GOP and the right wing media has turned into.
I was going to add this to my comment below but I think I’ll put it here.
2006
“Losing Hearts and Minds:”
“Since the advent of the Afghan war, world public opinion has trended strongly against US global leadership, both generally and, especially, regarding national security affairs.
Perhaps the greatest concerns about the drift of world opinion is that (1) in the Muslim world it is increasing the political power of fundamentalist parties and providing a more fertile environment for the activity of terrorist organizations, while (2) also creating favorable opinion worldwide for powers that purportedly seek to balance against the United States — namely China and Russia.”
http://www.comw.org/pda/0609bm37.html
I wonder if there is concern now. Or is the current war hungry approach for election influence purposes only?
Maybe the hawks really just want to go for it. Who knows
Does anyone remember the wisdom that if you want to have pleasant visits with family and friends, good business relationships you avoid discussing especially lecturing someone about their religion? And then the big one: you dont shoot, bomb, kidnap or torture anyone either if you want to get along. You think some things are obvious but maybe some people just dont know that.
Its impossible to protect anything good by punishing groups of people.
2015
“Terror attacks have jumped by a stunning 6,500% since 2002, according to a new analysis by Reader Supported News. The number of casualties resulting from terror attacks has increased by 4,500% over this same time period. These colossal upsurges in terror took place despite a decade-long, worldwide effort to fight terrorism that has been led by the United States.”
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/32339-focus-despite-14-years-of-the-us-war-on-terror-terror-attacks-have-skyrocketed-since-911
OK, now that the thread is stale and I don’t have the energy to help bash Craig (and my help is not needed) . . .
A few here may remember one of the times I was banned by The Guardian (similarly, late in a thread BTL on one of Glenn’s pieces), for being, er, intemperate in my remarks to and about some 9/11 truthers who were annoying me.
Well, speakers or headphones on and:
1. Watch, listen and enjoy. This guy should have a stand-up science comedy show.
2. Pass it on to the 9/11 truthers in your life who just refuse to stop babbling about “molten steel.”
“https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA”>For the undying 9/11 MORONIC JET FUEL ARGUMENT
~Doug
I swear there must be something wrong with TI’s HTML parsing, recently (as well as the absence preview and functions); I just don’t screw up tags this often. Trying again . . .
For the undying 9/11 MORONIC JET FUEL ARGUMENT
This is one of the stupidest attempts at science I have ever seen. This link works
That “iron-worker” has no concept of the science behind combustion.
The kinetics of combustion has a greater effect on temperature than the fuel does. That’s why you need fuel injectors to create the optimal fuel/oxygen ratio to obtain the 1500 degree flame temp of jet fuel.
(His little furnace has a blower and fuel mixing device, that’s how he got the bar hot enough to bend)
The towers had no such devices and hence the fuel burned at temperatures well below 1000 degrees F.
The black smoke from the tower fires indicates incomplete combustion.
It is beyond obvious as to how those towers collapsed and it had nothing to do with jet planes.
Get an engineering degree and then get an advanced engineering degree in metallurgy and you will see the light as I do.
1. Ooops — broken link. Thanks for the correction. Be sure to watch the video, folks.
2. If you have an advanced degree in metallurgy — and it didn’t come from the back of a matchbook or a coupon clipped from a cereal carton — the institution that awarded said degree should lose its accreditation.
“Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.</em
~Albert Einstein
That video is an absolute joke. Everyone should watch it and realize that little forge furnace does not model accurately the event in question. Bending a hot steel rod – imagine that. It’s a bright, shiny object for the fools who think they understand physical science. That hot iron bar deformed but did not collapse as the towers did.
You just do not understand combustion. The theoretical thermodynamic temps you quote are close but you have failed to include the kinetics, as did your “expert”, because he is trying to mislead. Flame temperature is entirely dependent on kinetics (the physical proximity of a fuel molecule relative to oxygen molecule). There was insufficient kinetics nor oxygen for high temperature combustion. Try getting steel as hot as your video clip without a mixer and blower; he uses one for a reason (and he’s burning methane not kerosene, a gas vs. a liquid, so think how a liquid mixes with a gas – hint – very slowly).
but back to the temperature of the steel in tower 3 …
but back to the temperature of the steel in tower 7 … third to fall.
“That hot iron bar deformed but did not collapse as the towers did.”
Einstein was right.
2003
“The Iraqis don’t want to see anyone else send in troops. We have to use the Iraqi people, use their police force, win hearts and minds. It has to be peace through prosperity. We have to give them jobs. ”
Major Bob Bevlacqua
http://www.thenation.com/article/fox-news-occupation-critic/
2005
A December report by the CIA-based National Intelligence Council predicts that masses of unemployed, alienated youth in the Arab world “will swell the ranks of those vulnerable to terrorist recruitment.”
http://www.globalissues.org/article/584/hearts-minds-and-dollars
2006
“The bottom line is that American aid is the single most important action the people of the three largest Muslim countries want from the United States. And here’s the key to winning hearts and minds: deeper American assistance directly to the people, following their expressed priorities”
http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/upimagestft/Indonesia%20Bangladesh%20TFT%20Final%20Poll%20Report.pdf
Glenn, why didn’t you include her genocidal statements that she made in her Sam Harris video interview? She called for a preemptive war against all Muslims innocent & otherwise to kill them all. Very neocon.
Could someone tell Glenn that ‘anathema’ isn’t an adjective? (“more anathema” – lol)
so would “anathema, more” do the trick? I think that’s the meaning Glenn is going for.
CraigSummers v CraigSummers:
vs
and
vs
The Cure: Killing an Arab
https://soundcloud.com/marcuscorrea/the-cure-killing-an-arab
Good song. Wikipedia explication:
Smith is still trying to convince Camus to change his book.
Very few believe in art.
Are you being ironic? Everyone believes in art.
Art is the belief that the reader knows more than the writer. Propaganda insists the writer is paramount.
Whatever faith Robert Smith had in his fans ability to read “The Stranger” without wanting to kill Arabs was very short lived.
Those who think that people will blindly follow their orders should probably steer clear of any sort of ambiguity or controversy–especially art.
The biggest problem with the propagandists view that the world is persuaded not by argument and ideas, but the sound of their voice–besides ego inflation–is that it can only result in tyrant or coward.
Art is enticing clay. The mandala. The koan.
Art wants to make people think. Propaganda is what you want people to think.
How many dream that their greatest achievement is to be misunderstood?
Oy. You lost me at sentence one. I think you and I have a different understanding of what “art” is… unless it’s an issue of semantics…
“Art is the belief the reader knows more than the writer?” How so?
But I’m tired. So, a domani.
Art is the use of ambiguity, symbolism and enticing clay for the purposes of igniting and providing fuel for creation on the part of the reader/viewer/listener.
Direct communication is like instructions for building a house. Ambiguity is the enemy here. When I am directly communicating, I don’t want you take what I am saying as symbols or to randomly redefine units of measure. X is to equal X. I only trust you insofar as I trust you to follow my explicit instructions.
But if my goal is to act as fuel for the creative/moral mind, then by using ambiguity, symbolism and enticing clay, I am trusting that your creation will be greater than mine. That what I have to say is meaningless compared to what you will create. That you will take the enticing clay of ambiguity and create something much bigger and better than I ever could. That you will teach me.
Art, at its base, is trust in the other. Art is democracy. Art is trust in the crowd. Art is the inversion of the hierarchy. All else is propaganda.
Hopefully this post is more direct communication than art, but if you have any questions, I would be glad to answer because I have been trying to hone this message since forever.
Okay. I see what you are saying. You are just coming at it from a different direction than the way I normally think about it. I should probably put more thought into my response, but I’ll start here:
I think that the significance of art is that it enables us to see the world from another person’s perspective, how they interpret the world, or reality, or what have you, whether it be in music, or dance, or theater, literature or the visual arts. It’s value is not only in that it can be instructive, or aesthetically pleasing/disturbing, but also that it is humanizing — because seeing the world through someone else’s eyes fosters empathy and understanding.
But I am more interested first, in what the artist is trying to say – sometimes the artist’s intention is a very specific message and sometimes it is more ambiguous (or open to interpretation). I think it is first the act of the artist’s interpreting that creates art – and I think that act could be performed in a vacuum, and still be art. In that hypothetical situation, the artist’s audience would be himself/herself, but it would still be art.
When I look at a painting or a sculpture, or a movie, I have an automatic tendency to take it apart and analyze it — it’s what I do. Sometimes there are elements that are so ambiguous that they defy analysis, or they lend themselves to multiple interpretations — you can tell when that’s intentional and that that ambiguity was part of the artist’s original intention. I think that’s fine.
But while some art is abstract or stylized, other art is highly representational (or, “illusionistic”). Are you saying that the degree of ambiguity inherent in a piece of art corresponds to the value of the art itself? I would disagree with that.
Addendum: I think you and I define “art” differently. To me, art is the expression of interpretation (by the artist, not his/her audience – he/she has no control over that).
Unless I’m misinterpreting you, you seem to think that “art” is the result of a dynamic between the artist and his/her audience – how the audience interprets the art, is the art.
I disagree. While I think that the audience’s interpretations of an artist’s work define the value of the artist’s work to his/her audience, I don’t think they are an inherent aspect of it.
Let me start by saying that everyone’s definition of art is a unique and individual act. If art is trust in the other and democracy–how could it be anything else?
Nietzsche said “Poets muddy their waters to make them appear deep.”
If something is worth saying it is worth saying directly. The value of ambiguity, art and enticing clay is in creation by the end user. Otherwise it is just romanticizing the drunken unintelligible confession of those afraid of their own voice. Which gets to another point in my definition of art–The intention of the artist is irrelevant. Not only irrelevant, but the intention of the artist is anti-art. Art is the complete and total giving of oneself to the audience. The only interpretation that can defile art is the original intention of the artist.
If you have something say–say it. Otherwise get out of the way, and let those willing to give clear meaning to your words have their say.
No, not at all. The value of art is what you make with it. Whether you can find God on the back of a cereal box, or in a popcorn ceiling, or on a sheet of paper with the word “God” written on it–whatever speaks to you is art.
Many do not trust themselves enough to believe that they are the genius behind great art–so the artist is idolized. In addition to “enticing clay”, I have used the metaphor “one half of a torn treasure map.” The latter metaphor tends to sit better with certain audiences because it implies finding instead of inventing.
Now, one of the inherent contradictions in art is that I believe the creation of “enticing clay” is best served by actually having meaning behind your art. Although, this probably has more to do with projecting confidence than anything else.
This was always your humanity. Always your empathy and understanding. You made this. That you are willing to give credit to someone else is only another reflection of your humanity and understanding. This is your gift.
I’m shocked that that old chestnut strategy of winning hearts and minds is failing, it was such an inspiring success in Viet Nam and Central America. Much easier said than done, this winning over the people you’ve been killing.
@CraigSummers
” But what Malala didn’t say was that it is the Pakistan government which supports and provides a safe haven for the Taliban bringing the war to Pakistan. It is the Pakistan government which supports the Afghanistan Taliban responsible for 75% of the civilian casualties in Afghanistan ”
Things are not as simple as you appear to see them.
Your assertions could not be farther from the truth. Pakistan has suffered more from the presence of the Taliban on their soil than you will ever know. And Pakistan asked for none of it.
First, flowing into Pakistan while escaping Russian bombs during the invasion of that nation by Russia, the Afghans, including the Taliban, would later flood Pakistan when it was America’s turn to invade Afghanistan.
While in Pakistan, they nearly destroyed that country through their aggressive marketing of opium to the general population, and through commission of violence as a means of settling scores.
They did not recognize nor respect Pakistani law, often accusing the govt as not truly Islamic.
Pakistan took the stain of terrorism that, while this is no attempt to excuse Pakistani nationals who may have committed terrorism, terrorism committed by the Taliban on Pakistani soil became Pakistani terrorism in the eyes of the world.
When the new Afghan govt invited it’s nationals in the diaspora to come home, there were few takers. Taliban and many other ordinary Afghans, had taken root in Pakistan, with many born in that country even.
I could ho on and on but I will not.
Pat
“……Your assertions could not be farther from the truth. Pakistan has suffered more from the presence of the Taliban on their soil than you will ever know. And Pakistan asked for none of it……”
Sorry Pat, but the Pakistan government (along with Saudi Arabia) supported the rise of the (Afghanistan) Taliban in Afghanistan in the mid 90’s. The ISI has been their biggest supporters providing funding, weapons etc. Under Musharrif, the Pakistan government played a double game with the US pretending to fight the (Afghanistan) Taliban while bilking the US government out of billions. In reality, they supported the (Afghanistan) Taliban for geopolitical reasons because they did not like that Karzai was close to India. In the meantime, they provided a safe haven for the Taliban in Pakistan bringing the war to that country. Despite what Malala says, Pakistan is responsible for the drone warfare in Pakistan.
Don’t confuse the Afghanistan Taliban and Pakistan Taliban. They are different entities although the Pakistan Taliban supports the goals of their Afghan brothers. It is the Pakistan Taliban which has waged a war against the Pakistan government – and visa versa.
Pakistan is a failed state strictly because of their own policies.
Thanks.
This is kind of remarkable argument coming from you. It’s like you’re saying a country does bear responsibility for the consequences of its meddling.
I’m not sure where you’ve been Jose. I have been saying that about Russia in Ukraine and Syria for a long time. It’s the Intercept which refuses to acknowledge Russia’s role. I have also said that the US was responsible for the civil war in Iraq (just not most of the sectarian related violence).
Thanks.
Craig, is Malala Yousafzai a radical leftist?
No, but you are Mona.
Craig, Malala is a self-identified Marxist. How can I, a non-Marxist, be a “radical leftist” but Malala is not?
Then she is a radical leftist – but so are you Mona.
When the Soviet Union was the threat, any non-Russian, non-East Block American who learned Russian was guaranteed a job. Very few Americans study Arabic as it is extremely difficult to learn. I speak and read Arabic at Level III, which is okay, but I did live with Bedouins and recently came back from Lebanon. I’m retired, but the State Dept., FBI and local police aren’t interested in using people like me. Had I been hired by “Homeland,” without the Arabs knowing, I could have told the producers about the grafitti issue before the episode aired and they were embarrassed. Anybody who served in a war like me knows local translators are not all trustworthy; ours in Vietnam was arrested as a double-agent. Also, a local mosque would rather deal with a person like me than a nit-wit like Karen Hughes with the local PD. Our war on ISIS is half-assed and there is a good reason why.
DocHollywood
“……Malala Yousafzai – who received international acclaim after being attacked by the Taliban for her advocacy of girls’ education and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize – makes it clear that US policies fuel terrorism….”
But what Malala didn’t say was that it is the Pakistan government which supports and provides a safe haven for the Taliban bringing the war to Pakistan. It is the Pakistan government which supports the Afghanistan Taliban responsible for 75% of the civilian casualties in Afghanistan
The Pakistan government has Afghan blood on their hands. Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have died because of the Pakistan-supported Taliban. The Pakistan government has supported the Taliban since the Taliban rose as a fighting force in the mid 1990s – for geopolitical reasons.
The drones are a direct result of Pakistan policies. So if more terrorists are created, she can blame her own government. Although I admire the courage of Malala, she appears oblivious to the role of her own government in Afghanistan – and apparently so are you, Doc.
Craig translated: “Malala is useful to Zionist campaigns to demonize Muslims, but she is only acceptable insofar as she is useful for that. Anything she says that does not help the Zionist campaign to demonize Muslims, and anything that smacks of holding the West accountable, is wrong.”
Sometimes the truth is really a hard thing to swallow as in the case of the Pakistan government. So the person who most uses the word “whataboutery” more than anyone else starts talking about Zionism. That is right up there with your Jewish Defense League post from awhile back (for idiocy). And you think I am going off the deep end?
Your motives for rejecting Malala statements you do not like, and my reciting those motives, do not constitute whataboutery. You, Craig, are a fanatical Zionist and authoritarian, who has use for Malala solely insofar as she is useful for the Muslim- bashing that many right-wing (and even some liberal) Zionists spew by the ton.
Malala had this to say today:
And:
But then, she’s a radical leftist, eh Craig?
So annoying when my comments don’t show.
I am not sure who has the most pathetic responses – you or DocHollywood. In reality, you don’t know a fucking thing about Pakistan so you choose to change the subject. It couldn’t be more obvious.
Carig, you didn’t answer the question: Is Malala a “radical leftist?”
She cares about education and equal access. She must be.
It was not the US or the UK that attempted to kill Malala for going to school. It was the Taliban. You know? Those terrorists that you guys sympathize with. So again, if the US/ NATO stop all support for ALL governments, armed groups…in Afghanistan, Pakistan…would it be easier for the girls in Pakistan and Afghanistan to go to school without being targeted by the Taliban? Not those girls who go to school freely in England. Those in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
DocHollywood
How long has it been since you really responded to one of my posts? The only problem here is that you repeat the 2004 out of date garbage continually cited by Greenwald and other extreme leftist like yourself. That 2004 commission got it wrong and only the extreme left cites that report considering what is happening in the world today. It couldn’t be more obvious. You are nothing but a propagandist for killers.
We have discussed this exact commission’s report on at least two other occasions. You repeat the same fucking garbage again and again. As an example, and you can look back at my response right after the Intercept began publishing (i.e., promoting the propaganda of radical Islam), I have never said that Muslims hate our freedom – and you are lying by repeating again here as if I implied it or said it at some time in the past. After all, I said it then and I continue to say it now: the Arab Spring disproves the idea that Arabs hate our freedoms. However, radical Islam absolutely hates our freedoms as the attacks on Charlie Hebdo prove. Radical Islamists seek power to subjugate Muslims under a fascist, anti-democratic and racists government (Caliphate). That is irrefutable. All you have to do is listen to them.
Islamists not only hate our freedoms, but hate the march for political rights (freedoms) of other Muslims as well. In fact, whether its the Taliban, ISIS, al-Qaeda, Boko Haram and any number of other politically motivated Islamic terrorists, they are not only willing to kill Muslims to gain power, but they target and murder innocent Muslims far more than any other people. The real victims are the Muslims wherever radical Islamists seek power – not western Muslims who are fortunate to live where freedom and economic opportunity give Muslims good lives compared to the anti-democratic political armpits in the Middle East and Africa.
So quit repeating the same lies and propagating the propaganda of the terrorists, OK? It gets tiring. The commission was wrong.
Craig is petulant yet again: “The only problem here is that you repeat the 2004 out of date garbage”
Out of date, eh? Wow. I guess in the past 11 years human nature has undergone an enormous change, and human beings now love it when we bomb them and support tyrants in their countries. Now, they crave that the U.S. send ever more money to an oppressive state that holds Muslims in an open air prison, steals their remaining land, settles it, and terrorizes and kills them with impunity.
Yeah, since 2004 human nature — in CraigWorld — has radically changed. So that Defense Science Board report is just fish wrap — in CraigWorld
Mona
You keep citing the report Mona. In the mean time, Muslims will continue to be targeted and murdered more than any other people (obviously) in revenge for our policies. The US supports and arms Israel so “I” will target and murder Shia at the local Mosque. The US arms Saudi Arabia, so “I” will throw acid in the faces of little girls going to school. Yep. It’s our policies which drive these otherwise nice people to murder – Muslims.
Yes. And will continue to. As well as former Muslim radical, Mubin Shaikh. And much as you’d like to change the conversation to intra-Muslim crimes and internecine warfare, we here are not going to let you. The topic is Muslim hatred of the West and attacks on us, and what causes those. Get used to it.
“……Yes. And will continue to……”
No problem. Since when has the extreme left been adverse to promoting lies? Carry on, Mona.
Reality is whatever you want it to be, is that it Craig? A report prepared for the Department of Defense, and a Muslim who works in counter-terrorism measures, to quote them is to be part of the “extreme left” that is “promoting lies.”
You are what Stalinists used to be like, denying reality in favor of The Greater Truth.
Malala already has.
After meeting with President Obama, Malala released a statement saying she was honored to meet with Obama, but that she told him she’s worried about the effect of U.S. drone strikes. (The White House statement didn’t mention that part):
Malala Yousafzai – who received international acclaim after being attacked by the Taliban for her advocacy of girls’ education and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize – makes it clear that US policies fuel terrorism:
CBS This Morning, October 10, 2014:
So basically if it was not for US drones, attacks on Malala and other kids in Pakistan would have been lower…lol …lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…lol…
This comment section is a comedy show loaded irrational fools. I think you should just stick to repeating what others say.
What is irrational (and not a laughing matter) is tacitly supporting drone strikes, an extra-legal assassination method that is typically used to target unknown individuals who haven’t been formally accused of any wrongdoing.
You are right, drone strikes are not a laughing matter. However, you and the other fools in the comment section are definitely the cast in a super comedy show.
If you disagree with drone strikes that is fine. Tell the US to stop them and provide a better alternative to bring those accused to the Hague. You can start by telling us how you would bring those in Yemen responsible for the attacks against Charlie Hebdo to court.
For starters, they could at least pretend to do the right thing, and I’m talking in general, not about specific cases. So they could formally indict people (which they never did in the case of al-Awlaki, for example). Then they could issue international arrest warrants. If they are able to locate someone traveling by car in order to launch a missile at them, I’m pretty sure they could figure out a way to arrange to get them captured by the local government with a reasonable probability of success.
lol lol lol lol lol
Sorry I had to laugh at this:
“If they are able to locate someone traveling by car in order to launch a missile at them, I’m pretty sure they could figure out a way to arrange to get them captured by the local government with a reasonable probability of success.”
Drone strikes are not done where local governments are able to capture criminals on their soil. Drone strikes are done in areas where local governments have no control. LOL LOL LOL
The Yemeni government had absolutely no control in the tribal areas where al Awlaki was. Now Yemen does not really have a government at all.
“They could formally indict people (which they never did in the case of al-Awlaki, for example). Then they could issue international arrest warrants.”
Arrest warrants, indictments are not necessary when a state is a war. There is no such thing as a death penalty against the enemy. Was there warrants against Japanese generals, SS soldiers during WWII?
The US Congress has authorized the executive to use deadly force against Al Qaeda. But let’s say you issue your international warrant against that terrorist in Yemen or in Al Shabab controlled areas. What local governments will arrest him for you? How are you going to stop him while he keeps planning and sending his foot soldiers in your cities to kill civilians?
You don’t know what you’re talking about. The US conducted hundreds of drone strikes in Yemen, while it was under the control of Ali Abdullah Saleh, a reliable and obedient US “ally”. Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in northern Yemen while travelling by car across governorates, not far from Sanaa. Two weeks later, his son Abdulrahman was killed by a drone in Southern Yemen, while eating at an outdoor restaurant with his teenage cousins.
According to a report published by the Washington Times, the Obama Administration’s decision to kill rather than capture al-Awlaki had to do with legal considerations. They knew due process had little chance of going their way.
“You don’t know what you’re talking about. The US conducted hundreds of drone strikes in Yemen, while it was under the control of Ali Abdullah Saleh, a reliable and obedient US “ally”.”
Lol Lol Lol….lol…
al Awlaki was killed in al Jawf, an area under the control of Houthi rebels and other tribesmen. Government forces had no control in that area. Before his death he was protected by the tribes in Shabwa, a lawless area in Yemen. Government forces had no control over those tribesmen who categorically stated they would not hand over Al Awlaki who indeed, had a Yemeni arrest warrant against him. Do not take my words for it. Take the words of many journalists who went there and interviewed those tribal leaders including Richard Spencer from the Telegraph.
His son was also killed in Shabwa. The US said it was a mistake. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. But the point is, drone strikes are not done where local governments are in full control of their territory.
Do you understand why I think you are laughable? You are basically stating that multiple journalists from all around the world who went to Yemen and who consistently repeated that the government did not control those areas do not know what they are talking about.
Okay. So, tell us whether you believe the government was in fact in control of the Shabwa and al Jawf provinces based on your visit in those areas.
Wow. In direct response to multiple quotes of Malala Yousafzai, you reply:
Wow you still stuck in Greenwald’s ass!
Yes, it is quite funny when irrational, ignorant, and stupid terrorist sympathizers like you pretend to care about kids getting killed by the Taliban.
The Taliban went into that bus to kill those Muslim, Pakistani kids because of US drone strikes. Lol lol lol Logic from somebody’s ass indeed.
Lola asked:
Providing an opportunity to explore why France, in particular, has a problem with angry Muslims. The Canadian Muslim I cited and linked to below — Mubin Shaikh, the former radical who now assists his government in preventing terrorism — addresses that point as well:
Algerian Muslims in France, and their descendants, are heavily discriminated against. The colonial period, and the horrific French-Algerian war, still leave a profound mark on that country and it’s culture. The status of Algerian-Muslims in France has been compared with American marginalization of African-Americans.
Anecdotally, the first I recall hearing about this was from my French professor in college, three decades ago. She was a French national, and told the class that her country was deeply racist against Algerians.
Charles de Gaulle on Algerian Independence — March 5, 1959
So when you go to the banlieues in France, you notice that discrimination is so great that you understand why a young French Muslim who has free healthcare, free school, free university, the right to vote… would want to kill as many French as possible?
“The status of Algerian-Muslims in France has been compared with American marginalization of African-Americans.”
Yet blacks who had no healthcare, basically no right to vote, consistently victims to state violence, regarded second class citizens by the LAW, prevented from being educated…did not seem to be interested in massacring white people in concerts.
Did somebody call you a dumb ass before? If so many people are calling you “stupid” “ignorant” “dumb ass” maybe you ought to pull your head out Greenwald’s ass and take a look at yourself.
Ever heard of the Black Panthers? There were and are violent black people fighting white colonialist oppression. Indeed, have you ever heard of Franz Fanon, Lola? He was an Afro-Caribbean psychiatrist who wrote the classic The Wretched of the Earth, and who supported the Algerian revolutionaries.
Indeed, American black activists very much identify with oppressed Arabs/Muslims. The Black Lives Matter movement is supportive of BDS.
Black Panthers were violent against whom? How many White churchgoers, white school children, white racists politician did they kill or even target?
The Black Lives Matter is a 100% NON violent movement.
Again, how come millions of blacks (some of them armed) with no healthcare, no proper education, systematically under state sponsored violence, classified as second class citizens under the law were not interested in massacring white people in concerts?
Why discriminated Algerians in France with FREE healthcare, full right to vote, FREE basic and higher education would hate other French citizens so badly to the point of killing them randomly in a concert or in a coffee shop?
I am telling you again. Pull your head out of Greenwald’s ass. You do not get logic from somebody’s ass!
1) You admitted you found “logic” in Greenwald’s ass. So, take responsibility for your words and actions.
2) If you find “logic” in somebody’s ass, then you are not in a position to call others ignorant. If an organization (Black Panther) involved in common illegal activities such as drugs, prostitution, extortion… primarily targets the police and his own members for killings, then equalizing that organization with others that randomly go into concerts to kill whomever they find is beyond ignorance.
3) You cannot “troll” “Glenn” your way out of your unbelievable ignorance. You are pathetic. You did not post FACTS. You are referring to an OPINION.
These are the FACTS: thousands of Americans live in Muslim countries peacefully. There are rarely attacked and are even rarely victims of petty crimes. In proper logic, that means the logic you do not get from somebody’s ass, this not how people who are hated are treated. Again, did you feel the Muslims who checked your passport at the airport in Saudi Arabia, who was driving you in Kuwait, who was guiding you in Egypt hated you to the point of wanting to kill you?
The Muslims who clearly and openly hate Americans (ISIS, Al Qaeda, Taliban, Boko Haram…) rarely attack Americans. Their primary targets are other Muslims taking the bus, going to the market, or in a classroom studying geography!!
Call me a troll if you want to, but you are really stupid to believe that US foreign policy pushed Al Qaeda/Taliban to attack hotels, markets…in India or to get into a school bus in Pakistan to kill kids.
And it is still an understatement to call you stupid: you are placing black uprisings against slavery and Islamic terrorism at the same level.
You are really brainless. Are you aware that ISIS, Taliban, Boko Haram…use terrorism to ENSLAVE others?
Have some dignity and pull your head out of Greenwald’s ass. You are disgusting!
Lola, you really do have an Old Testament view of the world — if you do not worship Yahwe you will be struck down — everything black and white and a direct and clear cause and effect scenario for you. The world, including the human mind, is somewhat more complicated. But do have tea with Netanyahoo. He also has problems understanding why the Palestinians do not adore the Zionists — after all, they brought the Palestinians civilization and now they’re ramping up to a third Intifada. You, Lola, truly are infantile.
1) Improve your argument by underlining what is factually incorrect about mine.
2) Tell your God, whoever he or she is, to solve the ME problems so everybody can be happy.
3) Netanyahu…Palestinians….???? What???
Today’s LA Times carries an op-ed by Rebecca Vilkomerson, the executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace. She notes that “49% of Democrats in the poll recommended imposing economic sanctions or taking other serious action in response to Israel’s continued settlement building.” This is based on a recent Brookings poll which shows support for Israel significantly eroding, especially among Democrats.
Movement is even more striking among unions:
The BDS movement is only 10 years old, and was quit lethargic in it’s first 5-7. But in the last several years support for BDS, in both Europe and the U.S., has been growing exponentially.
Hirsi Ali is a die-hard believer in Sam Huntington’s baseless prophecy of an impending “clash of civilizations” after the Soviet collapse. By now, after 25 years of this media brainwashing, it should be obvious to everyone on earth that the “clash” has been artificially created – and definitely NOT by Muslims as “predicted” by Huntington. Hirsi Ali, a Libertarian atheist suggested in her book, Nomad, that Christians need to CONVERT all Muslims to Christianity to save the world from the worsening effect of the Muslim threat to humanity! They should be Christians! Then they would stop harming civilization! Like, maybe they could then bask in the sunshine of those blessed Christian events like the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Holocaust?
Lola:
You seem upset with GG, and yet just can’t seem to stay away from his articles?
What’s the real deal kiddo?
It’s kind of a joke, and a bad one at that, but the joke is as usual on thinking people all over the planet. Whose idea was it? Who at State would think this was a good idea?
@ Glenn Greenwald
This article brings up a perfect example of when it might be necessary to preface an argument you are making so it is not purposely misrepresented by some of your detractors with one you are not making.
You have never argued nor does the evidence indicate that “All T violence (i.e. “terrorism committed by Muslims or nominally in the name of Islam) is directly related or caused by US foreign policy.”
What you have argued repeatedly is that most reliable and relevant evidence suggests that “most T violence, or a primary (though not exclusive) motivator of T violence is directly related or caused by US foreign policy.”
There is a huge gulf, in meaning and import, between those two arguments. Your critics seem to believe they can legitimately question your objectivity and analysis by easily reframing your argument as one you have never made (at least not that I’m aware).
Perhaps the more successful frame not subject to such manipulation should be something along the lines of:
I don’t see how that argument can be refuted by propaganda or your detractors. Unless they’d like to argue against demonstrable facts, mathematics and logic. Not saying they don’t try, but seems its a good way to frame the argument you are always making that doesn’t give them much wiggle room to reframe your argument and argue their preferred ahistorical, counterfactual, mathematically unsupported and illogical argument.
And then you hammer them with the emotional appeal to the idea that in the absence of any sort of factual or reality-based bases for their argument, they must believe “Islam is a violent faith and its adherents a threat” not because of any rational basis for that argument but due to their irrational childlike fears and/or bigotry.
Just a suggestion. I’m aware you’ve argued all those premises or ideas separately, but it might be compelling (or not) to always try and frame or tie them together when reporting on this general topic.
@Mona “This site still needs a goddam preview function!”
I’ll settle for having the ability to display latest only as it is ridiculous to wade through the entire pile of comments to spot the occasional new reply.
A year ago TI said they were ‘on it’ as far as cleaning up the comment function …
I’ll not complain further as I am getting more than I pay for already. :)
@Sebastian
Imagine that, Israel Angered
because of this
Israel; always the common denominator in people trouble. Israel denounces and refuses to even discuss the possibility that Israeli actions are the root cause for current violence in the Middle East.
BDS; the 21st century yellow star, for cause. It worked against South Africa and it will work against Israel.
I recall a paper that I read recently ( removed from my house by torturers now ), where the author(s) argued for an assault on the narratives in the Middle East that they claimed are fueling most of the anti-Americanism in the region. To accomplish this, they suggested developing counter narratives.
There was no attempt at an objective analysis of the grievances, nor was there any pretence to address in the paper, any of America’s own actions as possible root sources of the resentments.
Apart from finding this repugnant, as the implication meant to convolute, twist and bend the PERCEPTION of America’s policies in the region and which the author(s) appeared to ignore as if they were unassailable and not to be subjected to question, I also found it astonishing that the whole idea seemed to be premised on a disdainful disregard for introspection.
But on second thoughts, getting inside the heads of the architects and supporters of such policies, I realized that there was really no contradictions.
Because to inflict such violence on a population in the form of invasions, bombings, torture etc, one had to dissociate themselves completely from any form of moral restraints to begin with.
Introspection is antagonistic to a need to be relieved of moral obligations when inflicting mass violence on entire populations. Country after country.
And so along this cursed road they move on, hoping in vain, that Hirsi will save the day.
Dec. 16 2015, 10:28 p.m.
“Greenwald’s ass is as mired in logic as the rest of him. Too bad about all your strawmen.” Mona
Mona just admitted that her face is loaded with Greenwald shit. And she is proud of it.
I just can’t help but ask Lola, just how old are you? Friendly question. I’m just curious really, as most people grow out of scatology rather early.
Recommend: <a href=" http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/upfront/2015/12/muslim-americans-liberal-values-151215125017608.html?platform=hootsuite" This 17-minute Mehdi Hasan, Al Jazeera interview of Muslim-American activist Linda Sarsour (executive director of the Arab American Association of New York), and leading Muslim scholar Yasir Qadhi, discussing the key issues facing Muslim Americans today.
This site still needs a goddam preview function!
It sure as hell does!
CraigSummers is petulant:
Yeah, the Defense Science Board is full of it in CraigWorld, as must be Mubin Shaikh, a Canadian Muslim who was a “jihadist” but who now assists the Canadian government in preventing terrorism. This “far left” fanatic says:
And before you shriek “anecdotal,” Shaikh has shown he understands Islamist terrorism in his work with the Canadian government, and his statements align perfectly with the findings of the Defense Science Board study you so detest.
Actually you are brainless if you really believe that the Taliban killed 132 kids because they hate US foreign policy.
Lola, I think you’ve stopped merely kissing all those strawmen and are now boinking them. Cuz there’s straw falling all over and off of you.
I guess if your face is loaded with Greenwald’s shit as you admitted, then you are incapable of understanding elementary logic. Wipe your face first and then answer that simple question: Who are “they” in that sentence, “they hate us”.
If “they” means Muslims maybe you can share your personal experience in how you believed the Muslims in all the predominantly Islamic countries you visited wanted to kill you. That would be weird since thousands on Americans live in those countries peacefully.
If “they” means Taliban, Al Qaeda, ISIS… then wipe your face again if you believe they hate us because of our foreign policy. You are definitely deep into Greenwald’s ass to rationalize the argument that somebody hates you so much that he spends most of his time killing people who have absolutely nothing to do with you.
Lola, honey, I fear you may be deeply insane. You are hallucinating:
How…odd. These fantasies you draft about me. This could be clinically significant.
Why don’t you pinpoint exactly what is factually incorrect with that statement and make a fool of yourself.
probably some still in her camel toe.
when you tromp through road apples you never know where it will go …
If we were in the 80s, Craig would be saying the following: The idea that our foreign policy drives Central Americans to kill other Central Americans is so ridiculous that I find it difficult to even respond.
In retrospect, what would be ridiculous is failing to recognize the key role played by the US. That’s not to say it’s the only responsible party — obviously it isn’t — but it’s unquestionably the biggest player.
Also, data does not lie.
@ Jose
You made the point I was trying to make above to Glenn much more succinctly than I did. Thank you. Yours is the perfect analogy to the specious quality of the argument that “US policy is not primarily responsible for T violence” when factually, logically and statistically it demonstrably primarily (though not exclusively) is.
“If we were in the 80s, Craig would be saying the following: The idea that our foreign policy drives Central Americans to kill other Central Americans is so ridiculous that I find it difficult to even respond.”
The US foreign policy was to support armed groups (contras…) against other armed groups in Central America .
The US foreign policy is to support financially and militarily the governments of Pakistan, Nigeria, Iraq, Afghanistan. That support for these governments has absolutely nothing to do with kids in their school being targeted and killed, with villages destroyed, girls kidnapped and enslaved, Shias and Yazidis being massacred by terrorist organizations.
This is how illogical and distorted you are. You are comparing armed groups in Central America that targeted each other and committed serious human rights violations in the process with terrorist organizations that specifically target and kill innocent civilians, including kids, as a matter of policy. If the US had stopped providing support to the Contras, then there is a very strong argument that human rights violations from that group would been greatly reduced. If the US stops providing weapons to Nigeria, Pakistan or Afghanistan would that deter Boko Haram, Taliban…from targeting and killing more kids, girls, Shias?
You’re making a couple of claims here that are flatly false: (1) That the US only supports governments in the Middle East, not irregular armed groups; (2) That groups like the Contras did not specifically target innocent civilians.
Those 2 falsehoods are beside the point, either way. Imperialism can be empirically tied to instability and political violence, period. You’ve done nothing to undermine this observation.
Layman term:
If the Contras wanted to kill all civilians in Nicaragua, then there is a very strong argument that had the US stopped helping them, there would have been fewer civilian deaths.
If the US stops helping every single governments, armed groups, militias in the Middle East, would that deter the Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIS…from massacring civilians?
(Read the definition of the word “claim” and come back here to read my comment again)
It’s interesting that you see this, but you only see it in retrospect. At the time you almost certainly would’ve sided with the conventional wisdom. Like Hilary Clinton, people like you have to continuously admit they were wrong in the past, pleading ignorance, while continuing to make the same “mistakes” over and over again.
If US/NATO imperialism went away in the Middle East, like it largely (but not completely) did in Latin America, I do expect that eventually political violence will subside to manageable levels. It will take some time, obviously, because everything is a total mess right now, but I think self-determination is paramount, and the political systems of others are none of our business.
“If US/NATO imperialism went away in the Middle East, like it largely (but not completely) did in Latin America, I do expect that eventually political violence will subside to manageable levels.”
How? by negotiating with ISIS and Taliban for the establishment of a democratic society? It is interesting that you cannot answer that simple question. If US/NATO leaves the Middle East 100% would it deter ISIS, Taliban, Al Qaeda from massacring civilians? Would it be easier for the Afghans, the Iraqis, the Syrians…to self determine their future under the Taliban, or ISIS?
If you are convincing yourself and others that the main problem is the US and other imperialists policies, then you must present a convincing argument that if the US and other imperialists get out of that area leaving it to ISIS, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, the people would have more freedom to decide what they want.
“the political systems of others are none of our business.”
Was it what Belgium, Norway, Netherlands, France…said about Nazi Germany?
Would it be safe for Jordan, Turkey, Kuwait…to agree with your statement when a well armed, well financed group next door has a political system (caliphate) that clearly consists on invading and controlling other sovereign nations?
Nazi Germany was imperialistic, so it became everyone’s problem. That’s kind of my point, if you didn’t notice. It’s easy to condemn and mock the political systems of others, but so long as they aren’t bothering you and you aren’t involved in any way, it’s really not your business, unless you’re Amnesty International or something. Whatever those systems are, subjugating people based on what you think is right can’t possibly be better. Self-determination needs to allowed to flourish. Ultimately, no independent government can survive without substantial support.
“Nazi Germany was imperialistic, so it became everyone’s problem.”
As opposed to ISIS, Boko Haram…that have showed absolutely no interest in spreading their violent ideology beyond their borders. Therefore we should leave them alone.
ISIS does have imperialistic tendencies. That’s pretty clear. But ISIS is an abomination that only exists at the level it does because of the Iraq war, primarily, and because of US-supported efforts to topple Assad in Syria. The way to deal with it would be for the US to forget about its obsession with capturing Syria’s government, first of all. That would diminish the supply of weapons to ISIS. Syria’s Army is who should be fighting ISIS, primarily, and to the extent anyone else wants to help, they should be helping Syria’s government.
lol lol lol…..
Dude you are really a character. So what exactly do you want? You said US, UK, France should leave them alone to allow self determination. Now you are saying somebody should help Syria’s government that crushed peaceful protests, bombed its own citizens thus radicalizing a large sector of the population.
Talking about terrorist organizations targeting and killing innocent civilians, including children, reminds us all of the theocratic Zionist State of Israel. Now, what do you propose we do about that terrorist organization? Send in the drones? If the US stops providing weapons to that apartheid state, would that deter the targeting and killing of more children, Palestinians, Bedouins? Most likely, the killing would lessen. Although no doubt there would continue to be armed squatters who run down 16 year old girls, and then get out of their cars to shoot them.
Apparently you also missed the fact that those armed terrorists in Central America murdered civilians by the tens of thousands, including American nuns. Ever hear of Rigoberta Menchu? She received the Nobel Peace Prize for standing with the indigenous against those American-funded and trained terrorist gangs in Guatemala. No, you know nothing about Central America. You are far too young, as your infantile writing style demonstrates.
You are far too old as your damaged brain demontrates your inability to understand current conflicts.
1) Israel has its own advanced weapon programs, highly educated and experienced engineers in defense industries. How does a lack of US support for a country that produces its own weapons would stop that country in an urban warfare environment?
2) Very interesting that you cannot understand an infantile writing style. That can only mean you are stupid. So again, this is the same question in a more infantile style:
There is a very strong argument that had the US stopped helping the contras there would have been fewer human rights violations and civilian casualties .
Is there also a strong argument that if the US stops ALL support for all goverments, armed groups, militias…in the Middle East that would deter or prevent the Taliban, ISIS, Al Qaeda…from attacking and killing civilians? Simple infantile question.
Hey State dept. Here are some ideas for future embassadors, provided that they are willing:
1. Zinedine Zidane: It’s likely you’ve never heard of him (google him), but almost every Muslim has. In fact when the French Yogurt company Danone was expanding operations to Muslim countries, Zidane was the face of Danone and the French. He is much loved. Young men are in awe of him. He is French Algerian.
2. Muhammad Ali: Now who on earth is not in love with Muhammad Ali. All you have to do in any Muslim country is say “Muhammad Ali” and there’ll be three cheers from everybody (half joking. only half)
3. Yusuf Islam: While many Muslims may not have heard of this Cat Stevens, introducing him to the wider Muslim world will be a great thing, as this man is a great humanitarian product of the west.
and fire that creep who came up with the Hirsi/Ali idea. Send that person back to marketing school. Or fire that PR company. Just wash your hands clean.
missspelled: ambassadors
The well known and admired Zinedine Zidane talked well of France and advises young French to educate themselves and stay away from violence. Yet, hundreds of young French still join terrorist groups. You think ISIS gives a damn about Zidane’s skills on the football field?
By the way why do “they” “hate” the French? Because of the Iraq war that France opposed or because of France’s drones programs? Why would a group of people in Yemen, a country France did not attack, did not strike with drones, decided to plan the killing of French cartoonists in Paris?
What would be ISIS, Taliban, Al Qaeda…reaction when Ali tells them they are not Muslims? Are they going to drop their weapons and allow kids to read American philosophers?
Again “they hate us”. Who are “they”?
Lola, search engines are your friend. Look up Algeria and France.
So, terrorists based in Yemen planned and carried attacks against Charlie Hebdo because of France’s policy in Algeria?
About the one in Sweden in 2010? What Swedish foreign policy would explain why an educated man in a country very lenient to refugees from the Middle East would attempt to kill innocent civilians?
Did somebody call you a dumb ass before?
France is one of the traditional imperial powers, and a Middle East colonialist power. The other traditional imperial powers are the US, the UK, and we can add Russia. The countries that had been bombing Syria the most are the US, Russia and France, in that order.
Sometimes countries that are not imperialist do get attacked (I can think of a couple examples where countries have been caught up in someone else’s fights) but that’s rare.
France, UK, US are rarely attacked by terrorist groups. Terrorists groups have mostly targeted, attacked and killed Afghans, Pakistanis, Nigerians, Lebanese, Iraqis…these are countries that do not have any capability to even think about becoming an imperialist power.
Your logic is completely distorted. So when the Taliban attacks a school, so the kids are just “caught up” in the fight between the US and the Taliban? When Boko Haram destroys a village and enslave the girls, those civilians are just “caught up” in the fight between the US and Boko Haram?
I’m talking about international violence by non-state actors. You’re talking about domestic political violence in Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. International violence is what can be traced back to interventionism, though destabilization of regions can also result in domestic political violence, obviously. There’s science about this sort of thing. See here and here.
“I’m talking about international violence by non-state actors.”
Example:
1) Al Qaeda, non state actor, violence in North Africa, Yemen, India, Europe, ….
Al Qaeda has targeted and killed more citizens from other countries than the US, France and UK
2) Taliban, non state actor, ( when an organization targets and kills citizens in three different countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, then it is an international violence, not domestic case)
Taliban has targeted and killed way more citizens from other countries than the US, UK or France
3) ISIS, non state actor, ( although they consider themselves a state), violence in Syria, Iraq, Europe, Turkey…ISIS has targeted and killed way more citizens from other countries than the US, UK or France
So, again you mean that all those organizations, non state actors that pursue international violence , that rarely attack the US, UK, France, and that spend most of their resources in attacking other countries and killing Muslims just happen to stumble in those other countries that “get caught up” in the fight between them and the imperialist powers?
Your logic: you hate me so much that you kill everybody in your neighborhood while 1) I do not really care about people in your neighborhood as I live 10000 miles away from them 2) People in your neighborhood do not really care about me.
I’m not sure how I can be more clear. What you’re describing are essentially civil wars. And yes, imperialism can also create the conditions for civil wars and instability. Iraq and Libya are undeniable examples. Ukraine is another. Notice that Ukraine has nothing to do with religion, the typical rationalization. When countries outside of the unstable region are specifically targeted, it’s usually countries that are engaged in war already, but their citizens act all shocked and surprised that their adversaries were able to respond.
“I’m not sure how I can be more clear”
You cannot because you do not understand what you are talking about. You want to blame the US, so you distort facts and reality to convince yourself that the US is responsible for whatever conflicts you decide to pick up. Your arguments become illogical and laughable. Greenwald uses that strategy to be provocative and maintain a level of popularity. It has nothing to do with a rational understanding of international conflicts.
“What you’re describing are essentially civil wars.”
When an armed group leaves the country it was founded and start attacking other countries then, it is not a civil war. How ISIS attacking Turkey is a civil war? How Al Qaeda and Taliban attacking India is a civil war? How Syrian/Tunisian nationals trained by ISIS attacking Lebanese on their soil is a civil war? How Boko Haram leaving Nigeria and attacking villagers in Chad, or Cameroon is a civil war?
These are “non state actors” that left the countries in which they were created to attack other countries. Most of them are not even citizens of the countries they attack. So either you do not understand what a civil war is, or you are just completely insane.
You consistently fail to present a basic argument that US foreign policy is responsible for a Taliban fighter getting into a school bus to kill Muslim kids. If the US did not provide any support to the Pakistani government would that policy deter the Taliban from attempting to kill those kids?
Someone can have responsibility for an atrocity without having to pull the trigger, and this is generally recognized. (Sometimes that’s taken to truly ridiculous levels, like when Snowden is blamed for the Paris attacks, which had absolutely nothing to do with avoidance of surveillance.)
So if a country invades another, and there are consequences from the invasion which would not have occurred otherwise, the invader bears much of the responsibility, albeit not necessarily all of it. For example, the invasion of Iraq resulted in about a million excess deaths, which would not have occurred otherwise, per epidemiological studies. Some of those deaths are from heart attacks and such. You might think it’s ridiculous to blame US imperialism for someone’s heart attack. Maybe they didn’t eat right. But I think anyone rational can understand the point.
So, the Taliban who got inside that bus to kill that child did it because the US invaded Afghanistan?
There is no way for you to imagine how stupid and laughable you are.
Pretty sure that you have to be an American to be an American ambassador. That knocks out Zidane (French) and Stevens (British).
Ali gets his food through a feeding tube and can no longer talk.
Sadly yes,the Greatest has lost his voice.They probably poisoned him like Arafat.
I don’t think Lola gives a goddamn about any victims of Muslim terror.Just Zionist yapping points.
There was none of this stuff, from Muslims at least(Zionists),in the 20th century,until the state of Israel was created.
But hey,reality matters little to the Zionists.they make their own,and navel gaze in it.
Okay, if the State Department is truly unable to use non-Americans, then send Jon Stewart. He’ll win a Muslim crowd centuries before Hirsi Ali. Hell, fucking Tom Cruise will be a better choice. Or Schwarzenegger. An amoeba. Hirsi Ali will come to my house, and slap me, as she tells me how I don’t deserve to live in it, as she steals my property.
In fairness, is it even possible for the State Department to do any better? I can’t see how. Any rational Muslim person who is admired in the Muslim world is not going to be in favor of imperialist meddling in the Middle East. There’s a fundamental contradiction in the pursuit of “heart and minds” as part of an imperialist project.
Take Malala Yousafzai — an ideal candidate. She’s a human rights activist, globally admired, and the victim of a Taliban attack. They can’t possibly use her, though, because she’d be the first to explain that US foreign policy drives radicalization.
Is that why the Taliban tried to kill her? Because of US foreign policy?
Didn’t US foreign policy contribute to the creation of the Taliban?
Are you incapable of answering the questions or you just cannot understand it?
Layman term: December 21st 2014, the Taliban killed 132 kids in a school in Pakistan. Is it US foreign policy that pushed those Talibans to enter that school and kill these Muslim kids who have absolutely nothing to do with US foreign policy?
Or maybe in your distorted and irrational view of the Muslim world that you obviously do not understand, “they” “hate us” so much that instead of attacking “us” in Pakistan, they attacked and killed Pakistani kids. Irrational indeed, but again what should one expect from a Greenwald’s supporter!
Poor Lola thinks Pakistan is a state in the U.S.
You will not find Pakistan neither in a North American map nor in Greenwald’s ass where your face is buried.
Ouch!!!
The Taliban and the Pakistani govt have been at it for years with atrocity followed by atrocity.The Govt,with our assistance,have been droning and bombing the Taliban since before 9-11,as they have tribal differences.Which is exactly why I say Yankee come home,it aint our battle,it aint our fight.
The only people who do want US there are the neolibcons and that govt,as it exists on our bribery.
That school bombing was against the military’s families,who attended the school.It was a revenge attack for the military’s own depredation.They have a tribal society,which unfortunately has been going on for centuries .
Nobody can defend the act,but remember it doesn’t happen in a vacuum,its cause and effect.Blowback.
No, not exactly. Political violence and extremism can and does exist outside of the consequences of US foreign policy. But there’s no question that US meddling does exacerbate violence and radicalizes people. This can be demonstrated with data. So while I can’t say for sure that Malala would not have been attacked absent US imperialism, I can make a case that the probability of an attack would’ve been lower.
“So while I can’t say for sure that Malala would not have been attacked absent US imperialism, I can make a case that the probability of an attack would’ve been lower.”
By any means, make your case.
I could make the same case “Oh, Please” made above: The Taliban came out of US efforts to undermine the Soviet Union. But that’s too easy.
We could look at charts on violence in Afghanistan. It’s been on the rise since the US invaded the country and imposed an illegitimate government. But Malala was attacked in Swat, Pakistan.
The Pakistani Taliban gained temporary control of Swat after what’s known as the First Battle of Swat in 2007. Now, why did the Taliban rise as a significant force in Pakistan? From Wikipedia:
To summarize: The US invaded Afghanistan in 2001, and 11 years later Malala was shot.
“Afghanistan. It’s been on the rise since the US invaded the country and imposed an illegitimate government.”
1) Is it the US invasion that causes the violence or the Taliban refusal to get power through elections? Where does most of the violence come? Afghan/international troops targeting civilians or Taliban complete disregard for civilians?
2) What would make an election backed by the United Nations, in which the two top candidates decided to agree on a power sharing government legitimate for you? What would make an elected government supported by traditional tribes, the United Nations, and all countries on Earth legitimate for you? Would a participation of the Taliban who was killing voters make it legitimate to you?
“To summarize: The US invaded Afghanistan in 2001, and 11 years later Malala was shot.”
Yes, as a result of the US invasion of Afghanistan the Taliban targeted a local child for execution. Is there a Nobel Prize for imbecility?
Serious people are getting serious.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2015/12/isis_s_online_radicalization_efforts_present_an_unprecedented_danger.single.html
Thanks for that link. For anyone that did not click on it and read it’s an article that explores the idea of legally censoring ISIS websites and communications, to impede their ability to radicalize Muslim Americans and turn them into jihadi terrorists on American soil.
The article goes on, it seems to me, in favor of “a law that makes it a crime to access websites that glorify, express support for, or provide encouragement for ISIS or support recruitment by ISIS…” while also acknowledging “that it would discourage legitimate ISIS-related research by journalists, academics, private security agencies,” and that such a law would be “unconstitutional because it would interfere with the right of people to receive or read political information.”
In other words this is one of those “on one hand/on the other hand” types of articles.
But the thought I always have after reading any of these articles about people getting “radicalized” online, is that I want to see how it happened, and I want to read what the “radicalizers” said to the “radicalizees” and how the whole thing worked, exactly. I want more information, not less, and primary source materials, not journalists paraphrasing. Shine a little more light, please, not less.
Mondoweiss had an article recently, about how the MSM has just sort of politely elided/glossed over the fact that San Bernardino shooter Syed Farook, was Israel-obsessed. I think that kind of information is fundamental to our understanding of why we are terrorist targets, and our media does us all a great disservice to keep those crucial kinds of facts in abeyance – and continue to keep us in the dark.
http://mondoweiss.net/2015/12/reported-politely-ignores
Of course if I ever tried to visit an ISIS related website to figure out the formula, I’d probably end up on some list. But even that information would only provide a piece of the puzzle. I’m sure the bible has inspired terrorist acts in the past – but not everyone who reads the bible becomes a terrorist.
People are individuals, and complex.
It is very interesting how obvious this censorship roll out/roll over has been. We had industry (google), government (Feinstein), and now law professor Posner, all simultaneously pushing the same message.
This is a concerted effort with all the subtlety of a fisting.
I agree with you that we need more light not less–a lot more–but I do disagree with your characterization of the article as “on one hand/on the other hand”.
There is only one hand at play here.
The article presents both sides (pros and cons) but I will agree it’s weighted towards the “pros” of censorship.
How about they completely ignored the report that the coworker was a messianic Jew who constantly harassed the shooter,and was a rabid Zionist.
Jews for Jesus are not Zionists.If they are,they aint for Jesus.
I read about that. I’ll bet Thalasinos was the only guy in the room that was terminated with extreme prejudice.
This reminds me of the Criterion version of the movie ‘The battle of Algiers’, which includes an extra segment entitled ‘A case study’, involving a round-table interview with Richard Clarke, former counter-terrorism advisor to the White House, and Mike Sheen, former head of counter-terrorism at the State Departement. They’re asked to give their views on the movie in relation to 9/11 and the war on Al-Queda. What’s revealing about it is that at no point do they acknowledge the root causes of terrorism depicted in the film: the French colonial occupation of Algeria, and all of it’s attendant atrocities, brutality, and racism inflicted upon the native population. They are oblivious to it, and instead spend the entirety of the interview discussing ways to combat terrorism, of similarities between the FLN and Al-Queda. At no point do any of them recognize the right of oppressed peoples to resist oppression.
Glen,
Although I agree with many of the things you say your violin will play better music if you explore wider variety and more complexity in your musical score.
In a complex world, or as some refer to it in the scientific field as chaos, it is too easy to see you drawn into being a form writer. Many novelists know that there is an audience for that. I too sometimes just want to pick up a good read to follow the thoughtless pattern. But some of us don’t even begin and finish your articles because they are too predictable.
What I think Glenn is doing here is very methodically laying out the case that Donald Trump is not an anomaly, or the logical conclusion of our policies, but Trump is our policy.
Now all of this may be obvious to you, but ‘obvious to you’ doesn’t actually count as logical argument or moral persuasion–which should be obvious to you.
Some recent Donald Trump quotes:
and:
Trump has said all kinds of things. Many of them contradictory. Like anyone else I will agree with some things he says and disagree with others.
Here is the thing: I don’t consider Trump sincere in his public opinions so it is kind of like a million monkeys typing–I might agree with them sometimes–but there is very little point in quoting them.
Understand, just because I don’t consider Trump publicly sincere, doesn’t mean I am saying he won’t implement his bullshit if elected. He will.
With that said, I do understand your point and I should have said “Trump the Monster”–meaning Trump the media creation–as opposed to just Trump. Although, I’m not even sure if even The Donald knows where one ends and one begins anymore.
I know. I didn’t quote him to endorse him – he’s just such an incredible gadfly, which I hope turns out to be the silver lining.
All true statements,and all more than any other major candidate,who have no true statements.
So true. The NYT and Fox offer quality and unpredictable journalism analogous to the likes of Schoenberg, Webern, and Berg.
Maybe you could enlighten us with a few examples?
Getting to the point with concision is so boring, and just won’t do for the discerning palates of America’s academically pedigreed.
US propagandists work under the assumption that everyone in the world is as dumb and malleable as themselves, and the American Voters they are able to manipulate with such ease. Of course some are, but not nearly enough to win any of their perpetual wars in Asia.
Why are ‘hearts and minds’ the last things thought of? Why is violence always the first thing thought of; when food and medical care would be so welcomed? Innocent blood roils around our ankles w/the remnants of our Constitution. I’m deeply ashamed of the land of my birth and will go to my grave happy that I leave no grandchildren behind. Remember Michael Hastings? He among other truth seekers was assassinated. I does no good to deny the truth. The truth never changes.
It’s incredible! I wonder if such huge plunders by the State Dep’t are caused by ignorance. Or is it more plausible these “ill-advised” campaigns are the fruits of twisted minds with ulterior political, commercial … motives?
I used to support Ayaan Hirsi Ali when she’s living here in the Netherlands. However, the flood of alarmist and extremist diatribes she’s been regularly spewing finally made me see her for what she truly is: a gold-digger, devoid of any moral principles. She consistently hijacks highly charged issues, sells her conscience to the highest bidder, repeatedly and unblushingly says what they want to hear and moves on when greener pastures appear at her door. A few of her former Dutch friends have recently lamented: When she moved to the US we asked her not to forget us; we’re just joking and didn’t expect she would discard us… but she actually did!
In the Netherlands, she used to promptly appear on TV whenever negative stories surfaced about groups belonging to her roots, e.g. Somalis, refugees, Moslims. She then always vilified those groups en bloc by asserting that the problems are widespread in these quarters… without ever providing concrete evidence or sound arguments other than platitudes such as “I belong to these demographics and I know what I’m talking about”! Most programmes got so tired of her nonsense that they stopped inviting her…
She’s recently been trying to apply her dodgy methodology to discredit the Black Lives Matter movement. For example: “The best place to be black in the world is here [USA]. I cannot imagine what it is like to be a black man… in even where the majority of people are black, like Africa.”! ( http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/05/ayaan-to-liberals-get-your-priorities-straight.html ). Generations of African-Americans are being criminalized and even decimated and AHA is only interested in them ONLY to pander to her current masters – the neocons and New Atheists, i.e. the new white supermacists…!!! Utterly unconscionable! !
Is the Lantos prize not named after Tom Lantos..the guy who organized the senate hearings around Nayirah and the incubator babies scandal to convince Americans to invade Kuwait.
Glenn,
Great article as usual. Do you think you could embed a link to the original Reason article that you cited? I think they deserve the same kind of embedding that is afforded to other online outlets.
Here is the original link if you need it:
https://reason.com/archives/2007/10/10/the-trouble-is-the-west
The post lightly edited to include facts and data from the report :
Mr. [Rumsfeld and the Defense Science Board Task Force]
How many Muslims must political Islam kill for you to quit promoting the same far left propaganda and lies? – CraigSummers
American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists, while diminishing support for the United States to single-digits in some Arab societies.
– Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force, Department of Defense, 2004
You cannot repeat the same lies over and over and expect it to become the truth. . . It isn’t the bombing, the invasions or support for Israel which drives radical political Islam. – CraigSummers
“Muslims do not “hate our freedom,” but rather, they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the longstanding, even increasing support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, and the Gulf states. . .
Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering. “
– Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force, Department of Defense, 2004
The facts do not support your propaganda. – CraigSummers
“A year and a half after going to war in Iraq, Arab/Muslim anger has intensified. Data from Zogby International in July 2004, for example, show that the U.S. is viewed unfavorably by overwhelming majorities in Egypt (98 percent), Saudi Arabia (94 percent), Morocco (88 percent), and Jordan (78 percent). The war has increased mistrust of America in Europe, weakened support for the war on terrorism, and undermined U.S. credibility worldwide.”
– Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force, Department of Defense, 2004
[Islamic terrorism] has nothing to do with the policies of the US and Israel. Nothing. – CraigSummers
“Yet the world of Islam — by overwhelming majorities at this time — sees things differently. Muslims see American policies as inimical to their values, American rhetoric about freedom and democracy as hypocritical, and American actions as deeply threatening. . .
U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self- determination. . .
In other words, they do not hate us for our values, but because of our policies.”
– Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force, Department of Defense, 2004
Only CraigSummers (*and Jeb Bush) can make Donald Trump look good.
*CNN debate last night derailed after Jeb Bush accused Donald Trump of getting his foreign policy from Sat. morning cartoon shows… when Trump clearly indicated it was from the Sun. morning news shows.
On with the show, this is it … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-t8PngHgWY
Nicely done, Doc. I lacked the patience for that project but am glad you did not.
My pleasure, Mona; thank you.
I think DocHollywood should be banned here for “crapflooding” . He/She does not “contribute” anything to the comment section. He/she just repeats what Craig says without any substance. I am sure Mona who get people banned here for calling her dumb ass and who consistently asks for LouiseCypher to be banned because she “does not contribute” anything would agree with him. Would she?
That’s nice. The weather here in Midwest U.S. is incredibly balmy for December. How’s it by you?
The laugh brought by your stupidity is enough to clear the melancholy attached to our cloudy sky.
Ouch!
Glenn, that page that pushes the same Syrian regime change mantra, probably is recruiting more to fight in Syria than it is even ineffective in stopping recruitment. And how does a picture of a U.S. government seal and powerful looking building generate a symbolism of anything other than a monolithic opponent of self rule in the region? How can our leadership be so tone deaf to what it will take to bring peace and reconciliation? Maybe stirring the pot is the real objective, since war industries have never been more profitable than when conflict is at a feverish pitch.
It used to be “bring civilisation to the savages”, now it’s “bring freedom and democracy”. Plus ca change – same as any empire of old, mixing racism and plunder.
that image is cringe worthy…whitey going out to save the savages while screwing them out of their land and resources…ya know like they did to the native americans…it some kind of perversion…where these people can claim virtue and superiority while ordering their armies to massacre large populations and plunder their lands.
State Department Has No Regrets About Highlighting An Anti-Islam Activist
“It’s understood always that any tweet or Facebook post or anything else we do potentially can make someone unhappy,” a State Department official told BuzzFeed News.
posted on Dec. 15, 2015, at 4:25 p.m.
Hayes Brown
BuzzFeed News World Editor
http://www.buzzfeed.com/hayesbrown/state-department-has-no-regrets-about-highlighting-an-anti-i#.nvJ5NnMA4
Mr. Greenwald
“……How do you convince the people [Muslims] of that region to like you when you’ve spent decades bombing, invading, and droning them; arming and propping up the tyrants who suppress them; lavishing Israel with the weapons, money, and U.N. cover used to occupy and brutalize Palestinians; and just generally treating their countries like your own private plaything for war and profit?……As a 2004 Rumsfeld-commissioned study about the causes of Terrorism put it: “Muslims do not ‘hate our freedom,’ but rather, they hate our policies,” in particular, “American direct intervention in the Muslim world,” our “one-sided support in favor of Israel,” support for Islamic tyrannies in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and “the American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.”…..”
You cannot repeat the same lies over and over and expect it to become the truth just like you cannot ignore continued Islamic terrorist attacks targeting and killing innocent people (world-wide) while attempting to divert attention from the root causes of Islamic terrorism. The facts do not support your propaganda. And it is remarkably tactless that you criticize a woman sentenced to death by radical Islam for speaking the truth:
“…..In 2005, Hirsi Ali was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.[5] She has also received several awards, including a free speech award from the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten,[6] the Swedish Liberal Party’s Democracy Prize,[7] and the Moral Courage Award for commitment to conflict resolution, ethics, and world citizenship.[8]…..”
What is your next article? Criticism of the outspoken Malala Yousafzai. Of course the real reason for the hateful rhetoric directed at Ali by the radical left is because she does not buy into your lies quoted above. She actually holds radical militant Islam responsible for killing innocent people – mostly Muslims. It isn’t the bombing, the invasions or support for Israel which drives radical political Islam. It is the thirst for power, the return of the Caliphate and the subjugation of Muslims in an anti-Democratic, racist society. How many Muslims must political Islam kill for you to quit promoting the same far left propaganda and lies?
According to Wikipedia:
“…..In Saudi Arabia, several attacks against Shia Muslim Minority were reported, however, suicide explosion in Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib Mosque is one of the deadliest attack.[5] Reportedly 150 people were present in the mosque for Friday prayers. The mosque suicide attack killed 13 people.[13] This kind of suicide attack has been seen many times in Pakistan, Iraq and other Muslim countries….”
Throwing acid in the faces of little girls going to school, bombing Shia Mosques and attempting to commit genocide on the Yazidis has nothing to do with the policies of the US and Israel. Nothing.
By the way, the state operated New York Times published a story this morning
“……WASHINGTON — A Maryland man received at least $8,700 from Islamic State operatives overseas and planned to use the money to launch an attack in the United States as part of a pledge of loyalty to the militant group, prosecutors said on Monday…….The suspect, Mohamed Elshinawy, 30, who lives outside Baltimore and was born in Egypt, was arrested on Friday after a five-month F.B.I.investigation that included tracking of his finances and online communications………In the past two years, prosecutors have brought cases against more than 75 people in the United States over accusations that they supported the Islamic State or other militant groups……”
Obviously another one of those “hapless”, non integrated Muslims. We should have reached out. …..
Hi Craig. Did you know that Israel’s military has used Palestinian civilians, including children, as human shields during combat more than 200 times? Did you know that Israel’s Supreme Court has ordered the IDF to stop this but it won’t, and did it again the summer of 2014?
And Craig, what I wrote above is as responsive to Glenn’s article as what you wrote is.
Typo! When I wrote: “more than 200 times,” I meant 1200.
Did you know that, Craig? Do you suppose this just might annoy Arabs and other Muslims a tad? Do you suppose they are grateful the United States arms Israel to the teeth so it can commit these atrocities? Do you think all that, Craig?
Source please
Look up “Human Shield” on Wikipedia. Then skim down to “Israeli Palestinian Conflict.” Sources are numerous but include Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
In 2005, Israel’s High Court of Justice banned the practice (of using Palestinians as human shields) with the Israeli Defense Ministry appealing the decision (though there is evidence the IDF has continued the practice through 2014, in wars in Gaza).
It’s too long to cut and paste the whole thing, but for starters:
That’s just the first 2 paragraphs. It goes on.
And did you feel the Palestinians hate you to the point of killing you when you visited the West Bank?
Is that why ISIS kills Muslims? Because US supports Israel?
So, the Taliban goes into schools kills Muslim kids because of the Taliban hates US policies in Israel or Afghanistan?
So, if tomorrow morning the USA and all NATO countries pulled 100% of their troops from the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Stop ALL military support to countries in the Middle East. Then ISIS, Al Qaeda, Taliban…will stop killing Muslims? The kids in Peshawar, Kandahar would be safe going to school? Cartoonists in Europe would be safe? Is that your argument?
You have straw coming out of your ears, Lola! Been kissing too many strawmen I fear.
I would kiss the strawmen on their cheeks as opposed to you who kiss Greenwald on his ass. ouch!!
Greenwald’s ass is as mired in logic as the rest of him. Too bad about all your strawmen.
I can tell you pick up your worthless arguments right from his ass. I doubt you have even noticed how impregnated of Greenwald’s shit you are. A skunk would run away from you.
Ouch!!
ISUS does our bidding,despite MSM bloviation and propaganda.They are our tool to right the Iraq debacle by carving out a Sunnistan at the regions Shia expense.After murdering millions,we now murder more like a black marker slashing through another million or so dead.
We are absolutely evil and will pay,for years,for our criminal exercise in Israeli security and expansion.
The only way out is withdrawal,make the
Zionists negotiate,and end this terrible assault on humanity and reason.
But the Zionists who control US,will do anything and everything to stop that logical American response to neolibcon madness.
The idea that our foreign policy drives Muslims to kill other Muslims is so ridiculous Mona that I find it difficult to even respond. Greenwald still quotes that old study by the Rumsfield Commission. The far left clings to that study as if it is the God given truth.
Of course radical Islam hates our freedoms. Did you not notice the Charlie Hebdo slaughter, or that the often protected Awlaki put a fatwa out on the Seattle Cartoonist (notice how the radical left defends freedom of speech in the case of Awlaki, but not for Ali – for political reasons). Radical Islam couldn’t possibly detest our freedoms any more.
Finally, Israel has nothing to do with the surge of anti-democratic political Islam except as a point of propaganda used by Islamists and radical leftists in support of the goals of radical Islam.
source please
A Maryland man received at least $8,700 from Islamic State operatives …who happened to be informants working for the FBI….and no doubt the suspect could not have gotten anywhere near that level of involvement without the coaxing of the FBI. Entrapment is what the FBI do best.
And btw, Malala Yousafzai may be the poster girl of Empire in the West but in Pakistan she is seen by a great portion of the population (not the corrupt elites) as propaganda machine of capitalist democracy.
Yea. That is a great reason to execute her, right? It is nice to see the radical left supporting the right of the Taliban to execute 15 year old girl for supporting women’s rights in Pakistan.
Thanks.
Craig: I see you have a penchant for putting words in other people’s mouth. No one has the right to violence and I did not suggest that they did. But at the same time, every day people who are not white, middle class and predominantly Western die unjustly because of liberal regime agendas yet they are not given the same consideration because they do not constitute ‘humanity’. The people of FATA have had many of their 15 year old children and far younger murdered by the Pakistan Army and US drone strikes. Of course, because the Western media are not privy to such things, horror and brutality becomes a selective discourse afforded only to liberal regimes…..
Our real policy is quite different from the policies that are publicly proclaimed. What is happening is quite in line with our real policy. Who cares if the terrorists (good and bad) like it or not?
El DDDDDUCCE……El DUu-cce……elducee……eldu…..c……
WWWWHHHHATTTTABBOUTTTERRRRRRYYYYYYYYY……..WWWWHHHHATTTTABBOUTTTERRRRRRYYYYYYYYYRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTTUUUOOBBBBAAATTTTT-T-T-T-T-HHHHHHWWWWWWWW……wwwwWWHHHATTtttaaaabbbbBBBBbbbooouuuttterraboutterry,….bbouuttterryyy….
The place is a little overdesigned, but I like that, with it moved off the high roads and into the distance, all the window shoppers aren’t crowding up to peer at the offerings. With vastly fewer members, it’s easier to create a little echo.
OK, that’s it. I’m going back to The Three Amigos. You people bore the shit out of me.
Ever the establishment naif, Glenn is operating from the assumption that the Obama/Soetoro administration, and those who manage him, want to weaken ISIS rather than supply it.
Obama is probably naive as to how his government operates, frankly. But it’s true, US imperial planners probably couldn’t care less if ISIS is weakened or not. What they really care about is weakening Syria, Russia, Iran — anyone with some measure of independence.
“Obama is probably naive as to how his government operates.”
I’m guessing he’s come up to speed a wee bit since day one, and been scared shit-less ever since, which could explain why he is so keen to follow orders and so brazenly lie to the public domain.
But yeah, like Pot Pot, IS is another quality US ally. It doesn’t make sense for the USG, CNN, Fox and NYT to scream about killing them but logical geo-strategy was never their game. Kleptomaniacal pathology related to Syria, Russia, and Iran’s independence, and making money out of the never-ending bloodletting has always been the game.
You got it man. Glenn is a pathetic, servile, subservient, establishment hack.
Now let’s talk about how awesome Alex Jones is and about UN Black Helicopters, poised to take over the world. Or the fluoride in the water that keeps the citizens tame.
” As a result, trying to change Muslim perceptions of the U.S. without changing U.S. policies of imperialism and militarism is the ultimate act of futility. ”
Unfortunately, humans will lay eggs; chicken will breastfeed their young; and Hirsi’s mutilated part will return as a giant appendage before they grasp that fact.
Ayan Hirsi Ali as a messenger/ambassador to Muslims, means one of two things, and only one of two things:
Either
1. Somebody at the State Dept is a comedic genius
or
2. The State Dept simply has no grasp of the situation.
or
3. The State Dept. has no intention of actually reducing tensions with Muslims, because bombing their home countries has been so profitable for the MIC and so popular with a large percentage of American voters that doing so would be undesirable.
And only a relative handful of American lives have ever been lost or at risk during the long campaign, so there is effectively no antiwar movement.
“We are going to cauldronize the Middle East!”
Michael Ledeen, PNAC, ~2002
Jesus!!!
“One can only hope that we turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today.”
Michael Ledeen, National Review Online, August 6, 2002.
We ain’t seen nothing yet. When the Prez.#25 is in the House, we’ll see the true colors of her vision for the new American Hegemony Plan. Damn, why are these people of color sitting on our oil deposits?
I guess if you can make a multi-billion dollar business by selling water, sugar, acid and some color (Coke and Pepsi) then anything is possible
Each of those ingredients individually are billion dollar businesses, so you’re not saying much
But it’s the cinnamon in Coke that you can’t forget.
This article articulates several points that are straight bull’s eye hitters.
” How do you convince the people of that region to like you when you’ve spent decades bombing, invading, and droning them; arming and propping up the tyrants who suppress them; …”
You do not.
As long as the arrogance born out of a a misguided sense of omniscience and a false superiority on all aspects of human existence continues to drive the U S foreign policy, they will continue to make the fatal assumption that others of a lesser race elsewhere, a lower religion, an inferior culture and more, must possess inferior abilities to know what is good for them, and to discern the true intentions of the U S .
This political myopia has led to their failures in many a part of the world time after time.
It has depleted the goodwill reserves of billions around the world. It has cast a perpetual shadow of distrust in anything America does. And had stripped all words she utters of all worth and value. Especially in matters of moral leadership.
But they insist on playing it still – the winning hearts and minds game.
Because the alternative – looking themselves in the mirror – is simply
unacceptable.
Maybe they are more afraid of what the mirror might show them…
Gotta go with the intentional, not inept bunch on this one.
We’re air dropping ammunition to al Qaida in Syria and our “allies” support ISIS… and official denials about it all are seemingly effective on the masses.
And Bernie wants the Saudis to play a bigger role in the ME.
It’s sort of a Celtic knot pattern.
State Department should get Salman Rushdie to do a book reading in the rubble of Aleppo, win those hearts and minds.
Puzzled that she would like to convert to Judaism; I should have thought she would be allergic to any group that practices genital mutilation.
She loves Barbara Streisand and bagels. And shooting Palestinians.
She subsequently said she wasn’t going to convert after all. She prolly was just pandering to the Israeli counsel. Which is really worse.
Well, I’m not sure they’re going to care all that much at the end of the day. I hear they’re not all that keen on the dark skinned Jews.
And what kind of atheist is interested in conversion? I thought she had renounced religion. I saw a picture of her next to “will pander and demagogue for money.”
If you have to put the word “female” in front of “genital mutilation” then you have serious issues.
There is an extensive literature that shows that they are both mutilations usually inflicted on non-consenual victims.
“non-consenting” victims
I agree. How fucked up do you have to be to qualify criticism of non-consensual genital mutilation–especially by gender.
The term “female genital mutilation” is a moral embarrassment.
The Danes have done a medical review that strongly connects neonatal MGM to subsequent autism and other neurological disorders in in boys. Google it.
That sounds unlikely. Although I guess anything is possible, and it does explain the idea of thinking with your cock.
Opposing genital mutilation doesn’t require a scientific study–it only requires not wanting to mutilate the genitals of children in some insane rape/castration/de-slutifying ritual.
Who exactly “hate us”? Does anybody who live or visit Egypt, Dubai, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Tunisia, Algeria…feel that these people hate you to the point they would want to kill you? Why so many Westerners live peacefully in those countries if they “hate us” that much? How come they “hate us” that much, but an average American, European is way safer in Qatar, Bahrain…than he/she would be in US inner cities?
Last time I checked those Muslims who hate Westerners to the point of killing them actually target and kill more Muslims than Westerners.
So who exactly “hate us”. So, the Taliban kill Pakistani Shias because they hate US policies? ISIS kill Yazidis because of US policies?
If you love to mention that so called report, then you have to elaborate on it. I am not sure how relevant it is that ISIS or Al Qaeda hate us. Those groups hate everybody. You have a well documented record of bashing US policies. Do you believe ISIS does not hate you?
I think you are a nation of dullard moronic self-serving turds incapable of embracing any truly socially conscious and caring policies living in a nation that is far far far more than the sum of its unimpressive parts.
But I guess “Hate” would mean I care. The closest emotion that comes to mind therefore is that I want to “flush” you. Or “dry you out and use you as fertiliser”, like they do in New York. They sell dried human poo poo to farmers there and have huge vats of gas that can fart. Amazing!
Most people in the world – the billions of poor – don’t even know where or what America is and so couldn’t give less of a shit about you. But where I live in Thailand, they are currently very insulted and upset by you because out of nowhere you appeared and insulted their royal family and their culture and threatened their sovreignety by trying to get them to join the TPP and by doing deals with their hated former PM.
So yes, people do hate you, it is just they tend not to intimidate you or murder you out of being polite and decent human beings, unlike your president, government and military, who are murdering scumbags, and Donald Trump, who is a bigotted insufferable shit.
They sell dried human poo poo to farmers there and have huge vats of gas that can fart.
Best description of the US political process I’ve seen yet.
p.s. If that’s you up above with the soft pubes and stained undies, just wanted to say your name choices are, um, entertaining. ;-}
A lot of words to conclude that
“I am an just an ignorant who follows Greenwald.”
ISIS hate us because of US policies, but they target and kill more Muslims than any Westerners. Yes, I hate you so much that I am going to kill my peaceful neighbor who does not even know who I am!
A doughy English chom loves living under military rule with the constitution suspended and praises the greatness of Thailand.
You are unbelievable.
Fuck the king and his little dog too.
The hard man who stopped the IRA single handedly, does not have the courage to call it like it is, by Jove. Corruption drugs and paedophillia thrive in a country where westerners have slaves. But dont call the king a fuck or disparage his dog.
Just download the royal party video from Wikileaks sunshine and see what happens to you in paradise.
http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern-day-slavery-in-focus+world/thailand
One night in Bangkok
I don’t see you guys rating
The kind of mate I’m contemplating
I’d let you watch I would invite you
But the queens we use would not excite you
So you’d better go back to your bars
your temples
your massage parlours
One night in Bankok and the worlds’s your oyster
The bars are temples but the pearls ain’t free
You’ll find a god in every golden cloister
A little flesh a little history
I can feel an angel sliding up to me
One night in Bankok makes a hard man humble
Not much between despair and ecstasy
One night in Bankok an the tough guys tumble
Can’t bee to careful with your comapny
I can feel a devil walking next to me
Yes, I am sure the Thai hate us so much that they do whatever they can to attract us to visit and even to stay in their country. Are all of you here that stupid? According to your distorted irrational view the Egyptians, the Kuwaitis…the Thai..hate us to a point that they welcome us with the upmost hospitality in their living room and they make sure we come back again.
There is nothing wrong in admtting that you are an ignorant incapable of deciphering who exactly hate us.
There are no bigoted Thais?None?A nation of saints?
The kind of utterly inept, fatuously cowardly police state tactics the U.S. uses is likely to create an insurgency in America, let alone Iraq. I mean, what do you make of this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/16/us/los-angeles-schools-bomb-threat.html?_r=0
Somebody in Germany emailed the right bureaucrat at the LA schools, and managed to uproot the lives of all the parents in a massive city using claims like he had “32 jihadists” and “nerve gas”. Students were actually being sent back home who had arrived at school… but just to be careful, they required parents to show their ID cards to pick up kids, because like, you know, how could a kid recognize his parents without an ID card?
What can you do to fix that kind of stupid? The land of people who don’t even hope they could select a competent official, or even call someone like this to account. The land of cringing cowards so pathetic that one smurf with a water pistol could take a million of them hostage and make them drop all their guns and kick them over and handcuff each other and then start strangling each other to death, if only he asked. I mean… stupid. Yeah, I know America’s most competent people are in the business of tracking down Internet trolls, so the guy probably has his goose cooked, but maybe there’s just a little room for hope that he can hide behind proxies, keep messaging school after school, day after day, week after week, month after month, until the entire American educational system permanently shuts down operations because someone might send them something a dumb email. What would be lost – could the lack of education lower the collective IQ by even a point?
“. . . they required parents to show their ID cards to pick up kids, because like, you know, how could a kid recognize his parents without an ID card?”
It is routine, all over the country, for school staff to require ID from parents they don’t personally recognize, or written authorization from parents for other individuals to pick up students. Happens every single day.
And not such a terrible idea, IMHO. Students would certainly recognize, and might willingly leave with, a non-custodial parent subject to a restraining order for domestic violence . . . just for instance.
I used to be a troubleshooter for businesses and EVERY case I ever attended to was deliberately caused as a smokescreen for something else, be it fraud or tax evasion or hiding illegal operations or laundering illegal money or hiding illegal workers or through lack of investment or an attempt to hide strategic activities from the existing customer base or through cost-cutting or hiding true costs from customers or to bamboozle and stall auditors and ombudsmen or just through favouring one function that paid commissions and earned brownie points like sales over another equally important but less glamorous one seen as a cost centre like logistics…
I would investigate the problem, draw up recommendations, present them to the board, and then get verbally attacked by the very people who had hired me to fix the very problems they were all too aware of because they had caused them their very self. They even expected me to be upset and afraid, and when I wasn’t they would ask why, and I would tell them, “because you are paying me to be here”. Then I’d hand over my report and sod off elsewhere, job completed.
It is thus very difficult to fix any kind of Stupid when those responsible for the Stupid remain in charge; even when they’ve hired someone to supposedly fix it all.
It’s a strange world, particularly whenever money is involved. As we say in England: there’s nowt queer as folk.
We excel at hysteria, mainly. The people do, anyway. It’s why we’re so beloved by both our military and our political class (distinction not always so clear, I admit).
Glenn, they are NOT interested in changing hearts or minds and neither are their Muslim allies the Saudis and Turks. I think we are seeing a concerted effort to dismantle traditional Islamic beliefs – be they Sunni, Shiite or other – and create a new version of Islam modeled on the Wahhabi modernist interpretation.
The Saudi Arabians, the very keepers of the heartland of Islam, are themselves destroying traditional sites associated with the historic events of their very own faith, immune it seems from criticism from within the faith and among the faithful and without.
This seems a risky and strange thing to do, but Mecca is a glitzy and showy concrete and glass affair lacking any substantial monuments to the Islamic past – the current Kaaba is a 400 year old Ottoman renovation.
But though Islam is intimately linked with the Arabs of the Middle East, the vast majority of Muslims live far away not only in distance but also culturally, in places like India, Pakistan, Indonesia, SE Asia, and in Africa. Controlling the Hajj and the holy cities and places gives the Saudis huge control over the form the faith takes, and they are forming it in their own image, rather than harking back to history.
I think the Saudis fear a secularisation of the Islamic world and a falling away from the faith as has happened rapidly over the last century with Christianity in the West, particularly Europe – hence the election of the first South American Pope.
The Saudis see themselves as chosen and special, and this aura is maintained best by them controlling and shaping Islam to their needs and they are more than aware that no other group of Muslims is in any position to question or oppose that approach. This, coupled with their huge oil wealth and their alliance with the USA has given them a total free hand to pursue whatever long-term strategies they want, and we are seeing that as we progress into the 21st Century the Saudis are becoming more openly ambitious and active in their strategic, political, economic, religious and military operations.
It appears that As’ad AbuKhalil scooped you with this story, Glenn!
Glenn…
support for Islamic tyrannies in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia;
Egypt is not an Islamic tyranny. The dictators US supports and supported in Egypt are more secular than islamic. Similarly Kuwaiti, UAE, Bahrini and Qatari monarchs are far less Islamic than say the Saudis. They do dress up in the Arab native dresses but allow some kind of religious freedom compared to Saudis.
The Hashemite monarchy in Jordan is some steps above, as the King Abdullah only dresses in Bedouin cloths for certain occasions.
It is foolish for the US to try to convince the “Muslims” in the middle east. IMHO, policy changes will not give the needed changes as we have reached a point of little return.
There is enough contradictions among the different countries, sects inside Islam that they will continue fighting even if the “US and the West” leave and have fought long before the West “conquered and suppressd” them. Agreed the West has made the situation worse by siding with bad guys of every stripe, but “Hearts and Minds initiative” is fool hardy. Islam needs a reformation in the middle east wherein the political islam should be made effete. Christianity went through a costly war period which ended up with Renaissance and the Church was defanged of its political power.
The greatest irony is that there is only 1 group in the Middle East where both the populace and their leadership are pro-US. Those are the Kurds. But if we favor them, it upsets Turkey greatly and hence we do not do that.
I do not support Ayan in her wild claims like giving Bibi the Nobel Peace Prize. Heck! She is even married to a neo-con Niall Ferguson. Hope that the State Department is not paying her with our tax dollars.
But, do you think that she did not go through problems due to strict Islam and had come out of it? Should she not, be atleast somewhat inspiring to women victimized by political Islam? Her friend and movie director Theo Van Gogh murdered by bullets, purposefully decapitated with a note left by the killer specifically addressed to her and the various threats to her, she being a parliament member, she was given special security. Are you surprised that she even grew more angry with Islam? And in 2006 literally due to the security provided to her by the Dutch governement (which is expensive), her neighbours complained that she is bringing “unneccessary security risk to the neighbourhood” and she was ordered to leave that place by a judge.
In 2007, I would not even be surprised with the kind of interview she gave in the Reason magazine.
For someone who purposes himself as to understand why a Cleric, who was chosen by the Defense department to show case moderate Islam after September 11 2001, radicalized after Iraq war and war on muslims, became an inspirer and spokesman for attacks against the US, I would be happy if you grant the same level of courtesy/understanding for Ayan…
“Egypt is not an Islamic tyranny.”
That’s true. It’s just a junta-ruled tyranny, to which the US currently gives about $1.5 billion annually, in which the tyrannized are overwhelmingly Muslims. Not to mention the fact that we supported the junta’s coup that overthrew the elected government.
I just wanted Glenn who is normally accurate to properly interpret the Rumsfeld era report which just said “…even increasing support for what Muslims see as tyrannies..” rather than “support for Islamic tyrannies in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia” as Glenn said.
Of all dictatorships in the Gulf, only Saudi Arabia comes close to an Islamic Tyranny. And muslims are not tyrannized by Sisi. Islamic brotherhood and their supporters definetly are. This also includes the TV channels that were closer to Morsi and team. And the US continued to give the billion dollars in aid even when Morsi was the PM and even invited him to the White House.
US did not mind the Islamists and even encouraged them so as to fight the “Godless Communists”. So perhaps you suggest US needs to do that so as to not upset their sensibilities ;-) .
That makes no sense. Glenn does not extend “courtesy/understanding” to Alwaki. What he does is insist — properly — that this U.S. citizen had a right to due process of law before the government assassinated him, and to free speech protections.
Hirsi Ali is not in danger from the U.S. government and has not had her free speech rights denied. Glenn is criticizing her horrible speech, but would absolutely defend her right to say those things.
Your entire point is fallacious.
Mona,
Do a favor. Read about Ayaan Hirshi Ali and know why she left Netherlands and came to the US. This is a good place to start
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaan_Hirsi_Ali
esspecially the paragraph titled “Film with Vangogh” …
After that please read my argument carefully. Glenn quoted a 2007 interview that Iyan made some really angry statements against “All muslims”. At that time, she did have a damocles sword hanging on her head from Islamists. (For whatever reasons, the muslim community in NL did not condemn them in a way they condemn the Paris attacks in 2015 for example. ). So from her statement, I can see how she feels about both Islamists and Muslims clouded by the experience. The same way Glenn “understands but not supports” Maj Nidal Hassan, Abdul Shahzad and Awlaki, who have committed/attempted/encouraged to commit far greater crimes than Ayaan did.
Yes, Ayaan went overboard on Muslims or more specifically “Middle eastern muslims”. But that is heavily influenced by her life experiences with them.
Here is an interview she did with Irshad Maanji on Fareed Zakharia GPS in 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVeiT0DHej0
This is after being a member of the neo-conservative AEI for many years.
And this is in America, were we can far easily paint muslims with a broad brush as there is Freedom of Speech and we can literally talk trash about Muslims like Geller/Trump/any right wing pundit does. I feel that the reason she has “toned down” her statements is because she has less of a fear of some Islamist beheading her in the US rather than in Europe and she can be “reasonable” even if she still holds opposition to the system.
And BTW, the largest muslim country in the world is Indonesia, 2nd largest muslim population is in India. Neither of which pose the level of threat to the “West”. And I have not seen Ayaan call them out. She is worried about the political islam with Wahabi/Salafi overtones that forms a shadow over the Islamic landscape.
BTW to the same Wahabis/neobandhis/salafis, Sufi (a very good natured moderate Islamic faith) is also haram…They even target Shia’s and Shia Mosques. [Google how many Shias and Shai Mosques are targetted in Pakistan despite it being a “Muslim” country].
Your special pleading for Hirsi Ali is most unpleasant. She’s an adult and responsible for her words and actions, including her choice of employer.
In any event, your invocation of Glenn’s work on Alwaki is inapposite for the reasons I stated.
For someone who purposes himself as to understand why a Cleric, who was chosen by the Defense department to show case moderate Islam after September 11 2001, radicalized after Iraq war and war on muslims, became an inspirer and spokesman for attacks against the US, I would be happy if you grant the same level of courtesy/understanding for Ayan…
Whatever one might think about Ms. Hirsi Ali’s personal saga, there is nothing in it that should elevate her critique of Islam above criticism itself. Especially when those beliefs have been shown by the US’s own study to be destructive to the battle to ingratiate the US to Muslims. Under such circumstances, one would be negligent, it would seem, to not wish to examine why the US would seek her out as a spokesperson at all. She is not an ambassador for peace. Quite the contrary, she is an ambassador for a scorched earth policy of eradication.
Exactly what Doug Salzmann said. I understand that terminology is important, but Glenn is trying to say “majority Muslim countries with tyrannical governments,” as opposed to “Islamic tyranny”
And in case you’re interested in expanding your knowledge about Ayan, here is an exhaustive piece by Max Blumenthal:
http://www.alternet.org/media/anti-islam-author-ayaan-hirsi-alis-latest-deception
It might yet open your eyes to her politics.
I normally am with Glenn most of the time and I always find him being pretty accurate and focussed to the point both on Print as well as the TV interviews when the establishment [liberal/conservative/extreme center] throw all they have at him. But I think he got carried over by the fact that Ayaan was selected ;)
Interesting.
I agree that she has told tall tales about her life story to get the needed attention for immigration. A lot of people tell these things to get sympathy from the European and Canadian governments to qualify as a “Refugee”. A lot of Sikhs did when there was insurgency in the Indian state of Punjab in the 80s.
Heck I know quite a number of jewish friends from the former Soviet republics who emigrated to the US stating that their “Religious freedoms were blocked and hence not free” and got an easy entry into this country.
But the Van Gogh incident is true and she was targeted for it and had to live under security for 3 yrs.
However, I find the whole “Hearts and Mind” things heavily over rated and it will not succeed as it looks like it is mainly a PR exercise.
OK, so while we’re at it let’s piss off the Muslim world more than we already have. Propaganda is used to promote action, to inspire folks to get up and do something. The problem is the propaganda promoter can’t actually believe the message. So using someone that believes in,( the war against Islam), defeats the purpose. Find someone that believes, and then DON’T use that person. Find a nice person of faith to introduce a more positive message of tolerance. Then scrap all the hegemonic policy that got all this shit and unrest started. Oil will eventually be less of an incentive to dominate the ME, but for now we have to scale back the US aggression in the area if peace is in the future. If not, only more animosity and unrest in the region, or business as usual.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali has made her name (and probably considerable wealth) criticizing Islam and, often, lauding Israel. She has been the darling of anti-Muslims because she was a Muslim who left (or they would have us believe, “heroically escaped”) the fold, and has made it her life’s work to besmirch Islam.
She is a hero of the West (and that includes Israel), not a hero of Muslims. It is an insult to Muslims to anoint her as any kind of thought-leader, spokesperson, or peace-and-understanding envoi.
Hopefully most Muslims are just laughing their asses off. ISIS is probably planning its next beheading. You Go, U.S. State Department!
Obama’s speech on December 6, 2015 appeared on the surface to be Muslim-friendly, but it wasn’t. He said that the radicalization of groups like ISIS and al Qaeda was caused by those groups “embracing a perverted interpretation of Islam that calls for war against America and the West.” Nonsense!! If I remember correctly, wasn’t it Osama Bin Laden and his al Qaeda associates with the help of America who ran Russia out of Afghanistan? Russia is NOT the West. He went on to say, “Muslim leaders here and around the globe have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like ISIL and al Qaeda promote….these interpretations of Islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance.” Obama went on to lament, “But just as it is the responsibility of Muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas that lead to radicalization…., etc.” Hello, Mr. drone president, I think that your dropping bombs on people kind of makes them a little radical, don’t you think? People began to ask themselves why are they the objects of these mass killings. Hence, the flood of immigrants out of these areas targeted by the American empire. The only perverted interpretation of Islam is the one the American Empire created to impose their will on others and to profit from the fossil fuels in those geographical areas where THEY are terrorizing the people. ISIS and al Qaeda are your creations Mr. Obama because they, too, are killing Muslims with impunity. The false flag happens when they supposedly kill a non-Muslim creating a pretext for you and your vassal governments to kill more Muslims. They have nothing to do with Islam, a religion of peace.
So, in the end, the Paris and San Bernardino attacks profited the weapons manufacturers BIG TIME. These multi-national corporate fossil-fuel extracting and burning industries will continue polluting the planet with impunity while directing our attention to the Muslims. So, don’t expect anything substantial to come out of the COP21 climate talks. The leaders of the world don’t want any environmental protesters to interrupt their agenda of continuing to burn the major cause of global warming, fossil fuels.
The recruitment of some Benedict Arnold, hypocritical, sell-out, so-called Muslim who supports Amerikkka’s subversive narrative will only have credibility among the thoroughly brain-washed sheeple.
I’ll NEVER forget the televised moment in the 2004 presidential campaign when Ron Paul advanced the idea that the 9/11 attack was a consequence of American interventions in the Middle East.
Candidate Rudy Giuliani told Paul to apologize for making such a suggestion and the audience broke into applause for Giuliani. Does Giuliani have a child running for president? In the senate? Giuliani who?
Fortunately, while the media backed Guliani and the people at the debate did, the actual voters thought otherwise. Guliani got trounced by Paul. (BTW, the very next day, the former head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit endorsed…Ron Paul. It got little to no coverage.)
I am mortified to see that both Benito Mussolini and Louise Cypher have yet to post any comments. Are they perhaps one & the same person?
You didn’t know that? So are Craig and Mona.
So are Craig and Mona.
This is not true. Craig is Mona’s homunculus.
He was created by the alchemy of Greenwald writing at the Guardian while Mona stirred the cauldron.
I wondered about that too. Today’s topic is made to order for Signor il Duce sense of irony, or at least an aria from the Civilian Barber.
” Today’s topic is made to order for Signor il Duce. . .”
Perhaps The Leader has been kidnapped by Ethiopians with long memories.
“. . . an aria from the Civilian Barber.”
Here, you may have outdone yourself. Bravo!
To paraphrase the unique wisdoms of Ronan Keating: They say it best when they say nothing at all.
Yes the choice is absurd but not so shocking. What I really want to know is when Glenn will enlighten us about Dima and what’s going on where he lives. The information is not so easy to find and analysis of it is even less. Please Glenn, turn your trenchant spotlight on the current Brazil political situation.
Quote from Patrick Coburn “Tomgram: How to ensure a thriving Caliphate”
Had George and Dick not decided on their “cakewalk” in Iraq, had they not raised the specter of nuclear destruction and claimed that Saddam Hussein’s regime was somehow linked to al-Qaeda and so to the 9/11 attacks, had they not sent tens of thousands of American troops into a burning, looted Baghdad (“stuff happens”), disbanded the Iraqi army, built military bases all over that country, and generally indulged their geopolitical fantasies about dominating the oil heartlands of the planet for eternity, ISIS would have been an unlikely possibility, no matter the ethnic and religious tensions in the region. They essentially launched the drive that broke state power there and created the kind of vacuum that a movement like ISIS was so horrifically well suited to fill.
Ah the “they don’t hate our freedoms” canard… Well if Islamic extremism is strictly a reaction to American foreign policy why do they seem to hate ancient Roman architecture and Buddhist statues so much? Why did ISIS behead a mentally ill Chinese man recently? It should be obvious that Islamic fundamentalists hate all things they deem un-Islamic… Ayaan has harsh things to say about Islam, but then she has suffered at the hands of the Islamists and if she were to visit almost any Islamic country she would likely either be executed by the state or murdered by a mob of fundamentalists. How do you open up a constructive dialogue with such people?
She overgeneralizes, stereotypes, distorts the teachings of Islam as understood by traditional Muslims, and spreads irrational fear of them.
Islam is not monolithic.
There are strains within it that are bad to evil, most are benign to good, some are excellent
You mean…just like Christians???
“Well if Islamic extremism is strictly a reaction to American foreign policy why do they seem to hate ancient Roman architecture and Buddhist statues so much? ”
Your logic is flawed. The extremists are the ones destroying ancient architectural treasures, not muslims in general.
Don’t conflate the two without thinking.
I didn’t say Muslims in general. I believe the State Department report was on why the terrorists hate us, not the Muslims in general. Now who is conflating things?
“Now who is conflating things?”
I’m sorry, you’re correct. I misunderstood your intent.
To answer the question, “idolatry” is the extremists’ base reasoning.
I think it was Muslims in general – I don’t think the State department gets to interview terrorists on their true and heartfelt opinions. Or maybe they do…………….. ………………..OMG!!! Aaaaaaaaarrrrrggggggggghhhhh!!!
Yeah looking at it again, and it is a bit vague, but it does seem that the study conflates general negative opinions of the US by the Muslim world with the roots of terrorism.
WhenDogsFart ? Whendovescry
A classic is born.
And of course, you have contacted the Pentagon to inform them that their study that dismisses the “they hate us for our freedoms” nonsense — and stresses that it’s our policies they hate — is entirely wrong. You’ve done that, right?
Report of the
Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication
Emphasis added.
It’s simple: Islamic extremism is not strictly a reaction to American foreign policy (I don’t know who you believe claims that), but it practically wouldn’t exist without it. An analogy: The Contras in Nicaragua didn’t exist strictly as a consequence of American imperialism, but they would’ve been practically irrelevant and non-existent without it. It’s not too difficult to put 2 and 2 together. ISIS is an abomination that only exists because of the Iraq war.
“The Contras in Nicaragua didn’t exist strictly as a consequence of American imperialism, but they would’ve been practically irrelevant and non-existent without it. ”
Obviously this is beside the point, but of course there was always a significant amount of resistance to the Sandinistas. Otherwise they wouldn’t have resisted holding elections.
I guess I need to clarify my point. Of course there was a lot of resistance, like there is resistance to any political movement. What I’m saying is that without imperialism, it’s unlikely the political opposition would’ve taken the form of a terrorist organization. Major political violence with international overtones — like what we saw in Central America in the 80s and today in the Middle East — requires imperialism. I can back up my assertion with some charts:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/04/regional.png
http://devpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Deaths-from-Terrorism-2000-2014_branded.png
Damn you Whendovescry. Damn you to hell. This is an anti-government Hobbesian bacchanalia haunted by a venomous She-beast who will emerge from behind rocks and attempt to feed on your eyeballs the second you say anything unflattering about Glenn. (Oh I’m sorry Mona, but I had to, you are so mean sometimes.) I should not be here. I find I have to make a one-time exception in order to respond to you, though, because I am both fascinated and logically irritated at your superpower for Changing The Topic So Subtly That No One Notices. You are like, really good at it, and yet it ignites my Logic OCD that I feel the irrepressible need to point it out.
In the Trump thread, you said it was hypocritical to complain about Trump and not Iran’s illiberal talk, and got people to argue about how well Iran is behaving and why and whose fault that is or isn’t. In comments on the fake ISIS accusation story, you made it about that obnoxious Clock Kid. And now you’ve again gotten people to act as if they’re defending a position that I don’t think they held in the first place by framing it as “If you agree with this argument then you have to defend the idea that everything about Islam is peachy and entirely problem-free.” And your phrase it so well that people tend to go along with it.
I thought Clock Kid acted like a total jerk. I like the Persians I have met in the US a great deal but think “Death To America” chants are awful. I think religious extremism is a horrible problem. I think drug cartels are a big problem. Warring tribes in Africa have killed millions and millions of people over the past couple of decades, I also do not approve of that behavior. Heck, I don’t even know if I agree with Glenn’s stated position above, because foreign policy interests me about as much as Pesapallo (that would be, btw, not much, if you are randomly a big Pesapallo fan). But the topic changing thing is bugging the hell out of me. While impressing me. But also bugging the hell out of me. But also impressive… but…
I wish you still commented here.
But I don’t know why you think clock kid is a jerk.
Thanks. Now I feel guilty about being snarky. Clock kid shouldn’t have sued for an absurd amount of money. Ironically, tort abuse is pretty all American, but no less obnoxious.
“Clock kid shouldn’t have sued for an absurd amount of money.”
Sure he should. He won’t get even a tiny fraction of that amount (and he and his lawyers know it), but the shock value will help put the morons in the school and the local PD on notice and, hopefully, help guide their future behavior in similar situations.
He’s like, what, 14 years old? His parents pull the strings. But please come back.
So let’s get this straight. You’re arguing that the terrorists are blowing up ancient Roman architecture and Buddhist statues because they’re afraid of some kind of “freedom” inside them, and not because the terrorists are idiotic bastards who believe that these are some sort of pagan representations which must be destroyed for the perceived glory of their god. Is that what you’re arguing. Or do you just like to use the keyboard every time dogs fart?
The State Department spokes people can barely handle questions from the foreign press. Is it any wonder they can’t handle simple messages to anybody outside the US?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gNOzP5WBOw
TO: Secretary of State
So, you want to know how to win their hearts & minds, or at least get a goddamned clue as to how not to provoke them? Simple enough:
1. Stop bombing them. No one likes it when they’re getting hit over the head, and once it stops it feels a lot better. Better yet: pull back your drones and the mercenaries you call “contractors” and the special forces you’ve denied scattering from Casablanca to Manila. Just lay off and scram. Hey, it worked in Vietnam: we left in 1975, left them alone and now they don’t seem to hate us.
2. Stop contributing to the thugs in their region. Israel doesn’t need $3 billion a year, and we could use the money to teach our kids and fill our potholes. Just wash your hands of them and let them make their own mess. The local dictators don’t need to see Ben Franklin’s face any more either, the more you give them the more they lord it over their people. Don’t support them and the locals won’t blame us for maintaining the local Al Capones.
3. Lay off the phony propaganda. Sending spokespeople who are condescending or outright mal-appropriate only invites contempt. Let our entertainment industry do its thing and the locals will tune in; they’ve got satellite dishes and whatnot. No one’s going to be going on jihad if they’re throbbing uncontrollably from binge-watching Baywatch reruns.
4. Try diverting the resulting defense savings to our country; after all, it’s our money, remember? Make this a shining city on a hill (cough), for real, instead of what this country is now: a Trump Palace Hotel and Casino surrounded by seedy trailer parks. Maybe the rest of the world will emulate us then, maybe they won’t, but we’d be better off. Work for us, damn it.
See how simple it is? Even someone as mendacious and greedy as Washington could grasp it. Thank you for listening, and send my consulting fee to — well, NSA knows my address.
Have a nice day and a happy Saturnalia season,
CN
Well freaking said!
Keeping OUR jack inhouse. What a concept. Also known as REAL ‘national security’.
Nobis for president 2016! … and Mussolini as, well…, the vice president (“deuce”?)
As the years roll on, I realize how much I miss people like Zappa . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI9k8l6Asgg
There is no hope that money shipping to Israel will end instill the domestic funding of elections here is restored to some sane system. Our era is one of cash and influence and the Israelis have long known how to game the system.
What are you? Sane?
“No one’s going to be going on jihad if they’re throbbing uncontrollably from binge-watching Baywatch reruns.”
I just recalled, that statement is very similar to Netanyahu’s statement about Iran and watching American t.v. – he said something along the lines of [paraphrasing] “Iranian kids are watching the smut and filth of American t.v. like 90210, et al… and they are wanting the lifestyles they see there”
I believe he was saying that hollywood smut is good propaganda.
The ignorance is exceeded only by the arrogance
Great article, and a brilliant exposition of the US government’s leading role in championing Islamophobia (which thrives on bigotry and ignorance–a couple traits which seem to be in abundance among their chosen “embassadors”) at home and abroad. I blogged about a professor at UCLA who would actually be the perfect candidate for such a position (link below). However, I’m pretty sure enlightenment is not among the criteria favored in such nominations. Alas… Keep up the phenomenal work! :)
http://humanwritesblog.com/2015/12/10/lessons-from-history-for-the-here-and-now-thoughts-inspired-by-when-muslims-admired-the-west-and-were-admired-back/
If somebody had told me this was true, I would not have believed it unless I read it here. And here it is. Unreal.
Wow, what a cock up from the State Dept. Might as well put up a picture of Bill Maher LOL
These clowns have no freaking clue. None at all. They keep marching to their own tune of “we are right, and those who think like us are right”, positioning charlatans like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Asra Nomani, Maajid Nawaz and Ahmed Chalabi as examples of what our hegemony wants the Muslims to behave like. It’s thought-imperialism at its most blatant.
I don’t know how but we need to push the views of Muslims from within the tradition of Islam that are talking against ISIS instead of propping up these anti-Muslim zealots that slum with people like Frank Gaffney, Robert Spencer and Pam Gellar (designated hate group founders courtesy of SPLC).
Domestic threat of radicalization is different than combating ISIS. To begin, we should identify respectable, knowledgeable voices WITHIN the Muslim community in the west that champion peace, tolerance and civility while still being truthful to their traditions. You’re only going to get a knee-jerk, fuck you reaction if you bring anyone else that even presumes to talk down to Muslims. That’s understandable. Only Obama can talk to the blacks the way he can because of the shared collective and experience. If you get a BillCosby (pre-scandal) to talk down to blacks, he’s gonna get (and actually did get) a big fat fuck you from the black community. Real talk. Of course Obama has the highest platform in the nation which helps, but my point is we need to elevate voices in the communityfrom within. No uncle toms (or uncle tarek in our case). The government and media loves their uncle tareks because we like to hear what we want to hear; that Muslims need to let go of part of their faith or drop the hijab or change their holy books or whatever. Or how the crazy people that are blowing themselves up are demonstrating an equally valid expression of their faith. The people who say these things are not going to help you defeat radicalization or capture lone wolf terrorists. They will only exacerbate and accelerate the existing problems.
I’m not saying that simply giving a bigger platform to anti-radical voices could have somehow prevented Paris or San Bernardino. There will always be few that slip through and we still have a lot to learn. But the decoupling of America’s interventionist, pro-Israel, ostensibly anti-Islam foreign policy with the personal religious identity of a Muslim is something we should strive for. There are lots of very articulate, very reasonable, civil and all-American Muslim leaders in our community that have institutions and organizations that work and have been working with cases of domestic radicalization. Only thing I would add is that by elevating I don’t mean to invite them to white house and appear besides politicians. That will just add unneeded political veneer to their message. I’m not even sure if the government can do anything in this regard or how to organically move the voices of love over the voices of hate. Community outreach programs? More Muslim politicians? Create more trust between the government and Muslim minorities? I guess the Islamic communities need to step up their game as well and speak more about things going on in their communities and being close to families. Make the friday sermons relevant to the problems the young teenagers and adults face instead of the droll sunday-school type religious lectures. Last thing we need to do is elevate voices of total imbeciles like Ayaan Ali Hirsi. In fact, ISIS is probably using that tweet to recruit more crazies right now.
wow! what eloquence!
“organically move the voices of love over the voices of hate”
“the decoupling of America’s interventionist, pro-Israel … foreign policy with the personal religious identity of a Muslim is something we should strive for.”
one question: with the exception of Ahmed Chalabi, in what way are these people charlatans?
Beside, she, Ayaan Hirsi, is a liar.
She was kicked out of Holland because she almost lie about everything.
Hirsi Ali is like an ISIS wet dream, with her talk of “war with Islam” and “crushing the enemy,” though she’s probably too stupid to realize it.
French journalist Nicolas Henin, formerly an ISIS hostage,surely knows them better than she does, and he wrote of his experiences with them,
Emphasis mine – Henin’s article at the Guardian is here:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/16/isis-bombs-hostage-syria-islamic-state-paris-attacks
Maybe we need a Neutrality Act for religion (would that help “propagandize” the folks there); say something like it’s a misdemeanor for any citizen to wage war against any religion.
The only problem is there are apparent conflicts with 1st Amendment if there are religious groups/cults/sects who practice killing as part of their religion. Haven’t we already made a law against beheading and crucifying, not necessarily specifically; but you know what I mean. And what is a religious group anyway? The HBO Scientology documentary was fun to watch – IRS had trouble defining religion.
At some point it’s going to be difficult for the U.S. to define and then attack/wage war on folks. How long have we been defining and punishing piracy on the high seas now? Over 200 years huh? Geez.
The Middle East in reality is no match for us in weapons or surveillance capabilities so there is no respectable reason for why we would occupy so many countries in that area.
Targeting religion is very convenient for the conquering effort because it makes the enemy much more powerful to the religious or spiritually insecure justifying our invasions there.
A deliberately bad propaganda effort to “win hearts and minds” puts the attention/argument on Islam for why we’re occupying so many countries taking the heat off of the attempt to take over the Middle East.
It also keeps the people that would normally be protesting the many wars very busy calling out the irresponsible efforts to keep America secure (which btw implies a belief that those who design these policies have the intentions they say they do)
The more outrageous crap they toss out the easier it is to take actions that they want without ANY resistance
So how does anyone really know that America is so taken by Islamophobia? There is information AND perception warfare.
Thoughts have no boundaries. In the land of dreams and nightmares, or perception management anything is possible: How do you know you’re safe? How do you know what you believe is sacred wont be attacked? Are you sure you want to be a Muslim? Are you sure Christians are safe?
Media shows you what they want you to think.
Everyone is upset with Americans, including Americans.
Its hard to believe that the government can legally launch any kind of campaign involving religion.
Muslims need to learn what the U.S empire is, and what the U.S empire is not.
Glenn they are trying have their cake and eat it too! The big club must think it is such a bother to have to deal with all these people in the way of their resources. It would be so much easier if that land was clear and they could just go in and take all they want.
On the other hand some may welcome violent groups so that they can make tons of money selling bombs!! In fact support the spread of these violent groups by our fake efforts, racism…just like our fake anti drug campaign that increased drug use!! Drug war is mad money baby and so is the war in the middle east, and all their resources.
at the end of the day in one way or another we are all guilty at some level as we benefit from imperialism…just look at the metals in our phones, sources of coffee, bananas, computers, shoes…and gas for our cars or airplanes…our taxes pay for the military…every American financially supports the bombing going on in the middle east and so on…does it matter in the end if we don’t want to support it…the money still goes to the government and they allocate for bombs…if most people in america would stop paying taxes at the same time, then they would have no money for killing people…but who wants to go to jail and ruin their family lives for strangers…
a radical revolution of values is needed for all people. Present corporations and politicians would not be able to exist because people would be willing to sacrifice all for their fellow human beings near and far…maybe one day.
Ali is like one of those mint-flavored Oreos: Brown on the outside, Zionist-Green on the inside….
“Hackers trace ISIS Twitter accounts back to internet addresses linked to Department of Work and Pensions”
“Teenage computer experts unveil astonishing web of unpublicised interactions linking extremist social media mouthpieces to the British government”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/hackers-trace-isis-twitter-accounts-7010417
Does this surprise anyone?
Well, I wasn’t surprised when I ran a quick search and found that the “most reputable” site reporting this “news” — so far — is The Mirror.
Unless, of course, you think Infowars is more believable.
Yes, of course, we must only trust the sources that have been proven time and time again to be the most worthy…
“‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ did not happen in Ferguson”
“The department’s descriptions of about 40 witness testimonies show the original claims that Brown had his hands up were not accurate.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/19/hands-up-dont-shoot-did-not-happen-in-ferguson/
~fool.
Huh?
BTW, Above Top Secret and Free Republic are running with it, now.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s life story was exposed as a complicated fabrication by a Dutch television documentary in 2006 – no wonder she was then stripped of her Dutch citizenship –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbxP8Uys8kc
That documentary ripped apart her story and exposed her for the fraud and liar she is. She became a laughing stock in The Netherlands and in Europe generally. The fact that she’s given a platform in the US shows how corrupt and fraudulent the institutions in this country are – and it exposes their disgusting political agendas.
She hasn’t had an entirely positive reception here. Brandeis did revoke her honorary degree. And she had to accept work at a neocon, wingnut pit like the American Enterprise Institute.
All of what you wrote is true, but add to it that Ayaan Hirsi Ali has renounced Islam. She’s an apostate.
“Hi Muslim guys and girls, here’s a person for you to love. She abhors everything about your religion! How awesome is that!”
Just beggars belief that someone was paid to think this up.
“Just beggars belief that someone was paid to think this up.”
unless the goal is to make matters worse …
sells more weapons and gives a great excuse to commit genocide.
Israel.
Thanks, Glenn.
I don’t mean to be a nit-picker, but generally the purpose of propaganda is to slant the truth; what the State Department is doing is a rare instance of truthfulness and transparency, conveying exactly the attitude of the Executive and Legislative departments of our government (or at least the majority view), and the likely views of our next President as well. There is perfect continuity with George W. Bush’s promise of our conducting a Crusade in the Middle East, another uncommon feature of the State Department.
Now I agree that if we really wanted to be effective, we would follow the suggestion KJ Hrim gives below, but that would be awfully hard to do without lying and abandoning our dear friends and stalwart defenders of freedom, the Egyptians, Israelis and Saudis. Oh, I forgot, the Turks too. But look at it this way: The current approach does nothing to endanger the welfare and profitability of our greatest industry, the war industry.
The part I don’t understand is why they keep attempting to create region specific propaganda in the first place. Don’t they realize that World Wide Web is literally World Wide? A single clear message for home and abroad would be more effective.
But admittedly, this tactic really does work so well on the American people domestically. Every Presidential election cycle I crack up thinking that anybody in their right mind would actually vote for any of the candidates.
Well Said, Being an American myself I can say that the thing that worries me the most is stated above .
“But admittedly, this tactic really does work so well on the American people domestically.”
We as a majority are a clueless, dumbed down , willfully blind and ignorant society. Our willingness to buy into the propagated narrative while the facts blast us in the face is extremely disturbing . America and Americans in general are at great risk of becoming the next Nazi Germany (really we are well on our way).
Arm yourselves because your greatest threat will likely be your gullible neighbor wearing his freshly starched “Brown Shirt.” There is no left or right only the great lie!
One thing the US empire is excellent at is digging its own grave.
Thanks for another excellent article, Glenn.
It is wrong to assume that this is an example of being “inept.”
In fact, as is hinted in this article, it is much more likely that
these forms of rudeness are deliberate.
The horror show in the Middle East is just a part of the
typical insensitivity and lethal pretenses by which
these corrupt profiteers increase their bank accounts.
In the fake USA, the more predatory, the more profits.
It is typical of imperialist nations throughout the history of our
perverse species that they dominate and impose their twisted
vanities upon their victims
(within their “homeland” and abroad)
because they are driven by a superior Vanity and avarice.
They are too fat with pride, greed, and vanity to even remotely
sense how they crush the life out of everything they touch.
In fact, the most corrupt are often celebrated by their victims.
98 to 99% of the voters in the fake USA wouldn’t dare to
not support these vain monstrosities.
I don’t know if the initial decisions are deliberate or inept, but the example of sending Karen Hughes back out as quickly as she was sent in is a clear indication that their decision or choice was inept. Hard to deny that, and so it follows that many of their decisions are as likely fully inept as they are deliberately inept.
While I would like to accept your differentiation, I
really do believe this sort of crudity of behavior is
to be expected from those who think they are
(as Obama and so many others have claimed)
the “exceptional” people of the planet.
It IS a good example of arrogance and vanity, but
to say it is inept is to also imply that it is excusable
and that is exactly why these displays of arrogance
and worse things
keep happening.
It is the same as saying that the war in Iraq
and the banking “bailout” were the result of ineptitude –
which is EXACTLY how the democrats and republicans
have treated both of those corruptions.
No, this is deliberate beguiling and
as long as it is seen as allowable
it will continue.
Well, they’ve managed to shock and awe me, yet again.
Thanks, Glenn.
The problem with the US is that, whether there is a Republican or Democrat is charge, the behaviour towards the rest of the world does not change in essence. W.r.t. Europe that does not really matter, but w.r.t. to the Muslim world it does matter. It means that the perception of the US by the Muslim world has not changed for the last 50 years. Perhaps it is even more accurate to say that perceptions have worsened.
Basically the US has remained a nation of cowboys. You go in there, whether invited or uninvited, pull your gun and shoot whoever you decide is the bad guy, even if you don’t have all the facts. Then you get on your horse & ride off into the twilight, leaving behind the mess you created. This attitude has been extended to outside the old Wild West & now the cowboys are surprised the rest of the world, particularly (but not only) the Muslim world, rejects invasions of a gun-toting, trigger-happy foreign army in their own country. Nor do other countries appreciate the support those same cowboys give to suppressive puppet regimes that have been stamped & “approved” as good guys.
It will take generations before the US will be put in its rightful place as a regular non-superpower country among regular non-superpower countries like a Germany, Sweden, Australia to name but a few. But before that happens a lot of water will pass under the bridge & a lot of damage will still be done.
This is pretty interesting….some teenage hackers follow a Daesh Twitter account into the guts of the British government:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/technology/hackers-trace-isis-twitter-accounts-7010417
Funny how some “hackers” can do this but the NSA and Co. cannot?
You might want to read the full article. The British government sold those IP addresses to Saudia Arabia. Selling IP addresses became a thing a few years ago when the IPv4 address space was fully allocated. Just because you have the ip address doesn’t mean that you know where the person is physically.
She’s correct. We should go to war with Islam. I applaud the American government for trying something. The fact that we have to invest resources into winning “hearts and minds” illustrates what an enormous burden Islam is. Jihad and Islamism are products of Islam. They do not emerge in a vacuum. They are symptomatic of a seriously messed-up religion. There’s no excuse for terror. It’s an absolute outrage that we are in a position where we actually have to launch initiatives counter ISIS-messaging on social media. Are you fucking kidding me? How are pro-ISIS twitter campaigns attractive to anyone? What an enormous opportunity cost. Imagine what a disgrace it would be if we had a “Think Again. Turn Away” campaign for German-Americans who were vulnerable to pro-Nazi Messaging. Instead of mocking these outreach programs, you should consider yourself lucky for being a citizen of a country that has any compassion for people who are sympathetic to a psychopathic ideology. Enough with the Red Herrings about US foreign policy. It’s costing Belgium Millions of dollars per day to keep the city safe from terror attacks. What did Belgium ever do to anyone? This is a global problem. The fact that Ayaan Hirsi Ali has to walk around with a security detail is shameful. And, frankly, it’s the reason we do not have several more people like her.
Jonah, huh?
Looks like whale shit, to me.
“Looks like whale shit, to me.”
Or perhaps it’s a Goldberg turd …
It’s been some time since he tried floating one here; it gets scooped and flushed promptly.
So how do we “go to war” against a religion? People like you and Hirsi Ali always say this yet I still have yet to hear just exactly what it means.
Are we going to war against a billion people? Imprison and kill all muslims? Make Islam illegal? What does it mean to “go to war” against a religion? Please be specific and substantive–and stop the sloganeering.
Also-I assume YOU’RE going to enlist in this war to go off and fight muslims. Otherwise, you’re just another chickenshit internet blowhard.
War of ideas, not an armed struggle. That’s absurd. You’re interpreting what I said too literally. You can’t go to war with a religion. Ayaan and I are nor advocating that. We just recognize the truth. We’re not blind to the world around us, We know Islam is fucked and we would like to see its influence greatly reduced.
” We just recognize the truth.”
Do you recognize that over 90% of the terrorist acts in the US over the past 35 years were committed by non-Muslims?
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005/terror02_05#terror_05sum
Do you recognize that the chance of an American being killed in the U.S. by a terrorist is only 1 in 4,000,000?
https://books.google.com/books?id=sfSuCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA138&lpg=PA138&dq=%22Chasing+Ghosts:+The+Policing+of+Terrorism%22+%221+in+4,000,000%22&source=bl&ots=rcMtEHmpZ0&sig=lHplYhM2smzeuUGl1s_OxuxnUjU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjb_bTent7JAhXB4D4KHYRZAOgQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=%22Chasing%20Ghosts%3A%20The%20Policing%20of%20Terrorism%22%20%221%20in%204%2C000%2C000%22&f=false
Do you recognize that believing Muslims are uniquely “evil” (a’la Sam Harris, Bill Maher, etc.) is pure bullshit that intentionally refuses to take into account that over one million innocent people were slaughtered in “Shock n’ Awe” (AKA the very definition of terrorism) – men, women, children, babies barbarically annihilated – by the “good guys” (Judeo-Christians in the US government)?
ALL of Islam or just parts of it or most of it?
Is there any goodness you see coming out of Islam — the religion, the people and the civilization?
Do you see ANY Muslims carrying out good works or do you think that most of us are misbehaving?
When you say, “Islam”, do you mean the religion of Islam or the civilization of Islam?
It’s been going on for 1400+ years. Often, this “war of ideas” goes into sheer ignorance, distortions, stereotyping, subjugation, colonization, irrational fear, demonization, and warfare.
There are courteous ways to critique Islam. Since Islam is not monolithic, one needs to clarify if one’s criticism is limited to certain strains within Islam or ALL of what constitutes as a religion of Islam.
Here’s a sample of a strain of Islam: http://sufism.org
It’s based on the teachings of Rumi.
Is your “war of ideas” against this form of Islam as well?
I am associated with this Islam: http://www.askonline.co.za
Are you at war with MY Islam too?
Most Muslims around the world are peaceful and peace loving people. They just want to be left alone and are struggling in their existential lives.
Are you at war with the Islams of these benign, peaceful Muslims as well?
Malala is a Muslim.
Are you at war with her Islam too?
Don’t scare him off.
@ Sufi
Trying to teach certain Americans or Europeans that 1.6 billion people are not monolithic in their beliefs, or that anything less than some infinitesimally small percentage of that 1.6 billion is pathologically “violent” as a function of their religious beliefs, is a waste of time.
And that’s because a significant majority of Americans and Europeans aren’t very smart. More importantly they are culturally biased in a way that makes them need to believe they are somehow “superior” to other human beings and that the “other” is “inferior” to them. This is the basis of nationalism, racism and colonialism.
The only way you will every teach people like that anything about anyone is to drop them in a majority Muslim nation, and force them to interact with “the other” over an extended period of time (as civilians rather than garrisoned military personnel) so that they see that the “differences” in human beings born of religion or any other cultural marker is very very slight.
People laugh, eat, pray, work, send their children to school, clean the house, go to the bathroom, watch movies and listen to music and any cultural differences in those practices are fairly minor in the grand scheme of things. But without the nations of the West needing to feel superior and engage in economic-military imperialism, it would be a lot harder to propagandize their domestic populations to drop bombs and murder all the people all over the globe who just want to be left alone to live their lives like everyone else as a function of the inherent right “self-determination”.
Only problem is neoliberal capitalism can’t tolerate differences. Or democratic self-determination, because it gets in the way of their profit extraction and maximization.
Except, Ayaan is advocating that.
If you read what Glenn has posted, she is asked about how we defeat Islam – “Militarily?”, and she respons “In all forms … “.
Therefore, it is clear to see she is calling for an armed struggle, and it is anything but absurd to her.
@ Jonah
You mean other than the millions and millions of human beings it murdered in the Belgian Congo?
So presumably that applies to majority Christian America’s shock and awe form of terror it visited upon the people of Iraq, or Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, right? And applies to Christian abortion clinic bombers and that sort of terror, right? Or Jewish Israelis and collectively bombing out everything standing in Gaza, right?
I mean doesn’t that mean:
And if the argument goes, well Belgium, America and Israel never did all those horrible things in the name of a religion, but rather “national interests,” then given the level of destruction done in the name of “national interests” as opposed by Muslims in the name of religion, then I’d say “they are symptomatic of a seriously messed-up concept of ‘national interest'”.
Here’s a question I have for you, if America and the West generally have to export their “way of life” to the people of the world at the tip of the gun barrel and business end of a bomb, rather than on the intellectual and moral merits of “our way of life”, and/or by example, then what does that say about our way of life?
I will respond to this later in the day. Stay Tuned
Jonah
I can’t wait. Sort of like I can’t wait to see the dentist for a root canal while getting kicked in the balls by the dental hygienist.
Are you expecting to get beat up that bad?
@ Fred
Absolutely not. It was hyperbole or exaggeration for effect. As in refuting illogical ahistorical factually unsupported bullshit day in and day out is about as much fun as a visit to the dentist while being sack punched by the hygienist. The latter has never happened obviously and my infrequent trips to dentist, while not pleasant, aren’t the worst thing in the world.
It seems you will be spared the unpleasantness.
Jonah has gone off in search of lesser game.
Well said! The whole situation with Islam reminds me of the horrors Britain has had to endure from papists. Roman Catholicism is a scourge on the world and the very idea that Her Majesty’s government should coddle those Rosary fetishists is preposterous. Red herrings about English policies in Ireland is so much twaddle.
@Jonah
Obviously, I need to visit my optometrist; I was sure I had closed all the tags.
What, Louise Cypher wasn’t available?
Or Pam Geller.
Frank Gaffney perhaps?
Debbie Schlussel is tanned (but not too tanned), rested and ready…
CraigSummers will be along directly to clear-up this mess of miscommunication.
I am willing to make a shortish film about how bad the Intercept’s commenting system is.
The film will be called “No Comment” and it will explore the similarities between journalism vs government, commenting vs journalism, and art vs propaganda–all set against the lush backdrop of soft/hard girl on girl action.
Think Andrew Blake meets Terrence Malick. Nobody is in a hurry.
And there will be music.
https://soundcloud.com/andersonpaak/09-i-miss-that-whip-prod-k
Art is the belief that the reader knows more than the writer. Propaganda insists the writer is paramount.
Very few believe in Art.
That song sounds pretty good.
And people say Trump is crazy.
*I know what you’re thinking Glenn; Obama really is a ‘secret’ radicalized Muslim … w/ a rolex.
OMG! This US behavior is insane. Thanks Glenn, for shining a spotlight on more official USA madness.
No, way! An American government English language twitter account, promoting an atheist Islamophobe, who spends her time on Fox news comparing Islam to the Nazis? I hadn’t heard of this. A generous interpretation would put this down to stupidity but this will lend fuel to those who believe Obama is deliberately promoting terrorism, as it influences the public to give licence to government to pass laws and practice war in an atmosphere of fear not otherwise allowed in a healthy democracy.
Makes perfect sense, Islam, which is new as it has only been around a few months, right? Is the new fascism, and just as Hitler envisioned a caliphate, right? So does Islam!!!
But to be fair, some flunky on the government “some truths about terrorism” twitter simply thought that:
“hey Hirsi Ali, is against genital mutilation,….Ali used to be Muslim….genital mutilation is bad….terrorism is bad….we’re fighting terrorist Muslims….tweet posted!!!”
Why, when discussing Obama policy, does Dick Cheney keep coming up?
What??? Ayaan Hirsi Ali an atheist? First, how can that be, she wanted to convert to Judaism; no atheist in their right mind would do that! Second, if true, I move we excommunicate her for heresy. Oh, wait, we can’t do that, can we? One of the negatives of atheism is that we can’t throw anyone out.
When you look at the difference in competence between the U.S. and China, it’s just unbelievable. I mean, the U.S. went into Iraq with a lot of fake claims, militant bluster, huge number of well armed troops, plans to make them pay copyrights on Mickey Mouse. And came out with nothing. Whereas China went into South Sudan with … some anti-aircraft missile sales, a scheme to get the U.S. to take credit for the oil fields’ “independence”, some support for Uganda … and they’re busy pumping and digging away to this day. Meanwhile, the “South” Sudanis are dying, but you hear scarcely a peep around the world about how China kills Muslims.
And the thing is, China *has* the industrial capacity, *has* the troops, *has* the nukes … they just don’t even need to commit any of that sort of stuff to win, except a few token ‘peacekeepers’ to raise their flag.
– “And the thing is, China *has* the industrial capacity, *has* the troops, *has* the nukes … they just don’t even need to commit any of that sort of stuff to win, except a few token ‘peacekeepers’ to raise their flag.”
And when they want to, China and other nations can emulate the West’s imperialism. The US has made war of aggression, torture, assassination, hiring mercenary armies, …they’ve made all that respectable again.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/12/2011122813134071641.html
OK, that’s an interesting link… it’s frustrating, though, because it seems to incorporate nearly contradictory statements. I had heard the narrative that Western oil companies hadn’t gotten many of the contracts; it repeats that but also seems to say otherwise.
1) It’s almost 2016, and we still don’t understand that people get mad when we bomb them. Somehow that is too hard, so we settle for Islamaphobia.
2)
Lol. “I tried really hard to believe a different fairy tale but I’m still stuck on the first one I was told.”
3) Typo second-to-last paragraph, “mind” should be “minds.”