There’s been lots of attention-grabbing opposition to Trump’s “Muslim ban” executive order, from demonstrations to court orders. But polls make it clear public opinion is much more mixed. Standard phone polls show small majorities opposed, while web and automated polls find small majorities continue to support it.
What surprises me about the poll results isn’t that lots of Americans like the ban — but that so many Americans don’t. Regular people have lives to lead and can’t investigate complicated issues in detail. Instead they usually take their cues from leaders they trust. And given what politicians across the U.S. political spectrum say about terrorism, Trump’s executive order makes perfect sense. There are literally no national-level American politicians telling a story that would help ordinary people understand why Trump’s goals are both horrendously counterproductive and morally vile.
Think of it this way:
On February 13, 1991 during the first Gulf War, the U.S. dropped two laser-guided bombs on the Amiriyah public air raid shelter in Baghdad. More than 400 Iraqi civilians were incinerated or boiled alive. For years afterward visitors to a memorial there would meet a woman with eight children who had died during the bombing; she was living in the ruined shelter because she could not bear to be anywhere else.
Now, imagine that immediately after the bombing Saddam Hussein had delivered a speech on Iraqi TV in which he plaintively asked “Why do they hate us?” — without ever mentioning the fact that Iraq was occupying Kuwait. And even Saddam’s political opponents would only mumble that “this is a complicated issue.” And most Iraqis had no idea that their country had invaded Kuwait, and that there were extensive United Nation resolutions and speeches by George H.W. Bush explaining the U.S.-led coalition’s rationale for attacking Iraq in response. And that the few Iraqis who suggested there might be some kind of relationship between Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and the Amiriyah bombing were shouted down by politicians saying these Iraq-hating radicals obviously believed that America’s slaughter of 400 people was justified.
If that had happened, we’d immediately recognize that Iraqi political culture was completely insane, and that it would cause them to behave in dangerously nutty ways. But that’s exactly what U.S. political culture is like.
Photo: Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images
In an interview last March with Anderson Cooper, Donald Trump tried to puzzle out what’s behind the terrorism directed at the U.S. “I think Islam hates us,” Trump learnedly opined. “There’s a tremendous hatred there, we’ve got to get to the bottom of it.”
“In Islam itself?” asked Cooper. Trump responded, “You’re going to have to figure that out. You’ll get another Pulitzer.”
During Trump’s speech at the CIA right after his inauguration, he expressed the same bewilderment. “Radical Islamic terrorism,” pondered Trump. “This is something nobody can even understand.”
John F. Kelly, now Trump’s head of the Department of Homeland Security, is similarly perplexed, saying in a 2013 speech that “I don’t know why they hate us, and I frankly don’t care, but they do hate us and are driven irrationally to our destruction.”
Say what you want about the tenets of this worldview, but at least it’s an internally consistent ethos: We’re surrounded by lunatics who want to murder us for reasons that are totally inscrutable to rational people like us but … obviously have something to do with them being Muslims.
Meanwhile, in private, the non-crazy members of the U.S. foreign policy establishment aren’t confused at all. They understand quite well that Islamist terrorism is almost wholly blowback from the foreign policy they’ve designed.
Meanwhile, in private, the non-crazy members of the U.S. foreign policy establishment aren’t confused at all.
Richard Shultz, a professor at Tufts whose career has long been intertwined with the national security state, has written that “A very senior [Special Operations Forces] officer who had served on the Joint Staff in the 1990s told me that more than once he heard terrorist strikes characterized as ‘a small price to pay for being a superpower.’” That small price, of course, is the deaths of regular Americans, and is apparently well worth it.
The 9/11 Commission report quietly acknowledged, hundreds of pages in, that “America’s policy choices have consequences. Right or wrong, it is simply a fact that American policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and American actions in Iraq are dominant staples of popular commentary across the Arab and Muslim world.” A senior official in the George W. Bush administration later put it more bluntly to Esquire: That without the post-Gulf War sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and the stationing of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, “bin Laden might still be redecorating mosques and boring friends with stories of his mujahideen days in the Khyber Pass.”
Intelligence professionals were quite aware that an invasion of Iraq would take the conditions that led to 9/11 and make them far worse. The British Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war published a February, 2003 assessment by British intelligence of the consequences of an invasion of Iraq, which would occur one month later. “The threat from Al Qaida will increase at the onset of any military action against Iraq,” the UK’s Joint Intelligence Committee told Tony Blair, and “the worldwide threat from other Islamist terrorist groups and individuals will increase significantly.”
The CIA had the same perspective. Michael Scheuer, who for several years ran the section of the Agency that tracked bin Laden, wrote in 2004 that “U.S. forces and policies are completing the radicalization of the Islamic world, something Osama bin Laden has been trying to do with substantial but incomplete success since the early 1990s. As a result, I think it fair to conclude that the United States of America remains bin Laden’s only indispensable ally.”
For its part, the Defense Department’s Science Board concluded in a 2004 report that “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.”
Photo: Mohammed Abed/AFP/Getty Images
When Barack Obama took office, he had two choices.
First, he could tell the truth: That the U.S. has acted with extraordinary brutality in the Middle East, that this had been the main motivation for most Islamist terrorism against us, and if we continued the same foreign policy Americans would be killed indefinitely in intermittent attacks. Then we could have had an open, informed debate about whether we like our foreign policy enough to die for it.
Second, Obama could continue trying to run the Middle East without public input, but in a more rational way than the Bush administration.
Obviously he went with the second choice, which demanded several different forms of political correctness.
Most importantly, Obama pretended that the U.S. has never done anything truly wrong to others, and can enjoy the benefits of power without any costs. This is the most pernicious and common form of political correctness, but is never called that because the most powerful people in America love it.
But Obama also engaged in something more akin to what’s generally called political correctness, by contending that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. But it does — just not in the way that Frank Gaffney and Pamela Geller would tell you.
Religion and nationalism have always been similar phenomena, and Islam sometimes functions as a form of nationalism. And like all nationalisms, it has a crazy, vicious right wing that’s empowered by outside attacks on members of the nation. The right loves to jeer at Obama for calling Islam “a religion of peace,” and they should — not because Islam specifically isn’t a religion of peace but because there is really no such thing, just as there is no “nationalism of peace.” It’s true religions and nationalism can bring out the best in people, but they also bring out the worst (sometimes in the same person for the same reasons).
But Obama could never say anything like that, because he knew the U.S. needs the governments of Muslim-majority countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt to keep the rest of the Middle East in line.
This amalgam of political correctness made it impossible for the Obama administration ever to tell a story about terrorism that made any sense. For instance, in his 2009 speech in Cairo, he declared, “It is easier to blame others than to look inward” — and then went on to demonstrate that truism.
His description of wrongs done by the U.S. was vague to the point of meaninglessness: “tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims.” Also, “Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world.”
Obama then explained that “Violent extremists have exploited these tensions.” So … 19 people were motivated to fly jetliners into buildings by “tensions”? If that’s the only story that non-Muslim Americans hear, they’ll rationally be terrified of Islam.
In 2010, Obama’s counterterrorism advisor, John Brennan, emitted a similar bland puree of words at a press conference when questioned by Helen Thomas about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the failed underwear bomber. Their exchange went like this:
THOMAS: And what is the motivation? We never hear what you find out on why.
BRENNAN: Al Qaeda is an organization that is dedicated to murder and wanton slaughter of innocents… [They] attract individuals like Mr. Abdulmutallab and use them for these types of attacks. He was motivated by a sense of religious sort of drive. Unfortunately, al Qaeda has perverted Islam, and has corrupted the concept of Islam, so that [they’re] able to attract these individuals. But al Qaeda has the agenda of destruction and death.
THOMAS: And you’re saying it’s because of religion?
BRENNAN: I’m saying it’s because of an al Qaeda organization that uses the banner of religion in a very perverse and corrupt way.
THOMAS: Why?
BRENNAN: I think this is a, uh, long issue, but al Qaeda is just determined to carry out attacks here against the homeland.
At his sentencing, Abdulmutallab explained his motivation in less time than it took Brennan to say there wasn’t enough time to explain:
[I pledged] to attack the United States in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and in retaliation of the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Palestine, especially in the blockade of Gaza, and in retaliation for the killing of innocent and civilian Muslim populations in Yemen, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and beyond, most of them women, children, and noncombatants.
To be fair, there is one situation in which American officials have lost the mushmouth and drawn a direct connection between a country killing Mideastern civilians and terrorist retaliation: when that country is Russia. William Burns, formerly Obama’s Deputy Secretary of State, recently and accurately proclaimed that “Russia’s bloody role in Syria makes the terrorist threat far worse.” John Kirby, an Obama State Department spokesman, warned that Russia’s brutalization of Syria would lead to “attacks against Russian interests, perhaps even Russian cities.”
Russia’s response to our friendly observation was about the same as ours when Russia told us before the invasion of Iraq that it would cause a “wave of terror.”
Photo: David McNew/Getty Images
That brings us back to President Trump and his executive order on immigration.
Trump’s story about why it’s necessary is, factually speaking, garbage. But a normal human being can at least understand it and its moral: These incomprehensible foreigners are all potential psychotics, we’ve got to keep them out. Under these circumstances, who cares that no one from any of these seven countries has killed any Americans yet? They’re all part of a huge morass of ticking time bombs.
By contrast, the Democratic, liberal perspective laid out by Obama makes no sense at all. We’ve never done anything particularly bad in the Middle East, yet … some people over there want to come here and kill us because … they’ve been exploited by violent extremists who’ve perverted Islam and … gotta run, there’s no time to explain.
Regular people could sense that anyone mouthing this kind of gibberish was hiding something, even if they didn’t realize that Obama was trying to keep the U.S. empire running rather than concealing his secret faith in Islam.
And because a coherent narrative always beats the complete absence of a story, no one should be surprised that many Americans find Trump’s fantasy of inexplicable Muslim hatred persuasive. The only way to conclusively beat it will be with a coherent, complicated, true story like this:
America has done hideous things to countries across the Middle East for decades, such as bomb a civilian air raid shelter, burning the silhouette of a mother trying to protect her baby onto its walls. It was inevitable that some people would seek revenge. This doesn’t mean that their brutality is justified, any more than the slaughter at Amiriyah was justified by Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. It just means that humans are humans, violence begets violence, and Americans will always be in danger unless we change our foreign policy.
We must welcome immigrants from the Middle East both for moral and pragmatic reasons. Morally, the U.S. invasion of Iraq is what sent the region spiraling into catastrophe; only psychopaths set someone’s home on fire and then lock them inside. There are already three million Muslim American citizens. If the government keeps bombing the Middle East while making it clear that it genuinely hates Muslims, that will only spur to action more troubled weirdos like Omar Mateen — who was born in Queens, a few miles away from Donald Trump’s childhood home.
And we’d better get started with this story soon, because it may not be true forever. Israel has done an exemplary job turning a solvable, straightforward fight over land into a religious war that may no longer have any solution. We’re making similar strides in transforming a conflict that was 90 percent political, where there can be compromise, into a religious conflict where there can’t.
This can be seen, on the one hand, in ISIS propaganda. Bin Laden generally just talked about kicking the U.S. out of the Middle East and said things like, “Your security is in your own hands and each state which does not harm our security will remain safe.” The ISIS magazine Dabiq cheerfully tells us that “We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah … even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam.”
On the other hand, Donald Trump is president of the United States and Steve Bannon is his chief strategist. Bannon straightforwardly believes, as he told a conference at the Vatican in 2014, that “we’re in a war of immense proportions” that’s part of the “long history of the Judeo-Christian West struggle against Islam.” To win, Bannon says, we must form the “church militant” – an archaic term for the “Christian church on earth regarded as engaged in a constant warfare against its enemies, the powers of evil.”
So it’s quite possible ISIS and the Trump administration can successfully collaborate on getting what they both want: a totally unnecessary, civilizational war. To stop them we have to end our truckling equivocation about terrorism, and start telling the truth while there’s still time.
Top Photo: During a memorial service in Baghdad, Iraqis gather around a bomb hole in the ceiling of the Al-Amariya shelter in 2003, where more than 400 people were killed in a U.S.-led missile attack during the Gulf War. Iraqis opened a new memorial center outside the Al-Amariya shelter to mark the 12 year anniversary of the attack.
“Why do they hate us?” may be a bit of an absurd question; we have turned huge areas of their world into active killing fields for no good reason. Sure, there were good intentions on the part of some interventionists, and greedy ulterior motives on the part of others, but even good intentions don’t count for much when your world is literally on fire. But is the fact that some Muslims have good reason to hate us any reason to let them into our country? If anything, it makes letting them in all the more insane. We would have had good reason to keep most Muslims out without any threat of terrorism. The Prophet Mohamed was a mass-murderer and a mass-rapist and the Quran, based on his instructions, contains fairly straight forward orders to kill and dismember Jews, torture pagans to death, kill disbelievers in battle and take their women as sex slaves, and beat wives. So admitting most mainstream Muslims would be akin to admitting Nazis into the USA; why would we ever contemplate such stupidity? If we had banned all Muslim immigration in the 1970s, refused to get involved in local disputes like Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait in 1991 (despite Maggie Thatcher’s desire to play Winston Churchill), and demanded that Israel give up its death-wish-driven Swiss-cheese settlement policy in exchange for continuing American aid, we would have avoided 3 wars, 9/11, Ft. Hood, the Boston Marathon bombing and Hillary’s wars of aggression in Syria, Libya, and indirectly in Yemen. We also would have avoided the creeping Islamization that is rendering the rights of women, gays, Jews, and anyone else who is not ready to take orders from Islamists null and void in growing areas of Europe while threatening to start the same process in the USA. Much as I dislike Islam (and religion in general), I think both the West and the Muslim world would both be better of if we had had nothing to do with each other.
The silence of the so-called moderate Muslims is deafening.
Why aren’t those fabulous law abiding Muslims not cleaning up their religion from those Jiahdists the world fear?
Why do we have to do that for them?
Once I’ll see the “good” Muslims taking charge, I’ll stop fearing them.
I am not holding my breath !
What was that a bot archive post from 2005? The only thing missing is something about how we should attack Saudi Arabia.
Does your fear of Muslims extend to wanting the U.S to attack Saudi Arabia ?
Or wait I know: Muslim is code for Republican politician, isn’t it.
Weren’t there were some moderate Republican politicians that spoke out against extremism in their party and then were quickly eliminated? I don’t think the party actually exists anymore. I agree they can be scary.
Even so, the people that often vote Republican are pretty nice though. Differences aside you know where they stand.
One thing is for certain they’re not multi-username sporting cowards incapable of defending their opinion.
I’m sorry for the American policies that have been in place since the 7th century.
Lol! Good one.
How far back do you Bannon-Koch’s plan on taking America?
Yet, it’s peculiar that Washington is allied to and arming (in 100s of billions) a country that wants to take islam back to the 7th century. See Saudi wahhabism.
“American Muslims raise money to repair vandalized Jewish cemetery
Muslim community leaders launched a fundraising campaign to help repair a historic Jewish cemetery that was vandalized over the weekend. Donors surpassed the initial goal of $20,000 within just three hours.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2017/0222/American-Muslims-raise-money-to-repair-vandalized-Jewish-cemetery
This article seems to be informed, or at least influenced, by the Robert Pape book, “Dying to Win.” I feel the conclusions of the book misunderestimate the role played by Islamic commandments to kill, convert or capture non-Muslims. I believe this misunderstanding is sufficiently errant to cost us 100’s of 1,000’s of lives and Billions of dollars some day when all out war erupts on our soil.
And to make this seem even more scary, one of the books on former USMC General (now Secretary of Defense) James (Mad Dog) Mattis recommended reading list is this same dangerously misguided view of the cause of the Muslim hatred and violence against non Muslims.
For trustworthy information from the non Muslim’s point of view, but based totally on the texts of the Koran, Hadith and Sira, try Dr. Bill Warner’s PoliticalIslam.com
Or Political Islam Channel on YouTube.
Lots of resources. Books, videos, articles, interviews, maps and etc.
12:46 “… a nation once invaded by Islam will become one hundred percent Muslim unless it is driven out…”
What Happens after Islam Enters a Civilization?
https://disqus.com/home/channel/politicalrhetoricbusters/discussion/channel-politicalrhetoricbusters/what_happens_after_islam_enters_a_civilization/
Do you think the U.S should continue to be allies with Saudi Arabia?
“How We Got Here
The Misuse of American Military Power and The Middle East in Chaos”
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176245/tomgram%3A_danny_sjursen%2C_mission_unaccomplished%2C_15_years_later/#more
Americans do not fear Muslims. Americans are just hiding their shame. We Americans expect the shoe to drop any minute now for atrocities committed for a couple of centuries. In 1948 the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate of Palestine created Israel and started the fire in the mid east. In 1953-54 we committed a grossly horrific act. We overthrew a democratically elected Muslim government. Iran has earned the right to hate us. We need to apologize. America has taken the natural resources from this part of the world like common thieves. We and Great Britain caused the turmoil that rocks the world today. I don’t even want to start on Great Britain. What kind of demon country starts two wars to allow them to continue to send opium into China? And when the Taliban decided to destroy the poppy fields of Afghanistan in 2000 who sent troops in to fight them in 2001? Yeah just a coincidence huh?
No, it is not fear, it is expectations of payback that Americans feel.
The Balfour Declaration was issued in 1917, not 1948.Likewise, the US did not overthrow the Mossadegh government; it tried to do that and failed; the protestors that later took to the streets and toppled Mossadegh had nothing to do with the CIA’s original coup plot.
Also “America has taken the natural resources from this part of the world like common thieves”? Uh, yeah, I guess that’s the proper definition of the term “buying oil.”
And the war in Afghanistan was in response to the Taliban’s opium destruction? Sure, I guess that whole 9/11 thing had nothing to do with it.
Thanks for clearing all of that up.
We should fear Islam but intelligently. If one were to set aside a few hours of study one would learn fairly quickly that Islam is not just another religion but rather a political ideology that aspires to dominate the world with Sharia law. And Sharia law is no fun, believe me. Women are considered defective and inferior to men. All kafirs, or infidels, must either be executed or submit to Sharia law and pay a tax. Really Islam is not a picnic. It is like a jail sentence with time out for low level employment. In 1400 years Islam can count almost three hundred million kafirs killed. Moderate Muslims no doubt exist but it is practically impossible to determine who they are. Islam has a concept of sacred deception. However, find out for yourself by reading or take a vacation to Saudi Arabia and advertise yourself as gay even if you are not. Good luck.
And they should fear Christianity. For a thousand years Christianity/Catholicism have literally had a policy of genocide of “heathen” and “savage” races. The evidence exists in Papal Bulls such as Inter Caetera:
The so many documents are explicit in their genocidal acts. Whole cultures, from Africa to North and South America, New Zealand and Australia — whole cultures and languages — have been completely disappeared by Christian Missionaries.
Communism has been for previous generations been accused of wanting to take over the world, as is Islam now.
But Christianity/Catholicism has been actively doing just that for far longer, actually having committed genocide of perhaps a billion people and thousands of cultures over the centuries.
Too many Americans are simply just too ignorant of history.
So you still agree that we should fear Islam?
P.S. Your characterization that “Islam is not a religion” but a “political ideology” is not from “hours of study” but from reading a few posts on Brietbart, Redstate, Daily Caller or Fox News and the other White Nationalist sources who have been lying to you for years.
If one actually did “study” history — something Conservatives actually do not do — and it would have to be more than a few hours but only an intelligent person would understand that, one could not possibly believe that shtick of yours that you simply and only get from the white nationalist websites and newspapers you read — which you are just parroting.
(The term “alt-right” was actually created by a white nationalist — I’ll bet you don’t know who — to mean “the alternative right” as propaganda to deflect from his white nationalist roots. White supremacist is really what it means. People like him and the websites that publish his words have been lying to people like you for a very long time.)
The stupidity and falsity or your words are astounding. Though nothing I can say here will get you or the others like you to ever understand that. For that to happen you’d have to read a dozen or more books on history — and investment of more than a few hours — something you nor anything other Conservative will ever do.
To quote your boss: Sad!
There are bars in Texas where I’d like you to go and advertise yourself as gay.
As for the rest of your post. Hateful, ill informed nonsense.
The title should have been: Why do so many muslims fear muslims ? Decades of denial of muslim’s role in the world.
@Christian C Holmer February 22 2017, 1:05 a.m. BST
RE: “What if the US government was able to use the electronic devices you surround yourself with to stimulate your fight or flight response ever time you saw heard or read about muslims, conspiracy theories or free speech across all devices.”
What if Mr. Holmer’s prolific and silly posts are followed by public exposure of his occupation and home address by hundreds of enraged targets with a lot of free time on their hands?
Stan. I consider what I described there in neuroscience news to be technologically feasible. I meant no disrespect of any kind and am certainly not mocking anyones experience as targeted persons. Don’t you remember when Mona agreed to admit certain TAO catalog retroreflectors from the “angry neighbor” set of tools may have contributed to the reemergence of Hugo Chavez cancer as Julian Assange and Jacob Appelbaum had postulated? She wouldn’t concede they’d go to th troule of oing that to ordinary people and WEdisagreed with her?
I spend a good deal of time researching in science journals and science publications both due to an interest in technology, electrophysiology an quantum mechanics. When I post those I’m just seeking constructive input like what I’ve received from Doug, Wnt etc I’m not trying to enrage ANYONE.
excerpt from an excellent article from July 2012 by James Petras
The Rise of the Police State and the Absence of Mass Opposition
http://petras.lahaine.org/?p=1904
What if the US government was able to use the electronic devices you surround yourself with to stimulate your fight or flight response ever time you saw heard or read about muslims, conspiracy theories or free speech across all devices.
http://neurosciencenews.com/fear-amygdala-prefrontal-cortex-oscillations-3699/
In the present study we demonstrate for the first time that freezing behaviour is tightly associated with an internally generated brain state that manifests in sustained 4 Hz oscillatory dynamics in the dmPFCBLA circuits. Furthermore, 4 Hz oscillations accurately predicted onset and termination of the freezing state.
4Hz oscillations provide longrange coupling of the neural activity in dmPFC and BLA, allowing for periods of synchronous coactivation of single neurons, which are believed to be involved in processes of information flow and synaptic plasticity. Using causal analysis we identified that activation of prefrontal neurons precedes that of amygdala neurons within each 4 Hz oscillation cycle, hinting towards the role of prefrontal cortex for controlling the retrieval and expression of fear memories. Using unprecedented optogenetic manipulation, we demonstrated that the artificial induction of 4Hz oscillations in the dmPFC was sufficient to promote freezing behavior and resulted in the formation of longlasting fear memory.
Maybe God is Not so Great.
Maybe the (D)s Modernday Mcarthyist Vladimir Putin is really the Avenging Secular Russo-Sunni Prophesied in the Book of Not so Great.
Interesting points. I’d add that a “coherent complicated true story” would have to include why America has done hideous things to countries across the Middle East.
‘Islam did it’ (as well as kindness, tolerance for the existence of different beliefs – skin tones, the absence of Christianity being shoved down our throats in the public sphere) is the excuse given for the continuous failure of US Foreign policy in the Middle East (that is, according to what we are told is the goal, which is really shady at this point.)
The US war dept, current administration, politicians or billionaires and the transnational corporations they represent would much rather we all argue opinions about Islam than demand we get out of the Middle East or have to give an honest explanation as to what those interests are that can’t be kept through humane respectable methods and give any details as to WHY they think the choices they’re making, the despair they create and the lives they destroy is worth those interests.
Stephen Walt: http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/17/five-ways-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-islam/
The White House’s approach to the world’s second largest religion isn’t just bigoted – it’s a strategic disaster.
1: The Balance of Power Is Overwhelmingly in Our Favor. Let’s start with some good old-fashioned power politics. Imagine for the moment that all of Islam was in fact united in an effort to overwhelm the United States and the rest of the West. If they really were united, do the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims have the capacity to do so? Hardly.
There are 47 Muslim-majority countries in the world. If you add all of their economies together, they have a combined GDP of slightly more than $5 trillion. That sounds like a lot, but remember that the United States has a GDP of more than $17 trillion all by itself and so does the European Union. In terms of raw economic power, in short, the “West” has this fictitious coalition of Muslim states out-matched from the start.
The imbalance is even more striking when it comes to military capability. This same imaginary coalition of Muslim-majority countries spent roughly $270 billion on defense last year, and if you take out U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia ($87 billion) and the United Arab Emirates ($22 billion), the number drops to less than $200 billion. By contrast, the United States alone spent roughly $600 billion — more than twice as much — and that’s not counting its various allies like the United Kingdom, Japan, Israel, or others.
But these raw figures on defense spending greatly understate the West’s advantage. The entire Muslim world produces no indigenous advanced combat aircraft (though Turkey produces some U.S.-designed F-16s under license) and no indigenously designed modern battle tanks (though Pakistan makes a modified Chinese tank and Turkey is working on one of its own). The navies of the Muslim world have no major surface combatants larger than a frigate (though Iran is reportedly building a single destroyer), no aircraft carriers, no long-range bombers, and no nuclear submarines. Indeed, the power projection capabilities of all of these states are extremely limited. And to the extent that these states have much modern military power, it is because the United States, France, the U.K., China and others have been willing to sell or license advanced weaponry, for various strategic reasons of their own. Yet Saudi Arabia’s unimpressive performance in its recent intervention in Yemen suggests that the Muslim world’s capacity to project power even short distances is quite modest.
Thus, even if one started with the wholly unrealistic assumption that the Muslim world is a single unified movement, it’s much, much, much weaker than we are. Maybe that explains why foreign powers have intervened in Muslim-majority countries repeatedly over the past couple of centuries, while the reverse hasn’t occurred since the siege of Vienna in 1529. Not once. It wasn’t Egypt that invaded France in 1798; Saddam Hussein didn’t send a mighty expeditionary force around the world and up the Potomac to occupy Washington and depose George W. Bush in 2003; and Muammar al-Qaddafi didn’t order his air force to bomb Paris in order to oust Nicolas Sarkozy in 2011. Surely this one-sided history tells you something about the relative power of Western states and those from the Islamic world.
2. Islam Is, in Fact, Deeply Divided. From time immemorial, threat inflators like Bannon & Co. have portrayed adversaries as part of some grand unified coalition. Remember the “communist monolith” or the “axis of evil?” Today, fearmongers use phrases like “Islamofascism” or “radical Islam” to imply that our enemies form a tightly integrated and centrally directed movement working tirelessly to bring us to our knees.
But in reality, the Islamic world is more disunited today than at any time in recent memory. It is divided among many different states, of course, and many of those states (e.g., Iran and Saudi Arabia, or Turkey and Syria) don’t get along. There are vast geographic and cultural differences between Indonesia and countries like Yemen or Morocco or Saudi Arabia. There’s also the core division between the Sunnis and the Shiites, not to mention a number of other minor schisms between various Islamic offshoots. And let’s not forget the sometimes-bitter rivalries within the jihadi movement itself, both across the globe and within particular countries. Just look at all the radical groups who hate the Islamic State, and all the jihadis whom the Islamic State regards as heretics because they don’t embrace its full ideology.
These divisions do not mean extremists pose no danger at all, of course, but Bannon’s specter of a rising Islamic tide that threatens to overwhelm us is pure fantasy. Instead of treating all of Islam as a threat — which might eventually unite more of them against us — the smart move is to play “divide-and-conquer.” But that means recognizing that the danger we face is not a hostile “civilization” or an entire religion, but rather just a small number of extremists who are unrepresentative of the larger cultural category (and opposed by most of it). To beat them, we want the rest of the Muslim world on our side.
3: Terrorism Is Just Not That Big a Threat. Really. We live in a world where lots of bad things can happen. You might get into a car accident. You could get cancer. You could mishandle a power tool and injure yourself severely. You may fall off a ladder, slip in a bathtub, or be in the wrong place at the wrong time and end up stopping a stray bullet. Or maybe, just maybe, you might find yourself imperiled by a radical Islamic extremist.
You wouldn’t know it if you listened to Trump, to CNN, to Fox News, or to most of our politicians, but that last danger is miniscule. Not zero, but really, really small. We’ve been obsessed with terrorism ever since 9/11 but the reality is that the risk it poses is way, way, way down the list of possible harms that might befall us.
For example, based on the evidence since 9/11 (and including that attack), the likelihood an American will be killed by a terrorist is less than 1 in 3 million per year, and the lifetime risk is about 1 in 45,000. That’s pretty damn good odds: You are much more likely to die from being struck by lightning, falling out of bed, a heat wave, or accidentally choking on food. But don’t expect Trump, Bannon, Flynn, Gorka, Gaffney, or any of the well-compensated “terrorism experts” to highlight this fact, because their livelihoods and their ability to seize more and more power depends on keeping you very, very scared. And don’t expect the media to downplay the danger either, because hyping terrorism whenever it does occur is a good way to get your eyeballs glued to the screen. (Among other things, this is why Trump’s recent statements suggesting terrorism was being “underreported” are so absurd.)
In some ways, in fact, terrorism remains the perfect bogeyman. It’s easy to hype the threat, and to convince people to worry about random dangers over which they have little or no control. Unscrupulous politicians have long understood that you can get a lot of leeway when the people are scared and craving protection, and it’s pretty clear that Trump and Bannon see this tactic as the ideal way to retain public support (and to consolidate more presidential power), and the specter of terrorism serves well because it scares people but isn’t actually an existential threat that might require a serious, sensible, strategic, and well-thought response. For would-be authoritarians, “terrorism” is a gift that just keeps giving.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying the danger is zero or that sensible precautionary measures should not be taken. But to believe that ragtag radicals like al Qaeda or the Islamic State constitute a threat on a par with Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or some of the serious opponents the United States has faced in the past is silly. Frankly, it makes me question the guts, steadiness, and judgment of some of our present leaders, if they are so easily spooked by such weak adversaries. Let’s hope these fraidy-cats never have to deal with a truly formidable foe.
4: “Creeping Sharia” Is a Fairy Tale. Die-hard Islamophobes have a fallback argument: The danger isn’t an actual military attack or a Muslim invasion of America or Europe. Rather, the danger is the slow infiltration of our society by “foreigners” who refuse to assimilate and who will eventually try to impose their weird and alien values on us. One sees this argument in the right-wing myth of “creeping Sharia,” based on trumped-up (pun intended) stories about “Sharia courts” and other alleged incidents where diabolical Muslim infiltrators have tried to pollute our pristine Constitution with their religiously inspired dogma. If we’re not ceaselessly vigilant, we are told, someday our daughters will be wearing hijabs and we’ll all be praying to Mecca.
Seriously, this anxiety almost sounds right out of Dr. Strangelove, and especially Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper’s rants about fluoridation and the need to protect our “precious bodily fluids.” To repeat: There is simply no evidence of “creeping Sharia” here in the United States, and no risk of it occurring in the future. Not only do we still have formal separation of church and state here (at least so far!), the number of Muslims in the United States remains tiny. According to a 2016 Pew Research Center survey, there are only 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States, a mere 1 percent of the population. That percentage might double by 2050 to a vast, enormous, dangerous, and overwhelming 2 percent. Being a tiny minority makes them ideal victims for ambitious power-seekers, but hardly a threat to our way of life.
5: The “Clash of Civilizations” Is a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. The final reason to reject Bannon and company’s depiction of a vast and looming Muslim threat to us is that this worldview encourages us to act in ways that make the problem worse instead of better. As George Kennan wisely observed in 1947, “It is an undeniable privilege of every man to prove himself right in the thesis that the world is his enemy; for if he reiterates it frequently enough and makes it the background of his conduct he is bound eventually to be right.” If U.S. leaders keep demonizing an entire religion, impose ill-considered bans on Muslim refugees, and most important of all, continue to intervene throughout the Arab and Islamic world with military force, they will convince more and more people that Osama bin Laden, Khalid Sheikh Muhammed and Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi were right when they claimed the West had “declared war” on their religion.
Despite the mountain of evidence that shows that anti-Americanism in the Muslim world is overwhelmingly a response to U.S. policy (and not because they “hate our freedoms”), people like Bannon, Gaffney, and their ilk want us to double down on the same policies that have inspired extremists since the 1950s and especially since the formation of al Qaeda. Frankly, given how often we’ve used our superior power to interfere in these countries, it’s somewhat surprising the reaction has been as modest and manageable as it is. Ask yourself how Americans might react if a powerful foreign country had repeatedly bombed the continental United States with aircraft and drones, or invaded, toppled our government, and then left chaos in their wake. Do you think a few patriotic Americans might be tempted to try for some payback?
My point is not to defend terrorism — far from it, in fact — but rather to remind us that it didn’t just come out of nowhere, and it isn’t solely a reaction to the political and social problems of the Muslim world itself. But if you’d like to encourage more of it, then by all means embrace the Bannon playbook.
Perhaps the most important task for any strategist is to figure out what the main threats and opportunities are, and then to devise policies that can defuse the former and exploit the latter. Making all of Islam our enemy and viewing the world through the lens of a vast “civilizational clash” fails on both criteria. If followed, it will bog us down in more interminable conflicts in places that are not vital U.S. interests, distract us from other foreign-policy issues, and sap the wealth and strength that we may need to deal with more serious challenges, including long-neglected problems here at home. I’m sure plenty of anti-Americans are hoping that we take the bait and do just that; what scares me is that there are now people in the White House who agree with them.
I loved reading that. thanks.
Why do Americans fear Muslims? Gee,maybe a bunch of guys hijacking airliners full of people and crashing them into New York skyscrapers would do it. Or,seeing Muslim jihadists drive a truck over a group of people in France.
I understand the anger,I know about Sykes-Picot,and Mossedegh,and all of the outrages perpetrated by The Great Satan. But I think it’s silly to ask “why”. Because some of them would behead all of us if they could,and they don’t attack soldiers.
Actually, soldiers have been the target plenty of times.
Two mere examples:
1983 Beirut bombing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombings
2000 USS Cole bombing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing
Right?
textophobia is a very specific phobia regarding certain fabrics .. for example muslin
http://www.phobiasource.com/textophobia-fear-of-certain-fabrics/
Zionist weapon of personal destruction
Winding down from the material I wanted in one thread for others who may engage Zionists at this site, it’s also important to document reputation-destroying projects. McCarthyite blacklisting is a rather recent and odious Zionist weapon. In the U.S. perhaps the premier such project is “Canary Mission.” The Jewish magazine, Tablet, describes the project and it’s site thus:
Part of the purposes is to list pro-Palestinian activists so they can be harassed online. But the more worrisome purpose is that they intend to silence pro-Palestinian student activists and faculty with threats of destroying their careers.
As MintPressNews reported:
I have a few more issues pertaining to Zionism to document, in the hope that others will pick up the torch; other demands on my time will be greatly reducing (but not wholly eliminating) my participation here.
Death threats and intimidation
Journalists and novelist, Ben Ehrenreich, frequently writes and speaks critically of Zionism. Like many who do that, and as he writes, ” threats and intimidation have long been the norm.”
At least one journalist at this site has also received many threats, including death threats, for his pro-Palestinian views. In a sub-thread below, some of us have detailed vicious Zionist behavior we also have experienced.
Here is H.R. McMaster…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HyqfM38K_TI
That may be what it brings to your mind Mona, but the fact remains you and nuf and barabbas were very cozy on this board while you were all attacking me. Face it the anti-zionist are infested with true racists and this board is the proof. as is the fact.
That is far more true of the alliance between antisemites and Zionists, of course. Many Trumpkins are deeply antisemitic, yet admire the ethnostate of Israel.
Granting No Quarter:
Yes, Ali abunimah and his site, Electronic Intifada, have always held very firm that antisemitism is disgusting and has no place in the pro-Palestinian movement. He specifically cites Gilad Atzmon who is, in fact, truly whacked out on the subject of Jews.
Fortunately, almost no one here has ever cited Atzmon, and the once I do recall I explained why he should not be used as a source. (Not everyone is familiar with his rancid commentary on Jews — not Zionists — per se.) Almost any point worth making can be sourced elsewhere.
The other important matter to note about EI, is their incredibly good record for accuracy. When I first began immersing myself in the truth about Zionism I was wary of each new site I read and researched it. While I found tons of bilious whining from Zionists about how supposedly horrible Abunimah and EI are (antisemitic, pro-terrorist, doncha know), I found virtually no credible claims of factual inaccuracy. Like any reputable outlet they have, on rare occasion, published an error — but when that’s demonstrated they post a correction.
Yes, 9/10, easily. Better than Mondoweiss, IMHO.
That is indeed sickening but hardly surprising.
Some Zionists will stop at nothing. I’ve been threathened physically and on one occasion called at home (by phone).
I’m sure you’re also aware of the so-called MASADA S.H.I.T. List?
Zionists at another site published contact information for my adult children and their neighbors and promoted a campaign to call them and tell them all kinds of foul things about me, including that I supposedly “support pedophiles.” Another on Twitter said he hoped I was ill and that my kids had taken out a DNR on me. (That Zionist account was eventually suspended.)
Second possibly only to the misogynists attacking women during the Gamergate shitstorm, Zionists can be incredibly vicious.
Second only to gamergate…?WTF?
ZIONISTS KILL WOMEN AND BABIES. But somehow massage….missog…er….massagevaginists or whatever that word is-they are somehow worse?
This is why the left has collapsed in upon itself. Just this.
No offense, Mona, but I am not even certain that you even know that these are one and the same, working mostly from the offices of ADL funded think tanks and AIPAC bunkers full of crisis PR cash. That Twitter massagevaginists are largely paid trolls who create crisis and then run polls to gauge the effects of the crisis they create.
Ziotsheits and their mercenary armies of christurd dominionists are destroying democracy, one critical thinker like Mona at a time.
This one is too easy. The answer is, Mohammad is their prophet. Our father Abraham will deny all of you.
This is what a friend calls projecting your personality onto someone else. The U.S. goes to the Middle East, kills massive numbers of people, puts its puppets in place often by deposing now former leaders, and those puppets make life miserable for the people who live in the Middle East so that the U.S. can get cheap oil and for other resource and geopolitical reasons. And of course U.S. support for Israel. Then the U.S. turns around and cries “why do they hate us?” whenever someone from the Middle East responds violently.
Most people in Nazi Germany probably didn’t think they were doing anything wrong either. What the U.S. does is more indirect and distant, so it’s even harder for Americans to make the connections. Add the very sophisticated U.S. propaganda, and only those who make a strong effort to know what’s going on and are able to think objectively and critically have a clue. Everyone else thinks they hate us because of our freedoms or some other such BS.
Then the U.S. turns around and cries “why do they hate us?” Jeff D
First, who are “they”? Most people in the Middle East do not hate Americans or Westerners. Are you referring to terrorists when you say “they”? Terrorists (“they”) hate Muslims more than they hate Americans considering their usual target.
Second, when terrorists kill Shias in Pakistan we accept it as religious motivated violence. Those terrorists clearly say they kill those Shias because they are Shias.
However, when the same terrorists kill Americans because as they say Americans are infidels, many of you refuse that argument and respond by saying they kill Americans because of US policy. That argument is quite weak for two reasons. Firstly, you accept the terrorists reasoning whenever they are not killing Americans. You reject their reasoning only when they kill Americans. Secondly, the argument suggests that terrorists from the Middle East would not attack countries that are not involved in Middle Eastern politics. Empirical evidence points the contrary: how many “massive numbers of people” Switzerland or Indonesia have killed in the Middle East?
We do not need a debate about US policy in the Middle East. Everybody knows it has been a disaster. My question is what makes you believe “they” (meaning the terrorists) would not hate the US anyway regardless for the US policy in the Middle East considering that “they” kill Indonesians, Swiss, and many others.
“Most people in Nazi Germany probably didn’t think they were doing anything wrong either.”
Assuming the educated German population did not know that going into somebody’s house, killing him, and stealing his property was wrong!
They knew it was wrong. Check the Nuremberg Trial. Their defense was not whether it was wrong or not to massacre millions of Jews. Their defense was “we did not know”. That is the same answer provided by German citizens brought to concentration camps by the US Army.
Some were too scared or too coward to fight back, but most refuse to stand up against the Nazis. Genocides happen and will continue to happen because most people refuse to stand and fight against what they know it’s wrong.
Where were you ranting and protesting Leftists when Obama was murdering Muslims in the Middle East? Effing hypocrites.
admonishment against the obama drone policies was significant.
just one of many reviews on TI
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/20/a-new-documentary-explores-the-devastating-effects-of-drone-warfare-on-victims-and-whistleblowers/?comments=1#comment-312140
Anyone who thinks that Democratic presidents are any better on this issue should just consider Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam. What Obama did was try to fight the wars “better” and fight the “right” wars. He was very far from being a peace president.
What would be a “peace president”?
just a passing observation…
1. zion propagandists are on “this” particular board in a fashion contrary to the subject of the article
2. the msm are attacking the president with pronouncements of impeachment for no good reason or cause
3. the dcc and msm remain yet in total denial of the party failure to get elected when they had an easy win before them but stuck to the TPP like flies on sheet
it occurs to me that the criminal minded collective of zion participants must also have lost and are lashing out — as hillary and her band of losers in te upper echelon are speechless.
This indicates to me that it was not just hillary who lost by the consortium of criminal minds that back her that are raving mad at having lost something far more than normal persons would suffer. Their loss was a richter 10 to them. IF that is the case which it seems to me, and given that friendship with Russia is such a catastrophic event “to them”, that what these criminal minds lost was EVERYTHING. And everything to them is THE PLANET. There must have been a large criminal minded outfit with a deep interest in hillary beyond what most people would imagine to be considerable and the pervue of the presidency. I submit it is operational control of the planet in some fashion of organisation and the TPP had to be a very large part of it as the stupid minds of the dcc uppers could be so blind as to not concede that in the face of loud constituent objections – and in denial even today. Global domination of some sort.
I dont have the contacts or background to see how that would be placed but my nose tells me this. Brexit – sheer anger by the bureau of bureaucratic participants in writing the rules of trade and profit, gone from what zionists would want. TPP, guaranteed corporat rule and profiteering, gone, what the zionists would crave.
show me i am wrong.
also explains
1. why a likely kill order for Seth Rich has not been discovered.
2. why the media is so fearful of President Trump’s criticism of it as he speaks freely using his rights of freedom of speech that the so-called free press seems so opposed to.
3. why the media sold America on WMD
When President Trump warned America that the mainstream media is “the enemy”, he is illuding to something he knows that we dont. He is hinting at the existence of information that the whore media refuse to put out or challenge. TAKING A GUESS – THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK.
FTM
The sudden flurry of bomb threats at Jewish groups, mapped perfectly across the US, is another false-flag circle-the-wagons ploy.
I think Israel is worried as hell the Xtian loonies are coming.
Oh, FFS Nuffy, BEHAVE!
Behave? How so?
The sudden flurry of bomb threats serves a purpose.
Israel should be worried about the Xtian loonies as you well know. They will play nice with Israel for now.
The people around Trump are some of the most deranged individuals possible. Those are the folks who build and operate death camps with a cold efficiency. The disdain for the Press and Judiciary are necessary steps for Marshal Law to be invoked.
Christians, Jews, and Muslims; Satan’s Trifecta.
‘False flags’ are the New Commie to you, Nuffy.
When will you show me your 9/11 calcs though? ;^)
especially since these threats were so neatly packed in the lying media. Just threats, no source, no investigation, no actual damages. Just victims looking for to be rescued….
i agree that israel is worried about christian loonies
not a false flag, just their sick self-earned paranoia resurfacing
Here is what Osama Bin Laden said motivated him, via Steve Coll’s book, The Bin Ladens,
“The 1982 Israeli campaign in Lebanon lit up the Arab world…. ‘The events that made a direct impression on me were during and after 1982, when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon,’ scene of his boyhood schooling, Osama wrote years later:
‘I still remember those distressing scenes: blood, torn limbs, women and children massacred; all over the place, houses were being destroyed and tower blocks were collapsing; crushing their residents… In those critical moments, many ideas raged inside me, ideas difficult to describe, but they unleashed a powerful urge to reject injustice and a strong determination to punish the oppressors. As I looked at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me to punish the oppressor in kind by destroying towers in America, so that it would have a taste of its own medicine…On that day I became sure that the oppression and international murder of innocent women and children is a deliberate American policy.’”
Thanks for the reminder. A link would be even nicer though…
Bin Laden might have said that, but he did not become anti-American until after the Gulf War, when US troops were deployed to Saudi Arabia (an “occupation” according to his line of thinking)
You will recall that bin Laden fought the Soviets during their war in Afghanistan; according to Lawrence Wright’s book on al-Qaeda, bin Laden harbored no ill will toward America during this time, and was even grateful for American support to the Afghan mujahideen.
Also, I can appreciate the irony of someone like bin Laden complaining about the ” international murder of innocent women and children.”
no doubt the liars cons and thieves that make up the zionist personality disorder and who have no useful education, no real world talent, and no allegiance with goodness, are very quick too spot what they produce.
Left out the link.
82% of FBI arrests of (manufactured) domestic terrorists were home grown in the USA:
From Mike Masnick at Techdirt.com:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170212/23501436693/fbi-arresting-more-americans-targeting-muslims-than-muslims-targeting-americans.shtml
shiver me timbers.
so yer sayin’ the f…b…i… is now the NEW PLANETARY POLICE?
How in hell did you get that out of what I wrote?
Unless of course you are referring to things like the Kenya bombing, where they very likely created the Somali terrorist and then flew across the globe to run the cover and cleanup operation. “Wet jobs ‘R Us!” could be a new motto for their global aspirations.
I don’t want to give the Corporation sole credit for creating and then policing all of the terrorism, because they play so well with the many subsidiary international terrorist creation factories at the CIA/Mossad/JTRIG/GCHQ/MI5 etc.
And of course they have help from the new klan: InfraGard, working with the ADL, and local police departments, and NGO’s and church fanatics here in America, using community “extremist” monitoring programs way they did with Omar Mateen, Syed Farook, Gavin Long, Myron May and the rest of the “Somali” “terrorists”.
Naw- I don’t want to give you-barabbas of all people!- the wrong impression about world policing. It takes a village to create terrorists and send them forwards int the world.
Jewish organized crime isn’t a real thing-The kosher nostra is so yesterday!
Yidfellahs.
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Kosher_Nostra
Israeli baby killers in Gaza however are doing just fine, as are the Mossad shits who masquerade as “Islamic terrorists” and murder old ladies all over the ME.
Come to think of it, that guy who owned the Twin Towers pulled off one of the cleanest cons in world history.
lots of sophistry and not one drop of insight. Has anybody here actually read the Quran? Before you comment, go read it. All of it. It’s nothing more than a stone-aged , hate filled screed. Any one who trusts those who believe in it are morons and deserve the fate its subscribers are more than willing to provide.
I have read it. Have you read the Bible? Are you suggesting that Christians are capable of being Christians without following the Bible, but Muslims don’t have the capacity to be Muslims without following the Quran?
Next time you meet a Muslim, ask him/her if they’ve read the Quran? If they say, they haven’t, are they absolved of all the charges levied on them by Sam Harris?
For 14 centuries Christians and others have lived peacefully in Muslim land, that in itself is an ample proof that your interpretation of Quran is very different from how Muslims interpret it.
History would suggest you have no idea what you are talking about
The author confuses cause with effect. Yes… past administrations have caused muslims to want to kill us – ergo we should accept our fate?
Regardless of the WHY – muslim majority countries dream of killing americans en mass. We can sublimely submit to these impulses (righteous or not) – or we can proactively prevent such killings from happening.
No one has a birth right to immigrate to america. Immigration is a privilege that can be limited to those least likely to want to kill us – for whatever greivance… valid or invalid.
America is but one country in a big world. To suggest that because we deny entry THAT would somehow cause more hostility and terrorism is insane.
The author is not saying that Muslim majority countries dream of killing American en mass. If you look at actual number of terrorists, leaving aside the battlegrounds, it is less than 1 in a million. The author is saying that even those should be explained in terms of our foreign policy rather than the “they hate us because of our freedom” mantra. Allowing or disallowing immigration will really have no impact. Let us look at Timothy McVeigh — if there were no Branch Davidian fiasco their would have been no McVeigh’s terrorism. This factual statement by no means justifies what McVeigh did.
US foreign policy is rational, not insane. If you think it makes no sense you are clueless as to the real goal of the policy. These events are not blowback; they are provocations designed to perpetuate Anglo-American colonialism and destroy Arab nationalism. The US is simply practicing an upgraded version of the countergang strategy used by the British in Africa in the 1960s.
Yes, it’s rational, in the same sense that the mob is rational in its actions and strategies.
If the goal is to use CIA-trained terrorists to help destroy these countries, preventing them from developing independently (which it is, and has been all along), then US foreign policy makes perfect sense. Writers like Schwarz who talk about the US being “insane”, intimating it is “dangerously nutty” perpetuate the fiction that our rulers don’t know exactly what they’re doing at every turn, and haven’t orchestrated the whole thing from day one, “blowback” and all. But they do, and they have.
That’s a Chomskian view too. Take a look, for example, at his analysis of how the Vietnam war was actually more of a success than a failure.
I know about his position on Vietnam. I’m ambivalent about it, and in general I’m not a fan of Chomsky. There are better political analysts around in my opinion.
I guess what drove my initial comment was the use of the term “blowback” in the article. It’s simply a CIA cover story that the Agency uses to keep the public from realizing they deliberately orchestrate many of these terrorist attacks.
Evidence?
it’s patently sociopathic.
Ok, so Jon Schwarz starts this article off on perpetuates the American lie about Iraq and Kuwait.
It was Kuwait that was slant drilling into Iraq oil fields and not paying back Iraq for the theft. That is why Iraq invaded Kuwait.
It was America that gave Iraq the go ahead to invade.
It was American’s lie that they were protecting international laws and helping the Kuwaitis out.
congrats. Your observation is simple yet focused. You have perhaps read much or been exposed to much – including convoluted garbage. After all that you manage to zero in on the root. Again, congrats. Now… take your observation process to the next step in the larger picture and look at the CONTEXT OF EVENTS.
1. the slant drilling
2. the american greenlight
3. the attack on iraq
Q? Does it make sense that the US would give a green light then attack?
Answer. No. At least not good honest sense.
Q? Being as that is what happened, how does this make sense?
Answer. the greenlight and attack are of ONE UNIFIED RESPONSE.
Q? if the 2 seemingly unrelated events are unified, then what is included in the set of events that glues it all together?
Answer. As the final event was the attack, then there had to be a trigger. As the greenlight and attack together were of a unified dishonest nature, then it BECOMES APPARENT that the slant drilling must have been a part of that unified set of events.
Thank you for bringing this back to light, Skip. Your mind is working well. Keep it up. See more.
i am meaning to imply that the SLANT DRILLING WAS STAGED to precipitate the entire scenario of the US-ZION partnership agenda of murder and land theft.
Please explain.
should be self explanatory
what exactly are you perhaps confused about?
Who are you claiming that the US wanted to murder & whose land are you claiming that the US wanted to steal?
BTW..
This pattern of seemingly ununified events is the same template that plays out for the MURDER OF SETH RICH. As reported, he was shot in the back 3 times. This is a LOUD event yet there is no mention of a gathering of alarmed persons. This would indicate the use of a silencer. A silencer is not used by stickup persons as they take too much room and the guns are used as mere threats. This means that it was the INTENT of the perpetrator to kill.
There is no report of him attempting to escape a person with a gun. Had he attempted escape, it would have been reported differently. Conclude that he was probably on the sidewalk and walking away from the murderer and possibly feeling no threat. This would indicate that he was confronted by either someone familiar or by someone with familiar context. He turned and walked away and the person shot him. Conclude that by this he was a threat to the context.
the stupidity of the dumb&dumbers or the arrogance of the whores of party politics is what gives America this gangster setting that is more than likely – WAY WORSE THAN RUSSIA IS PAINTED AS, by the lying whore media.
One would have to be a fool to think Seth Rich’ murder was a random act of violence.
Agreed 100%.
The american people are dumb – but not that dumb.
YES. The “deep state” did kill Seth Rich on Hillary’s order and to deny that fact is rank stupidity.
Any who choose to take on Zionists online do well to be aware of this common online affliction: The hasbara troll.
Jack Green is a hasbara troll, but there are and have been quite a few others of them infesting this site.
At any reasonably prominent online venue, there are always a number of accounts who make it their mission to post vacuous, misleading and disruptive Zionist bullshit. Often, they are following talking points issued by both formal and informal “hasbara” projects. (Hasbara means “explaining” in Hebrew; in practice it means “propaganda.”)
Max Blumenthal has described these annoying creatures and their programs thus:
Israel and Zionist organizations publish “hasbara manuals,” many of which are available online. Hasbara trolls have also been assigned to comments sections, such as at the Guardian. They are likely here as well — Jack Green almost certainly is one.
He posts the same scripted arguments all the time, and has been for almost a year — he’s seen every point of his script debunked time and time again. I will reply to his claims only on request of another whom I deem to be asking in good faith. The hasbara troll literally has heard it all already and knows he’s wrong.
Anti-Zionist source: Albert Einstein
In addition to the new book State of Terror which I’ve extensively discussed below, another reality Zionist seek to avoid — and will do almost anything to distract from — are the deeply anti-Zionist* views held by Albert Einstein. Kindle Magazine published this astonishing piece on that topic:
*Einstein did not oppose cultural or spiritual Zionism, and believed — as most reasonable people do — that Jews should be able to found and promote Jewish Centers in Palestine. He opposed the Nazi-like political Zionism that prevailed and to this day distorts Middle Eastern geopolitics and devastates Palestinians.
Zionism Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries. Even when not actively persecuting the Jews, the majority-gentile countries refused to give refuge to the Jews when they needed it. There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries would have allowed in Jewish refugees who were escaping from the Nazis. The idea of Zionism was that Jews would return to their homeland & have a majority-Jewish country because majority-gentile countries had failed to provide safety for the Jews.
The problem remains. If Zionism is not the answer, what is?
YOU LIE.
zions, common criminals banded together to murder and steal under the cloak of religion and politics.
Evidence?
Copious evidence on the religious fanaticism driving Zionism is in State of Terror. See Chapter 1, “The Third Temple.” Weizmann, Ben-Gurion, Begin and the rest all spoke in terms of messianism, replacing the Second Temple and the apocryphal Solomon’s Temple. Just as you have argued multiple times, these religious fanatics regarded the Hebrew Bible as God’s land deed to Zionists.
To this day, religious extremism drives settlers on the West Bank and throughout Israel proper. As has always been true, they commit terror and believe themselves to have divine permission to slaughter and steal from indigenous Arabs.
With G-d ‘on one’s side’, everything becomes permitted, Mona. See also ISIL.
Evidence that Weizmann was a religious fanatic?
There is none but Mona will continue to lie about it rather than supply supporting evidence.
See State of Terror, Chapter 1, “The Third Temple.” Weizmann advocated Zionism as messianism. He wrote of it that way frequently. (This can have a secular or semi-secular flavor as well.) Whether personally religious or not, Weizmann was entirely happy to see religious Jews couch Zionism in religious, messianic terms, and many, many did just hat, and still do.
So once again Mona makes a claim she does not in anyway provide evidence for.
Give evidence Weizman was a religious fanatic. So far you provided a citation that wouldnt past muster in a 8th grade history class.
You really should learn to read, you know?
Literalism seems a preferred tactic of yours: the only ones I know practice it when they’re losing a debate are Paleoconservatives.
Are you one of those?
I explained what i was Gert. You ignored it. Face once again Mona made a claim she couldnt back up. Its as simple as that. Or sonce you are so ” smart” tell me where she proved it.
What you are is a Murican Idiot, Patriotic Parrot and defender of the criminal regime known as ‘the Israeli Gummint’.
Not to mention a general arsehole…
Ah just as I expected. When you get caught in false hoods the “well educated” Gert calls names. Too funny.
Oh another thing Gert. It’s getting near 9:00 here in New York so I must be off to work. On my short commute I will ponder why the prized chemical engineer and physicist does nothing all day but post to the internet.
You have posted like a postit addict here too. I’m am currently unemployed but not for long, believe me.
My status of employment has nothing to do with anything here, of course.
Yours is once again the statement a TROLL would make.
Gil is fully aware I document all of my claims and that I did so here. But really Gert, it’s a mistake to keep engaging him when he spouts any of this bullshit about “lying,” not backing up claims, or whatever other misdirection he puts out there. I’d implore you to just ignore him as I almost always do.
Turning the conversation into a digression on whether one provided evidence, whether it is really evidence, whether one is a liar etc…is a win for Gil. DO NOT LET HIM DO THAT. And make no mistake, you empower and reward his propaganda efforts when you do.
A religious fanatic who’s not religious?
Words have meanings.
What I wrote was of “the religious fanaticism driving Zionism” and that Wiezmann, among others, was driven by “messianism.” This is a fact amply supported in State of Terror:
Again, read the book. It is very heavily footnoted, much of it to primary sources. Ranting about Hebrew scripture suffused Zionist enthusiasm, including among those of a more secular, but still messianic bent. Many religious Jews ate that up, which is part of why Weizmann did it.
“majority-gentile countries had failed to provide safety for the Jews. ”
Perhaps gentiles were tired of always having a few Jews run ponzi and usury on simple Christians.
If you could warn people to not deal with Goldman-Sachs, Wells-Fargo, Capital One, etc, would you do that?
The majority of Jews are just scared and cling to the mother-cult. That the cult is based on taking and/or controlling others is problematic for Jews.
Tell me in what way The Merchant of Venice does not mirror today’s financial industry?
The bankers always get their cut no matter the harm to society. Israel is going to get its $36 billion no matter the harm to Americans. There is specific language to prevent America backing out for any circumstance i.e. the concept of force majeure is specifically excluded. Only Shylock would ask for that and only a congress controlled by the Jewish state would go along.
That is fucked up and a tiny minority of the planet is involved, again and again.
Charles Ponzi was Christian.
The CEO of Wells-Fargo is Christian.
The CEO of Capital One is Christian.
Does that justify hatred of Christians?
“Charles Ponzi was Christian.”
A good Christian would never harm others in the search for more. A 10% net profit is all Hewlett-Packard took for decades. Catholic priests tend to live in multi-million dollar homes while, well, you know what they’re best known for; every year in Seattle the Archdioceses releases more names of abusers. Always under 100 names; usually 70 to 80. This is more than 20 years after Ratzinger left Seattle to eventually become pope. What a plan.
Christians, Jews, Muslims; Satan’s Trifecta.
Is there anyone who is good?
Humanists.
It’s getting tougher as the planet fills up.
Are there any Christians, Jews, Muslims who are also humanists?
gee jack
a palestinian jams a knife into the soldier that murdered his young sister on her way home from school. Does that justify hating Palestinians?
A Jew kills a Palestinian that murdered his young sister on her way home from school. Does that justify hating Jews?
“A Jew kills a Palestinian ”
That happened a couple of thousand times in Gaza while half a dozen Jews died.
QED
Men of fighting age were overrepresented among the dead in Gaza.
No one would have been killed if Palestinians had not been firing rockets & mortars killing or wounding 2,000 Israelis.
Not complicated: to fight and erardicate racism, including anti-Jewish racism, wherever it is found.
But Zionism isn’t interested in combatting racism: it indulges in it copiously.
How do you fight racism?
Evidence that Zionism isn’t interested in combatting racism?
Everytime you ask for evidence, that very evidence has already been presented here, usually multiple times.
How does one fight racism? Certainly NOT by being ethnocentric like you and Zionists are.
The evidence may be there, but I may not have seen it
or what one person considers evidence another person may not consider valid. If you have evidence that Zionism isn’t interested in combatting racism, please tell me. Thank you.
It’s right in front of your eyes: the Zionists on this forum (you, Craig, GilG and a few others) have ZERO inclination to combat the Islamophobia that drips off the page when the Trumpkins assault it.
How do you know that I have ZERO inclination to combat the Islamophobia that drips off the page when the Trumpkins assault it?
Because, idiot, you NEVER EVER HAVE!
That doesn’t follow.
You go to an animal shelter & you see an adorable dog & an adorable cat & you want to adopt both, but you have only enough time, energy & money to adopt one so you flip a coin & adopt the dog, Does that mean that you hate cats?
False i have spoken out against Trump and Islamophobia , on the other hand you ignore the racist Trumpet supporting nuf said because he is an anti zionist and went so far as to deny his existance.
False. I’ve called out Nuffy several times. Including in this thread.
You hardly ever call out Isalmophobia AT ALL. You’ve cited sites that positively DRIP with it like HP.
“Islamophobia”
If one thing is clear dealing with Zionist Jews it’s that they’re concerned only with Jews and antisemitism. Ethnocentric navelstaring is what they do. While looking for antisemitism in empty cookie jars, of course…
Julius Rosenwald, a Jew, built over five thousand schools, shops, and teachers’ homes for African-Americans because of the chronic underfunding of public education for African-American children in the South.
Lilian Wald & Henry Moskowitz, both Jews, were founding members of the NAACP (National Associatiion for the Advancement of Colored People.)
There were 3 civil rights advocates murdered by the KKK. Two of them, Michael Schwerner & Andrew Goodman, were Jews. The third, James Chaney, was African-American.
First of all once again you made a false claim about me (never, never, have) only to be forced to change it to not enough. Secondly you lie when you claim you have called out nuf for his antisemitism on this thread. You are without honor Gert. If this exchange has proven anything it’s that the anti-zionists and the group of anti-Semites that lurk among them are liars who lack any credibility and incapable of reasoned debate.
Learn to read, Gil. Search this thread for it and yee shall find.
If there’s one thing we can agree on it is that Nuf Said is a Classic antisemite. I have denounced him also on other threads. Perhaps you weren’t there. I don’t know nor care.
Honor???? Hahahahahhahhahhahhhahhhahahhah. You fool. Who do you think you are? Tony Soprano?
Idiot…
Or maybe he’s part of the Zionist Mafia? LOL.
and again Gert makes a claim he can’t back up. Go ahead Gert if it is on this thread quote it. Or is this going to be another case where you blame your lying on lack of English skills.
Now bookmark that as well, as an example of Gil brazenly and maliciously — and falsely — claiming you lied and/or can’t back up a claim. Then, please, please, stop engaging him on his endless litany of specific bullshit accusations, and simply link to this example and say he’s always like this. And that you won’t engage the specific bullshit any longer.
Letting him make you the issue is the only way he can win, to keep you and readers off the sins of Zionism and Zionists, swamping the thread instead with his preferred inanity. Trust me on this: no one you need to care about believes his garbage so there’s truly no reason to repudiate it and every reason not to.
“My comment made here, arsehole:”
Only -Mona- is allowed to violate Comments Policy; who do you think you are …
“If there’s one thing we can agree on it is that Nuf Said is a Classic antisemite.”
Well, we can agree -Mona- is a Hasbarist, albeit not a very good one. Her constant attempt to label commenters is as old as the day is long. You have been reading too much -Mona- if you think I have much love for the other two clown-suit cults.
I see Israel, today, killing at a disproportionate rate compared to Muslims. I see Christian America killing more Muslims than Muslims do.
9/11 was an all-in play and Israel/Saudis/Cheney fucked the planet. We will never recover.
You’re a NUT, Nuffy. Of the kind only Murica seems to generate in industrial quantities.
You’re NOT a humanist, BTW.
“You’re NOT a humanist, BTW.”
M y, well, you are not a Chemist, Engineer, or a Belgian …
O nly offering invective.
N ever relinquishing name-calling.
A lways quick with a label.
You can’t be a humanist because you’re a racist. A Classic(TM) antisemite to be precise.
You’re also a 9/11 troofer.
I’m Belgian and a chemical engineer who worked for various petrochemical companies (Montedison, Enimont (all Brussels), EniChem Elastomers (Milan), Dupont Dow Elastomers (Geneva)) as an applied scientist.
I’m also an enthusiastic physicist (but don’t hold a degree in that discipline).
Challenging my identity hasn’t proved a great strategy for you in the past, nuf said. I’d be careful with that.
Richard Hofstadter’s “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” seems to have been written with people like you in mind, nuffy.
“Richard Hofstadter’s “The Paranoid Style in American Politics””
Read much Freud while you were studying ?
One of the anti-Zionists who posts here now and then is convinced Jack Green is a bot, having conducted some form of Turing test on him. I’m ready to consider that possibility; JG’s taking claims and simply restating them as questions or demands for evidence. Many times this doesn’t result in anything especially sensible.
Please give some examples when taking claims and simply restating them as questions or demands for evidence doesn’t result in anything especially sensible.
Persona Management Software in now in common use. AI’s will manage the standard repartee, but when the AI gets in trouble – a human will intervene to maintain the illusion, and it is an illusion, of humanity.
http://wiki.project-pm.org/wiki/Persona_Management
Well, there’s this, and lots of it- Jewish/Zionist terrorism:
http://radioislam.org/islam/english/index_terror.htm
Maybe we should just pay the Islamic terrorists off, like we do Jack Green’s favored neoNazi-ish zioshits.
Oh, wait, that won’t work, cuz then the zioshits wear ISIS gear and masquerade as “Islamic terrorists” and butcher babies and old women.
Hitler got the wrong Jews-maybe next time he can target zioshitbags and their Christurd dominionists instead.
Another anti zionist preaching genocide and Hitler heard from. Mona and Gert here is another one of yours.
Where have either Mona or me called for genocide? Put up or shut up.
Or are in any way, shape or form associated with “OrangeAgent13″?
Again, you’re LYING!
A good start would be to stop blaming Americans for the travails of Jews in Europe.
What are you referring to?
Wow.
Thanks for that.
Imagine for a moment that a group of persons who want to take what they can get rather than earn it. Imagine that this group of people discover that the easiest and best way to get the most and curry favor as well was to be involved in politics and gain strength as a party. This group, which individuals would otherwise have to get higher education in a scientific or business or medicine discipline, is instead comprised of persons who would rather a shortcut because perhaps they havent the brains or talent for real world pursuits. Banded together this group discovers that being in politics is a way to; get paid, get applause from persons who would otherwise have nothing to do with them, use the craftiness of certain courts and methods to get what they can take, establish a legitimacy for their taking ways.
I submit that such persons like the collective of zionists and likuds are nothing more than ORGANISED CRIME CRIMINALS cloaked in otherwise legitimate political governance for good people. And the reason they spend their time attempting to discredit facts and people is because, as criminals and thieves, it’s all they do.
What do you mean by “collective?”
Evidence that the collective of zionists and likuds are nothing more than ORGANISED CRIME CRIMINALS?
Millions of American Christians are Zionists. Are you including them in your condemnation?
I’m cannot and will not speak for barabbas but these Xtian Zionists are among the dumbest and ill-informed people on this planet, Jack.
“Evidence that the collective of zionists and likuds are nothing more than ORGANISED CRIME CRIMINALS?”
Read up on Meyer Lansky. After Capone went to jail Mr. Lansky organized the mob into 13 regions as defined by the federal reserve. The mob has been buying politicians since and the Jewish mafia handles the banking. The mobsters, through Prohibition, had more money than the Industrialists. They bankrolled Truman, along with the Jewish vote directed toward Truman, and he had to give them Israel.
It’s been fucked ever since because Israel is a criminal enterprise.
Lansky tried to flee to Israel to avoid prison. Israel sent him back. You left that out you racist dufus.
How is Israel a criminal enterprise?
let’s not conflate the people of an entire nation with the criminals that run it.
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/18/why-do-so-many-americans-fear-muslims-decades-of-denial-about-americas-role-in-the-world/?comments=1#comment-360764
a sordid collection of gangster criminals who murder to steal land under the guise of legitimate political and religious concerns.
Please name names.
For one, it commits war crimes on an idustrial scale.
It also steals other people’s land and resources.
“industrial”
How do you know what’s other people’s land and resources when there’s no official border between Israel & Palestine. Official borders are set by treaty & there is no treaty between Israel & Palestine.
Is the USA a criminal enterprise?
Is Palestine a criminal enterprise?
good discussions or statements by educated people require that other persons within range also be educated and profficient in the topic. Your ignorance of matters does not qualify for a response. Re-litigating known and accepted history is reserved for trainees such as yourself who are better served by learning the discipline.
since you express a need for serious help in your interest, i point you to the teachings of Dr. Hajo Meyer.
I don’t fear Muslims. I fear the people who are protecting us from them.
I hear you man. Few puffs of a good ganja and we would all get along. No problemo.
Part of the problem is that anytime anyone on the left side of the political spectrum speaks honestly about America’s culpability, they are loudly denounced for “hating America.” Only if they are on the left, of course.
Zionists lie, misdirect, SMEAR and otherwise engage in duplicity
Those who wish to intelligently contribute in comments sections to critique Zionism are best to be aware of common Zionist ploys. Why it is often best to ignore them we’ve been discussing a bit below. But ignoring their vacuous claims does not equal failing to use their offerings to post actually relevant and useful information.
The Zionist’s best friend is the logical fallacy, a variety of them. Ad hominem (which is not mere “name-calling,” but rather: “you shouldn’t believe X because s/he is Bad Thing Y) and poisoning the well are two they commonly deploy. For example, below the ever-fallacious “GilG” rejects a source as a “Trotskyite” and spews: “I suggest getting your history from historians not discredited Trots.”
Gil will not address any of what is found at the link of this supposed “Trot.” In point of fact, Tony Greenstein is a pro-Palestinian Jewish man and member of the UK’s Labour Party, which he joined when Jeremy Corbyn took over leadership. The only people who see Greenstein as “discredited” are militant Zionists who went on a witch-hunt against Corbynites like Greenstein.
No, what Gil object to are the facts Greenstein marshals.
Overwhelming scholarship, including the book I keep touting here —State of Terror, by Thomas Suarez — only reinforces Greenstein’s “discredited” points. Zionist like Gil detest Greenstein for telling these truths, and so, they are smeared as “Trostkyites” or “antisemites” (link following in separate post):
The point here is not the specifics surrounding Tony Greenstein or his politics; the point is how a resident Zionist typically acts when presented with facts he dislikes. Gil’s ploy vis-a-vis Greenstein is an example of the wretched well-poisoning tactics Zionists typically adopt. Recognize this tactic, for you’ll see it often if you choose to engage or read them.
On the Zionist witchhunt in the UK’s Labour Party, which targeted Tony Greenstein: How Israel lobby manufactured UK Labour Party’s anti-Semitism crisis
Tony Greenstein is one of the most pricipled anti-racists and anti-Zionists I know of. May his blog live on forever as an invaluable chronicle of contemporary Zionism and all who sail in that ship.
Yup. But Gil doesn’t want to talk about any of what Tony documents. Gil wants to instead discuss: where you were born, the Congo, your education, Syria & on and on with various other irrelevancies. (And call you a liar out of his ignorance of UK educational polices, such as undergraduate dissertations.)
It’s tempting to defend oneself from all that bullshit, but it’s a bottomless pit. Just keep telling yourself the extent to which you do it rewards and assists them. As I’ve said, this isn’t advice I’ve always myself followed, and and it’s human nature to want to indignantly repudiate lies about you.
But do it, at most, only once or twice, bookmark it, and then simply link to it whenever the Zionist pulls the same garbage again, and say you refuse to go down that diversionary road again — and are relying on the previous example of their smears proving to be false. (For example, bookmark Gil’s claim you lied about the dissertation matter, and simply link to it and comment no further when he claims some new purported lie. THEN STICK TO IT.)
This is what works to manage Zionists, as I’ve found from lots of experience.
I think it’s my inner scientist that doesn’t want to let those little lies go unrebutted.
Gil’s behaviour is very similar to what I experienced from the gutter snipers at Richard Millett’s. One over there actually threathened to come over to my hometown for ‘icecream and crowbars’. They’ll stop at nothing, these fascists.
Mona writes “But Gil doesn’t want to talk about any of what Tony documents”
Nonsense I posted the link to a blog that took apart what Gert posted by the non historian Trotskyite Lenni Brenner. Rather than respond to the substance of the refute of Brenner he responded by discounting the source and not addressing any of the substance.
What lies have I told about you Mona name one.
On the other hand I have documented multiple times I have indeed caught you in lies Mona.
As for Gert’s dissertation your link contained no evidence that undergraduate degrees in Chemical Eng. require a dissertation. Why don’t you think Gert is disputing it? He knows he was outed.
What I was required to write in my fourth year is known in Dutch as a “Thesis” (aka “endwork”). It’s a piece of work based on own research and required to graduate as an engineer. Mine was titled ‘Data transfer software for an Atomic Absorption Spectrometer’. It won the prize for Best Thesis in all disciplines. Perhaps Dissertation was a clumsy translation on my part. No outing here.
Paul Bogdanor really is the lowest of the lowest. I’m quite surprised “Fathom” stoops to using him at all.
Mark Elf on Paul Bogdanor.
I didn’t even know Bogdanor is associated with Horriblewitz’ FrontPageMag…
You learn something new every day.
Except he is not associated with FrontPage Mag as your buddy Greenstein ended up admitting to on his own blog. Front Page reprinted his article which was originally published elsewhere. Or didn’t you even bother to read the Greenstein blog post you linked to Gert.
Fair point, yet being reprinted by FrontPageMag is hardly a compliment, Gil.
Who said it was Gert? On the other hand Elf made a claim that wasnt true.
It was in Wikipedia, apparently. But PB no longer has an entry in Wiki. Good.
Another anti zionist claim proved false. And still no evidence for your claims i was dishonest.
Thanks for admitting it was Mona who was ignorant about educational polices, such as undergraduate dissertations.
There’s no such admission. I didn’t even click on that link. I obtained my degree in Belgium.
You are making a colossal arse of yourself. You’re far worse than I even imagined.
Tsk tsk. LOL. I know it’s hard at first, but ignoring his bullshit really is the right thing. (He knows there was no admission; he’s GOADING you.) To reply to it in any manner detracts from the material he doesn’t wish to discuss. Gil is a hardcore Zionist with only one mission here: To distract from those who can document the deeply ugly aspects of Zionism he’d rather ignore.
That bit about Barabbas “running away?” That’s another ploy he has often spouted, and should also be ignored.
No one of any intelligence reading this thread gives two shits about Belgian v. UK dissertation requirements, where you were born, my purported lies he endlessly spews about, or what Gil would prefer to argue with Barabbas. Anyone who would care< is literally not worth your time.
By contrast, smart people who wish to be well-informed will, e.g., read Thomas Suarez's speech to the British House of Lords on the horrific Zionists terrorism and Nazi affinities in British Mandate Palestine — without which the Terror State of Israel would not exist.
Gil is far, far worse than I thought he was, Mona. I’m honestly a little taken aback this level of dishonesty.
It’s par for the course with committed Zionists like Gil; dishonesty is what they do. When I document the grotesque dishonesty committed by Alan Dershowitz, or the duplicity of CAMERA, Gil ignores it all. Oh, he’ll argue around the edges, e.g., asking for evidence that CAMERA has outright lied, but their dishonest plotting and smearing, about hat he has zero to say. Ditto with regard to Dershowitz’s lies and smear campaigns.
Zionist lying, duplicity and smear artistry is truly breathtaking, but not exceptional, either in Gil or most of the rest of them.
And yet of the two of us the only one who has been proven a liar is you Mona. Hmmmm.
zions, nothing but a collective of common criminals who murder for land. Ordinarily they would be out dealing drugs, snatching purses, or burglarising homes. But they found a way to dupe the population just like Adolf Hitler did – their model and hero, albeit secretly.
What exactly was i dishonest about?
For example, you claim I had no (worthy) qualifications (not that they are relevant here), then when proved wrong claim I’ve been “outed” re. my dissertation. But I really do have that qualification and really did write that Thesis, Gil. It’s incredibly dishonest and ad hominem for someone complaining about name calling.
Or how you claim an alliance between Trumpkins and anti-Zionists: that’s a blatant lie and a smear. Shockingly inaccurate, to say the least.
You’re not just a liar Gil, you’re also a nasty piece of work. And exceeding;y dumb to boot.
False i said you seemed uneducated. Which is far kinder than what you have said about me. As for the dissertation, my statement was true. You did not write a dissertation and you admitted it, how did I lie?
There;s nothing uneducated about me. I clled you an idiot because you behaved like one and continue to do so.
I admitted to nothing bar perhaps a clumsy translation, due to not being a native English speaker. Despite the latter, I write better English than you do, BY FAR. Where’s your dissertation/thesis, Gil?
“There’s”, “called”,
You claimed I was dishonest. You failed to back it up. Dont change the subject. Put up or retract your claim.
You claim not to be an ‘extremist’ (a fairly meaningless word by any standard anyway), yet have been shown to lie, distort, resort to literalism, exaggeration and more…
No retraction needed, Gil.
And you sound like a troll also best ignored. No one gives a shit what American colloquialisms this or that European does or does not use. No one, except trolls. Nor is this the place to go into the weeds on “spectrometers” and such.
You are transparent.
I’m male. But keep showcasing your misogyny, “Sir”.
You are on drugs. I’ve never even been to the UK. And my degrees are in religious studies and a juris doctorate. It’s Gert who is the European with a chemical engineering degree.
If you are new here, please be advised that I am known by any number of folk here in real life. Including Glenn Greenwald, with whom I once practiced law.
More like a bad trip, it seems.
The site moderators do not allow accusations that other accounts are actually me. Glenn Greenwald told nuf said this, twice:
And it is unfair and harassing of you. This is whom you complain to about both nuf said and Mr. Treadwell: [email protected]
If it continues I will not hesitate to use that resource.
Thanks, sister.
Yes indeed, good call. She/they have tragically crossed that line once again. But, alas, every ill wind must pursue its twisted fate in doing nobody any good before blowing itself out.
Can you read? As I’ve said twice now, I’m Belgian. That is also where I obtained my degree.
Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS) is a well known technique. When I did my degree, data transfer between AAS and computers was still in its infancy. No, not an ‘engineering feat’, but how does that matter one iota? It was a great opportunity to work with a new piece of AAS kit and some PCs to connect to it.
What are you doing here, “Chad”?
You have no idea what a degree in engineering is. Some of my colleagues ended up in sales: travelling sales men for chemical (or other) firms. Others in research, me in material development.
You’re a clueless troll. Kindly go fuck yourself but elsewhere.
Degrees differ from one country to another.
Cue your permission to ridicule Belgium. I don’t care one iota.
Your USS Liberty stuff has me falling over with laughter, Nuffy. As does your “usury” baloney. Please get lost now.
If this was my blog racist idiots like you would have been permanently banned from it a long time ago. Stick that in your pipe…
That’s a Classic Zionist tactic of course too.
Especially the Syrian gambit. It’s what I’ve called the ‘Jeffrey Dahmer defence': “look we’re bad but look over there: they’re far worse!”. True as that may be it doesn’t absolve Israel from its own culpability.
The behaviour of my forefathers, British, Belgian or otherwise has of course nothing to do with anything here at all.
It’s the whataboutery “defense.” If you’re American, they invoke the Indians/Native Americans. To the extent I respond to that at all, it’s to point out that the majority of Native activists are solidly pro-Palestinian and support BDS. If they can and do, who am I not to?
Or the First People’s Cause: often invoked by Zionists with re. Jews, yet no other First People cause do they support at all.
More on Antisemitism in the British Labour Party…
During that Labour Party Conference in Liverpool Professor Jonathan Rosenhead had this to say on Antisemitism .
“In response to a moral panic about Left anti-Semitism seemingly expanding without limit, the group Free Speech on Israel coalesced in April out of a loosely-knit band of Jewish Labour Party supporters. Some 15 of us got together at a couple of days’ notice for the inaugural gathering. We found that over our lifetimes we could muster only a handful of antisemitic experiences between us. And, crucially, although in aggregate we had hundreds of years of Labour Party membership, no single one of us had ever experienced an incident of antisemitism in the Party.
Some time in May the ex-Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks was interviewed on Radio 4 about the antisemitism ‘crisis’ by now gripping the nation. Helpfully his interviewer invited him to share some of his own personal experiences of antisemitism. His response, from memory ran rather like this: “Well….actually I have never experienced antisemitism myself. Which is odd, because most people know that the Chief Rabbi is Jewish”. https://www.opendemocracy.net/jonathan-rosenhead/jackie-walker-suspense-mystery
Mark Elf, owner of the excellent JewsSansFrontieres blog once stated that the only incidence of antisemitism he had ever experienced was walking into a bar and someone started whistling ‘If I were a rich man’. He ordered his beer and enjoyed it nonetheless.
Antisemitism in the UK does of course exist but it is hardly the epidemic the Zionists like to portray it as.
Disgustingly, many Zionists are loving on Donald Trump, notwithstanding the rise in antisemitic harassment in the U.S. since he rose to power and emboldened all the racists and antisemites, who’ve come slithering out from under their rocks. Netanyahu defends Trump from allegations of racism, as do many in Israel’s premier media.
That’s becasue Zionism does not object to antisemitism in the West– it embraces it as fuel for Zionism. Zionism cares only about ethno-religious supremacy in Israel, which Trump strongly supports. For Netanyahu, antisemitism in France, the U.S. or elsewhere is useful for pressuring Jews to move to Israel. He wants antisemitism, as the Founders of Zionism always did.
Or at the very least they want the illusion of endemic antisemitism.
As I have said many times before the TI comment section has proved that many anti-zionists support Trump and many anti-zionists on TI have been proven to be anti Jewish and even more disgustingly some anti-zionists are now making common cause with those they know are anti Jewish because they are so flummoxed by being caught in lies that their natural instinct puts their own ego above any sense of decency.
A barefaced lie: there are no anti-Zionist Trumpkins here. I doubts very strongly if any exist anywhere/anytime. That would of course be deeply illogical anyway, as Trump is a dedicated Zionist, now basically advocating the OSS.
Your lies are like the Universe: they have no end.
There was one Trumpkin anti-Zionist, but he’s been gone for months. He’s also deeply antisemitic and it wouldn’t surprise me if mod action chased him out.
Wrong as usual Mona, not sure if it’s willful lying like the last time or just a short memory.
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/democrats-trump-and-the-ongoing-dangerous-refusal-to-learn-the-lesson-of-brexit/?comments=1#comment-306112
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/democrats-trump-and-the-ongoing-dangerous-refusal-to-learn-the-lesson-of-brexit/?comments=1#comment-305844
not to mention your new bff nuf said
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/democrats-trump-and-the-ongoing-dangerous-refusal-to-learn-the-lesson-of-brexit/?comments=1#comment-305832
you are wrong Gert. barabbas for one supported Trump and is an anti zionist. There were many others as well.
In the anti-Zionist camp I know, the election of Trump caused basically nothing but PANIC.
Not sure why a Zionist like you is that bothered though: Trump will be very good for Israel and Bibi is practically a friend of the Trump family.
What gives, Gil?
I despise Trump and always have. I don’t like Bibi either and have stated my dislike for his policies. I am not sure why you believe I can’t have a nuanced opinion on issues. Unlike you I am not an extremist. Not being in favor of the dissolution of Israel does not mean I approve of what it does or what the Likud wants. I am a pragmatist who wants what I believe is best for the people involved not an ideologue who preaches a fight to death, with others doing the dying, from the comfort of my couch. I am also an American who wants whats best for my country and that aint Trump.
” I am not sure why you believe I can’t have a nuanced opinion on issues.”
Because you claim the government has investigated the Liberty and found ‘fog of war’.
Did you read the deathbed statement from the JAG Captain? The crew’s statements match the physical evidence but it does not match Israel’s statements. Imagine that.
Israel spent 90 minutes trying desperately to sink the Liberty, including machine-gunning life-rafts. That is a blatant war crime.
You don’t want to acknowledge the pattern of aggression Israel has followed since its inception because all Jews bear a measure of responsibility for the carnage against Arabs; all for a biblical fantasy.
Then have the courtesy to accept that the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of anti-Zionists do so to and STP smearing them.
Full disclosure: I support the existence of Israel but oppose its policies vis-a-vis the Palestinians and believe the country’s current course is profoundly self-destructive in the medium-long run.
“too”
Not many; dahoit is the only one I recall. If Barabbas did support Trump, that makes two. A possible third as “A. Citizen.” I don’t recall his opining on Israel and Zionism, but his hilarious error in this thread purporting that I defend Zionism suggests he may be anti-Zionist. He’s definitely a Trumpkin.
Dont leave out your new bff nuf said. Anyway thanks for admitting it was Gert who was lying about the anti zionists Trump supporters.
Gert doesn’t lie. He was mistaken — he’s not here that much and isn’t that familiar with regulars and their various positions, unlike some of us.
Nuf is not a trump supporter, and it’s just tedious to claim he and I are friends. But that’s the kind of shit you constantly do — because you are a Zionist, and they are so often deeply dishonest.
Again you manufacture ‘admissions’ where there are none. I did not lie about anti zionists Trump supporters. These are extremely few and far between.
Yet you claim you don’t lie!
Well if the Chief rabbi never never experienced anti-Semitism than certainly it must not exist.
The rapper Lil Wayne says he never experienced racism Harry does that mean racism doesn’t exist in the US ?
http://www.theroot.com/lil-wayne-says-that-because-of-his-blessings-he-has-ne-1790856737
Straw man. Antisemitism does exist in the UK.
But if even the Chief Rabbi has never experienced it then clearly the epidemic of AS the Zionists are claiming can’t be happening.
” then clearly the epidemic of AS the Zionists are claiming can’t be happening.”
which Zionist claimed its an epidemic? and who speaks for all Zionists?
who speaks for all anti zionists ? do I get to pick?
Among others, the Zionists at HP.
care to provide a link?
and do they speak for all zionists?
and do I get to pick who speaks for anti-Zionists.
Do your own homework. It’s exceedingly easy to find assertions like these, both as main articles and in the comment threads.
You made the claim that makes it your homework not mine.
You’re also a lazy so-and-so.
Zionists use threat inflation re. antisemitism all the time, not just at HP. And no, NOT ALL Zionists, just quite a few of them. The logic is very easy to grasp: create the illusion of Britain (e.g.) being the New Weimar and that motivates some Jews to move to Zion. Not hard to grasp, Gil. Unless one is Gil of course…
One prominent Right Zionist voice that loves threat inflation with regards to British antisemitism is Melanie Phillips (aka ‘Mad Mel’).
You can read about here here.
She was also admired and quoted by Anders Breivik, the Far Right Zionist antisemite butcher of Norway…
What irks me is these right wing extremists have brought their nasty war against arabs, for whatever reason, to America and have hijacked the media and politicians to use and abuse Americans for their personal evil ambitions. Thanks for stayin ‘on point’ with this. I appreciate your efforts as i know very well how tedious it is.
Says the guy who enthusiastically supports Trump.
Nice post.
You handed GilG his ass in a hat.
Thank you. Zionist such as Gil have to be handled, or they take control and the whole discussion goes off into their preferred weeds.
Yes, his claim that multiple government investigations into the Liberty attack determined it to be “fog of war” is laughable.
He does give me the opportunity to post the death-bed statement from the Navy Captain Ward Bond, Jr. JAGC tasked with investigating and then burying the incident. He did what he was ordered to do but the continued disparagement of the crew by hasbaraistas irked him and he spoke out.
I offered to debate your fellow anti Semite barb on the Liberty but he ran away. Which one of the following investigations do you want to discuss first.?
U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry of June 1967
Joint Chief of Staff’s Report of June 1967.
CIA Intelligence Memorandums of June 1967
Clark Clifford Report of July 1967
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony during hearings of the 1967 Foreign Aid Authorization bill, July 1967
House Armed Services Committee Investigation of 1971
The NSA History Report of 1981
and ironically Mona proves my first comment on this thread, which cause Gert to go bonkers, correct.
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/18/why-do-so-many-americans-fear-muslims-decades-of-denial-about-americas-role-in-the-world/?comments=1#comment-360344
Yup; that’s what she usually does to racists that cross her.
Well done Mona.
Too funny, you cant point to anything racist i ever posted but you and mona are flumuxed to the point of being friends with the racist nuf.
Really slick nonsense, but nonsense nonetheless
After the invasion of Iraq I had an argument in an Arab country with an Arab guy who was arguing that “the Jews control the US news media”, and that this was the root of all the world’s problems. I thought “great, I can tell him about Jon Stewart and all the other liberal Jews who argued vociforously against Cheney’s foreign policy and were very much a force for peace and inti-imperialism in US domestic discourse”. It was like water off a ducks back – he didn’t even really listen to what I had to say. And this was a very decent very intelligent guy.
There is, unfortunately, something deeply tribal in how we view the world that is very difficult to bridge with reason. Its hard to convince the majority of Arabs that Jews are not evil for the same reason it is hard to convince the majority of Americans that Muslims are not evil … and this dynamic is self reinforcing.
I should mention that this was a guy who I had befrended and with whom I had a lot of rapport. Also, humans have scarce cognitive resources with which we have to try and understand a very complicated world, thus there is good reason for us to think about the world in terms of generalizations.
It’s not fear it’s complete and utter dislike of a bogus trash pure nonsense so called religion that cannot stand the light of day. The have been lying so long truth no longer has meeting in islam. And we should get on the bandwagon like all the other idiots. How stupid is that?
ISIS is NOT the “bogeyman” sadly Muhammad was the true “bogeyman,” a true Muslim must act and be like Muhammad, that’s what ISIS is doing imitating Muhammad. Millions of western women too naive to understand what Islam has to offer to females, pure tyranny. Islam is purely man dominated ideology.
It is impossible to penetrate the mind of an ideological bigot. You can present evidence, data, logic, arguments, and all it does is to harden their views. They use the data and evidence as tools – they will use what we give them for developing more misdirection, more obfuscation – it all about furthering their agenda and arguments.
Having said that – and, with the full knowledge that I will not change the mind or the heart of a bigot – I continue to believe that we should counter the lies and obfuscation in the strongest terms. I encourage all to do the same. To let the lies stand without a challenge is not an option.
As H.L. Mencken noted,” No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.”
And, as Sam Clemons, said, “God created war so Americans could learn geography.”
Or, as our POTUSes have told us: We are an Exceptional Nation, the Shining City on the hill.
Mr. Schwartz,
Unfortunately, you’ve left out the primary problem with Muslims. The primary problem with Muslims is genetic one. Whether the Muslim is Indonesian, Persian, Arab, Kazakh, or Malaysian, or whatever, the fundamental problem with Muslims is a pure and simple genetic one. Unlike all other human beings, the Muslim genetic problem is that when they’re bombed by a foreign military and their family members are killed, they get all flustered, and want to do something about it. Their fundamental genetic problem is that they just can’t die quietly, like every other civilized human being.
And the source of their genetic malfunction is their fucking book. Just ask Sam Harris. You seen when a normal person kills, murders, steals, or rapes, it’s because something went wrong. But when a Muslim does it, it’s obviously, because they’re following a strict Koranic doctrine that they are all well versed in. The Muslim kills and rapes and pillages, because he thinks it’s an entitlement. Everybody else does it because… well, because they’re trying to protect themselves from these fucking entitled Muslims, who can’t die quietly like a civilized person.
Now do you see the problem with Muslims?
(sarcasm, just in case)
Well said!!!
Good job.
@Gert
My advice, based on long experience of Zionists in general, and of Gil in particular, is to ignore most of what Gil posts. Over a month ago Gil was pulling the same attempt at misdirection with another commenter whom he was calling a “liar” and other bullshit, to whom I wrote this:
This is what virtually all Zionists do, including the resident hasbara troll, Jack Green. Simply trust that the intelligent, good faith readers will see through the crap they accuse you of — or the red herrings they raise — and refuse to crawl into the weeds with them. Use their prattling as fodder for more documentation of the evils of Zionism, but don’t fall into the trap that turns the conversation into defending yourself from the endless stupidities they hurl.
The only weapon they have is to consume your time and energy replying to bullshit, becasue the truth is their greatest enemy. Just don’t do it.
A very learned anti-Zionist told me a long time ago to ignore most Zionists.
I keep sinning against that sound advice, to my own detriment (mainly loss of time).
Believe me, it took time for me to get it, and I’ve tripped up along the way, and have with Gil from time to time.
But it truly is key to simply use them to state the many truths that show the foulness of the Zionist ideology and its history. Letting them lure you into defending yourself from inane accusations, or meeting absurd demands for this or that evidence, should be avoided. We have the truth; state it. And let the rest go. (Again, I’ve failed to follow that advice myself until I came to my senses.)
Read and noted.
See what he posted to me right below? Always ignore that crap. I wasted over 30 minutes locating an obscure article I had referenced because he demanded I do so; had I not, he’d have said I had lied about it existing. So I did that once and made clear I will do nothing like it again. Once you’ve established a strong reputation for factual accuracy (and always promptly admitting it when you’ve erred, something one should take care to avoid, but which will sometimes happen) simply rely on that.
Do not let them entangle you. Trust that the intelligent and good faith readers familiar with you are not going to buy endless shrieking that you are a “liar” or whatever else he/they spit out.
Too funny. “I always ignore it” oh really.
Your inability to tell the truth is reaching Trump like proportions.
I’m not sure that’s a smart tactic. I once laughed at the rhetoric in the 90s, thinking, there is no way any of this right wing nonsense will catch on. We laughed at Palin when McCain picked her and other Dominionist mindsets connected to Zionism or right wing nationalists in Israel.
I’m pretty sure you remember this; “I’ve struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.” – Richard Murdock.
Well, Trump represents much of this rhetoric, dumped into an East Coast accent to swing places like Michigan, Ohio, and PA. Ted Cruz would have never won these states. He’s the honest prototype for these ideas. The hopes of Zionists and evangelicals are wrapped up in Trump’s presidency, as well as the rogue, folksiness that Palin embodied. The GOP didn’t forget how the crowd reacted to her.
Bibi is the same style of politician. They can get people who the typical right would never sway. They lie incessantly, which real liberals can’t refute now because the politicians who represent liberalism have promoted similar tactics and embraced some corporate right wing policies masked as centrism. The GOP calls Obama and Hillary socialists, so, anything to the left of Dems is now seen as Marxist, which people have no problem using to describe Dems today. It’s insane!
Zionism is unquestioned after decades of this indoctrination. Even now, Dems are afraid to stand up to this undemocratic idea. The average American doesn’t question it either. Now, we are at the point where these ideas have moved further right. Mainstream media is now parroting One State, which is what our government always wanted the narrative to be. The next step is to normalize annexation. The propaganda around that idea is almost 10 years old. All they have to do is continue their current trajectory with cover from our government.
So, I’m happy when people push back against Zionism in forums like this. Most of the the arguments for Zionsim are weak, which is why you need smart, witty responses to embarrass those who spread such propaganda. When casual readers look at the arguments, these little push backs have an effect. It takes time but every millimeter counts, even if the effort seems insignificant.
Too many people think it’s the large platforms, which brings about change but oftentimes it’s small subcultures that have the most influence, especially when it’s off the radar.
You and Gert aren’t disagreeing. But it is extremely important to retain control of the discussion. Stay on point and don’t let the Zionist spew non-responsive fallacies; redirect RIGHT BACK to the unanswered, substantive point. Highlight it when the point remains substantively unanswered.
Yes. Which is why they generally fall back on misdirection, whataboutery, endless repetition of accusation of alleged personal faults (e.g., being a “liar”) and various other fallacies. (As well as factoids from hasbara training and manuals.)
Just look at Gil’s performance in this thread. He does not want to discuss the facts of Zionism and it’s history and assiduously avoids the substance of those posts. He prefers to rant about, e.g., where Gert was born, the Congo, Syria and the White Helmets, my purported lies & etc. DO NOT respond to such bullshit. Ignore it.
The Zionist can “win” only if you let them control the discussion by diverting you. Do not let them.
Very good points, Patrick. Thank you.
Face it Mona you were repeating a falsehood about what was contained in an article in order to fit your anti zionist narrative. When I found the article and quoted the passage that proved you were wrong you changed tactics and then made up a total lie claiming the article stated that the Jews in 1880’s Jerusalem were unwilling to work, which was something that wasn’t stated in the article. You didn’t just not back up a fact you completely made one up. It’s documented. Rather than argue in good faith you went on one of your many rants of name calling, threats and posting unrelated propaganda.
I’ve told no untruths. You on the other hand have been caught lying on multiple occasions.
Now go pull the wings off some flies.
This starts on a false premise. The reason they originally sanctioned killing of US citizens is when our troops, after being invited, set foot on the “holy land” of Saudi Arabia.
So, its not the killings, its that “the prophet” once stayed on this magical land and therefore, none of us non-magical people should be seen in that area. An absurd premise right from the start. Most decidedly Islam based.
So you’re argument is basically, “they started it?” That’s not particularly compelling and doesn’t detract much from his main point.
DocHollywood
Examples of what “fuels” terrorism. Girl’s education “fuels” terrorism (Pakistan Taliban):
Afghanistan Taliban:
Teaching girls “fuels” terrorism:
Just being a Sufi Muslim “fuels” terrorism:
Just being Shia Muslim “fuels” terrorism:
Just being a Christian “fuels” terrorist attacks:
Being a military brat “fuels” terrorism:
With all due respect to the courageous Malala Yousafzai.
Cackled TI’s village idiot, “Gil G”, below:
So much petulant ‘nerner… nernerner’ nonsense in one sentence, it’s almost a tour de force.
I’m not British but that hardly matters: I have and continue to denounce the slaughter for profit by various Empires throughout the times (wherever they are geographically or temporally). It is what eventually made me anti-Zionist too, of course.
“Americans”? No, you silly twit. 99 % of Americans are VICTIMS in their rulers’ games for profit and power. I have nothing but sympathy for them but note that many, like imbeciles of your variety, can’t even see how they are being conned!
Not to mention the thoroughly ridiculous idea that ordinary citizens of various Empires somehow benefitted from said Empire’s looting and pillaging of other people’s resources. It was never thus, of course!
Gil G may not be alt-right but nonetheless shows the historical understanding of a typical alt-righter! Someone fetch me some hot tar and feathers, please?
An interesting ‘petite histoire’ BBC Four documentary called “Nelson’s Caribbean Hell-Hole: An Eighteenth-Century Naval Graveyard Uncovered” I watched yesterday further underscores the point.
From a Telegraph blub:
Most importantly, the doument shows the utter absence of care taken by “Empire” with regards to those in its (often unwilling) “service”: the men who manned Britain’s war ships. Lead poisoning from cheap rum is now believed to be the cause of immune system deterioration and subsequent sensitivity to various tropical fevers. Not only imported slaves were the Empire’s victims, its own domestic slaves were too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10031826/Nelsons-Caribbean-Hell-Hole-an-Eighteenth-Century-Navy-Graveyard-Uncovered-BBC-Four-review.html
“blurb”
too funny , you needed to get that in in order to make your statement about how you denounce all empires not a lie. to late Gert you can’t do it after the fact.
That’s gibberish. Nothing more.
Not ridiculous at all. Britain is what it is today due to centuries of colonialism. It’s industrial base was built on funds that were acquired by stealing the resources of other countries not to mention the work provided by slaves. Are you sure you didn’t grow up in a country that required testing in order to continue with education?
As it happens, I didn’t. If I did, in what way would that make my criticism of US imperialism invalidm Gil?
“Someone fetch me some hot tar and feathers, please?”
No wonder you and Mona are friends. She likes to pull the wings off flies. You sadist types sure enjoy publicly indulging your fantasies.
Well, we can’t all kill little Palestinian kids playing soccer on the beach every time we feel like it Gil. So we have to satisfy ourselves with fly wings and magnifying glasses.
But you can continue your humanitarian work, by burning little palestinan children in their sleep bud.
A Zionist accusing an anti-Zionist of (rhetorical) “sadism” is indeed rather rich!
I have done nothing of the kind of course nor have I ever written anything in support of such things. As a matter of fact Mona and Im guessing you were opposed to the WH in Syria who were saving children who were being murdered in their sleep. Not to mention those who justify the murder of children as legitimate resistance.
Now please tell me about what you do to help humanity.
Too funny the person who gets her history from the discredited non historian Lenni Brenner thinks she has historical understanding.
http://fathomjournal.org/an-antisemitic-hoax-lenni-brenner-on-zionist-
collaboration-with-the-nazis/
Paul Bogdanor????
Hahhahhahahahhahhahhahahahhhahahhhhahahhhhahhahahhahhahahhhhahahahhahahhhahhahahha.
Look what you’ve made me do now: piss myself with laughter! Please don’t do it agian… ;^(
Paul Bogdanor exposed. (Tony Greenstein).
Tony Greenstein , too funny. Trotskyites united. Face it Gert in typical fashion rather than refute the claim you call names. I suggest getting your history from historians not discredited Trots.
Tony Greenstein is a socialist. Period. Leave Trotskyism (something no doubt you know nothing about) out of it.
It hardly matters but I go to the little guys’ room, not to the little galls’ room, BTW.
You’re wrong upon wrong upon wrong, yet keep coming back for more portions of humble pie.
Maybe he misspelled it because it’s not part of his vernacular either.
Why don’t you stick to the arguments, instead of veering into who he is. I don’t know who you are either, and you don’t see me interrogating you about who you are, and where you’re from or your parents are from, or what your religion is, etc. When you fail to stick to your arguments, you’ve lost.
Her claims of being a chemist and a chemical engineer (and I don’t know this to be true), impeaches her credibility on assertions on Israel’s behavior? How?
And I’m not a Yank. I grew up in a third world country as a Muslim. I live in Canada. And I like Yanks. Sanctimonious Europeans on the other hand, well, I like them at arm’s length. But the non-sanctimonious Europeans are fine :)
Where are you from Gert? I just assumed with your skill at name calling and teaming up with the other mean girls to bully plus the fact that you clearly lack an advanced education that you lived in Britain where bullying is part of the culture and the less intelligent are forced to leave school early.
Again Gil, in what way is where I’m from relevant to my critique of American Imperialism/support for Zionism?
I didn’t say it was relevant. I don’t know why you are afraid to admit it.
Admit what? Where I’m from?
I was born in Belgium in 1961. Antwerp, to be precise.
Haven’t lived there for over 25 years though…
Oh so your education was financed through the slaughter and theft of the Congo. Why are you ashamed to say where you are living now?
I live in Britain, arsehole, as you well know. It’s a place to live, nothing more, nothing less
Where I live, who financed my eduction or whatever has ZERO tp do with Zionism’s crimes. I think even an imbecile of your grotesque proportions can fathom that. Or maybe not (sigh)…
You’re convincing no one here and are making a collosal arse of yourself.
Im not trying to convince anyone of anything, but thanks for speaking for the board. I am here strickly for the amusement I get from exposing charlatans.
You haven’t exposed any charlatans here. You have shown yourself an extremely petty mind and far dumber than I originally thought.
I have indeed exposed charlatans. I exposed Mona’s lies about Ashkenazi Jews for one. I have exposed you for being nothing more than a name calling toady who lies about their education credentials and makes common cause with out right racists.
I haven’t lied about my education. I’ve been 100 % candid about, unlike you who as far as we can tell may only have left kindergarten with a “I have crayons” certificate.
You even lie about the meaning of words.
I don’t care what “you” say, Chaddy. Do go fuck yourself.
Jews had been persecuted for centuries in majority-gentile countries. Even when not actively persecuting the Jews, the majority-gentile countries refused to give refuge to the Jews when they needed it. There would have been no Holocaust if majority-gentile countries would have allowed in Jewish refugees who were escaping from the Nazis. The idea of Zionism was that Jews would return to their homeland & have a majority-Jewish country because majority-gentile countries had failed to provide safety for the Jews.
Israel has not provided much safety for Jews either.
And whatever safety or security was obtained for Zionist Jews was at the expense of local non-Jewish populations.
” at the expense of local non-Jewish populations?”
Nonsense! Jews drained the swamps thereby reducing mosquitoes & malaria improving the health & life expectancy of both Jew & non-Jew.
By putting unused land into production, Jews improved the economy. The money Jews brought to pay for land also improved the economy. Arabs came from surrounding countries for a better life.
Prove it. Or at least provide evidence.
https://www.google.com/search?q=jews+drained+the+swamps&client=opera&hs=D3z&tbm=isch&imgil=0_2rH0JG4I7bKM%253A%253BDMRGgpYXiDpVaM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fchristinprophecy.org%25252Farticles%25252Fthe-reclamation-of-the-land%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=0_2rH0JG4I7bKM%253A%252CDMRGgpYXiDpVaM%252C_&usg=__wctz6FJJg-gqzaQklo-a5gOL0nc%3D&biw=1920&bih=971&ved=0ahUKEwi5h_zH7J_SAhUE7yYKHXZ_C7MQyjcITA&ei=Xn6rWLngJITemwH2_q2YCw#imgrc=0_2rH0JG4I7bKM:
The leading Zionists of the day weren’t interested in fighting antisemitism. In fact antisemitism was useful for them. They were colonisers/nation builders, not ‘protectors of Jews’.
How should they have fought antisemitism?
Why were they building a nation?
If you can’t even recognise a metaphor, there really is no helping you. You appear far dumber than I originally thought.
Buggered that blockquote. Grr.
My dissertation also won a prize for Best Dissertation in all disciplnes.
Undergrads in chemical engineering dont write dissertations Gert but nice try. Now like your friend Mona you have been caught in a lie.
“Undergrads in chemical engineering dont write dissertations Gert ”
I understand she is a “life-long chemist”.
Chemistry and Chemical Engineering are two different degrees but then she wouldn’t know that.
I’m male.
I have a four year degree in Chemical Engineering.
I’m and excellent theortical chemist, as well as being a physicist too.
You on the other hand are an ankle biter.
Your pettiness knows no end.
What I produced was what is known in Dutch as a ‘Thesis’. My, possibly poor, transaltion is ‘dissertation’.
Interesting you chide me about spelling mistakes and when I expose your lies about your education I am being petty. Too funny. Wow talk about hypocrisy.
Keep posting from your iPod: when that Neoliberalism finally comes crashing down around you, it’ll be the only thing left you can still fiddle with.
As stated above: I’m Belgian. Deal with it. I live in Britain. For about 20 years now.
Dont forgot 9/11.
[[[ WHY DO SO MANY AMERICANS FEAR MUSLIMS? DECADES OF DENIAL ABOUT AMERICA’S ROLE IN THE WORLD.]]]
ANSWER: I don’t think the right word is “fear.” The real problem is “pain in the ass.” So, properly phrased, the question should be “Why do so many Americans think Muslims are a Pain in the Ass.”
We are tired of the 6 OClock News airing ridiculous reports of The Underwear Bomber, Gay Bar Mass Murders, Boston Marathon False Flags, and Batman Movie Narcotics Wackos.
For the last two years, we’ve had monthly “attacks” … whether real or feigned (false flag) is debatable… or maybe not.
The Establishment has been putting their hands down our pants for 15+ years now (Airport TSA security). I’ve even been “vetted” for fingernail clippers on my keyring.
So… It’s like the quote from the movie, “Network”. WE’RE SICK OF IT AND NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE.
I do not want muslims in the USA. Liberal policies are changing the face of Europe and the USA. Why should I want my culture to be erased?
Oh! You actually believe that you have a culture in the USA! USA! USA!?
Well done! This is serious.
What a preposterous hack piece! Muslims have been at war with Christian nations since the inception of the religion. ” After Mohammed’s death in 632, the new Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, launched Islam into almost 1,500 years of continual imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of others through invasion and war, a role Islam continues to this very day.” But you try to school us on how badly we’ve treated these poor folk in the last few decades! You have a lot a reading to do, son.
craigsummers v Malala Yousafzai
– Malala Yousafzai – cited by craigsummers because a terrorist group “targeted and attempted to murder Malala Yousafzai at age 15 for her girls education advocacy.” – describing what fuels terrorism
– craigsummers ridiculing explanations like Malala Yousafzai’s on what fuels terrorism
Drone attacks or Guantanamo prison are just recruiting tools for terrorist organizations. Recruiting tools and ideology are different.
Every time a civilian dies when a terrorist group is attacked that same group will use the casualty to blame the government regardless of the circumstances of that civilian death. Neither police nor military forces can guarantee operations without civilian casualties. Do we stop attacking terrorist groups because civilians might die in the process?
Interesting piece…Yet the premise, that Americans aren’t aware of the motivations/justifications of Islamic terrorists seems dubious…Can there be an American who doesn’t recall bin Laden’s original complaints about American troops in Saudi Arabia? I assume most people understand the antipathy Islamic terrorists feel towards the US isn’t pure whimsy…
We are the United States of Amnesia
@StamfordCT
This is incredibly important, and yet another of the facts fulsomely documented in Thomas Suarez’s book, State of Terror. This review well summarizes Suarez’s book on that point:
As European Jews began arriving in Palestine in the 1880s, their implemented intention was to usurp the native population. Multiple observers, Jewish and gentile alike, wrote of the vicious treatment these European, Zionist Jewish settlers inflicted on the Arabs well before the 1920s. Do read the book.
Evidence of Jewish settlers murdering Arabs before 1920?
If you are a confirmed zionist you might say so and demonstrate the righteousness of your self defence with such humbleness and humility that other people would come to understand that underneath all the animosity against Palestinians is coming from a place in your heart that understands and acknowledges that Palestinians want their country and deserve one as much as israel does.
However, i also believe that things are so far into the fire that the situation is irreversible because certain people dont have the courage to take the hit. The one person who had such uncommon valor for peace lost his life in the effort. But that is just too much to ask of ordinary people, aint it.
Every time Israel offers to end the occupation, the Palestinians say “No!”
Even Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia (certainly not a Zionist) said that Arafat’s refusal to accept the January 2001 offer was a crime. Thousands of people would die because of Arafat’s decision & not one of those deaths could be justified.
As Clinton later wrote in his memoir:
It was historic: an Israeli government had said that to get peace, there would be a Palestinian state in roughly 97 percent of the West Bank, counting the [land] swap, and all of Gaza, where Israel also had settlements. The ball was in Arafat’s court.
But Arafat would not, or could not, bring an end to the conflict. “I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake,” Clinton wrote. “The deal was so good I couldn’t believe anyone would be foolish enough to let it go.” But the moment slipped away. “Arafat never said no; he just couldn’t bring himself to say yes.”
That “deal” was nothing less than Palestinian capitulation. The oppressor — Israel — has much more restitution to make than that agreement even began to contemplate.
Trump and Netanyahu have now cemented a 1-state solution. Israel can continue as an apartheid* state, and will, until BDS — being the world’s pariah — compels Israel to end the apartheid. History shows no alternative: eventually the nation called “Israel” will have to be democratic and not the ethno-supremacist (for Jews) racist entity that it was founded as and continues to be.
*(I am not debating the apartheid issue with you again. I will simply link any interested readers — asking in good faith — to my many and extensive comments documenting why Israel is apartheid beyond any reasonable dispute.)
Palestinians attacked Israel so it’s Palestinians who should be making restitution.
Germany attacked Poland & end up losing 25% of its land.
Israel asked for only 3% of the West Bank.
If true, for argument’s sake, it [the Zionist Entity] will probably end up with 100 % of it.
Will you protest that?
Yes.
Not that it is likely to do you much good, but you really should read the book. More from the linked review:
Many Jews of good conscience are leaving the foul Zionist ideology, following in the footsteps of wonderful men and women such as Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt, or Judah Magnes. It would be emotionally jolting for any of the rest of you to do it as well, but it can be done. It is being done, more and more every day. If you value truth and decency more than tribalism you can also do it.
So you read the book & you still can’t show that Zionists killed even one Palestinian before 1920?
Total and unmitigated BULLSH**!!!
There’s a worldwide GENOCIDE OF CHRISTIANS, lint-for-brains, being committed by MUSLIMS solely because of their religion and not their foreign policy (for which they have none)! Over 160,000 innocent people murdered for their faith.
Islam is a racist, totalitarian ideology that seek to overthrow the world and put everyone under the control of Sharia Law.
It’s in the Koran. Read Sura 9:5 and take your left-wing garbage and stick it where the sun don’t shine.
“There’s a worldwide GENOCIDE OF CHRISTIANS, ” says the guy with lint-for-brains.
I got news for you, pal. Mohamed just amped his sky-chariot and you will be left watching pixie dust.
Jesus would rather brew beer, er, turn water into wine …
Very good article Jon.
I’ve been paying close attention to the Evangelical Christians in my life for decades. I’m a believer, but not attached to any “brand” name religion. Evangelicals become extremely vocal about America’s duty to bat for Israel at any cost, in order that the these evangelicals be saved via End Times prophecies. I’ve actually pushed buttons intentionally regarding too much aid to Israel, why Jews should be protected more than non-Jews, just to understand this obsessive paradigm regarding Israel.
What I have learned is that evangelical Christians actually crave and pine for the End Times in order that they get to meet their maker in the second coming. Blindly supporting all things Jewish or Israel, they are every bit as obsessed with their religious prophesy as the Muslims are with theirs.
It seems to be a “See me God? I’m loving Israel! Do I still get my ticket on the bus to Heaven?” mentality. It’s not about the Jews or Israel, it’s about these people getting their deliverance. Very self-centered, very short sighted, very blind and very destructive for our civilization.
Now… apply this scenario to our “representatives” of the Christian faith, the evangelicals especially. Tel Aviv knows very well that evangelicals in Washington are this obsessive about Israel and he’s taken that to the bank for Zionists. He uses AIPAC in the US to grow that power and use the US military as his own 1000 lb. gorilla through guys like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Peter King, Mitch McConnell and a host of others with influence and involvement in the Pentagon and military-related depts.
This evangelical radicalism combined with its Muslim equivalent is the disaster and the blow back Ron Paul spoke of throughout his campaigns. We have warring radicals who care not about life right now because they pine for life after the great conflict.
Donald Trump is not an Evangelical I hope. I have not researched it. But I do know that he likes his fortune as does Vladimir Putin, and neither wants to die before they get to spend a lot more of it or live in a bunker for several years. No jewelry stores or fancy restaurants down there.
We’ve got to contain the evangelicals in Washington and control the flow of these very risky immigrants who could snap in the middle of watching anti-Muslim rants by America talk radio evangelicals.
All the Barak Husain Obama fans should hang their heads in shame at what that fellow did for all the time he was ruling the country. Instead, it’s pathetic to see them now participating in protests organized by Soros and company with Fake News people in tow..
Obama merely continued a policy that Bush and others had been pursuing. Bush with his attack of Iraq ignited the current radicals, creating ISIS.
9/11 was because of past policies the US pursued. And Trump is going to take it all and make a religious war out of the mess.
You mean Obama was the anchor in the relay race? World Champion Nobel Prize winning Fake Bolt?
Who else does Trump hate besides Hispanics and Muslims? All black people. From his book “The Art of the Deal”:
What do I really hate? Fucking n*****s counting my money. Fucking hate it, hate it, hate it. Jews on the other hand counting my money is ok. But fucking n*****s? No way.
Are you stating that President Trump did say or put into print beginning with [beginning with] “What do I really hate?” [ending with] “No way.” ?
What’s the real message here from Trump on down to the other racist neocons?:
All Muslims hate us.
All Muslims are evil.
All Muslims are “terrorists”.
All Muslims are (racist insult of your choice for dark skinned people) who deserve to die.
The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim.
The govt. speak in this is really scary. US troops aren’t involved in combat. Hang on a minute. They’re in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. They have authorization to fight if fired upon. But there are no “boots on the ground”? Basic propaganda law that Hillary, Podesta and other powerful people follow. It doesn’t matter if it’s not true. Just keep repeating it over and over and people will believe it.
Zionism has always approved of Western antisemitism
The Second Father of Zionism even internalized antisemitism:
Certainly that’s worse than almost anything antisemites have spewed in this comment space. Antisemitism is the fuel of Zionism; Zionism is the corresponding hatred of non-Jews adopted by those Jews who embrace it.
You don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. There is no hatred in Zionism. Zionism, for your information, is a nationalistic movement similar to Arabism but different in that Zionism sought to establish a modern Jewish state in what had always been the ancient land of Israel
Conversely, there has never been a nation known as Palestine in all of recorded history. Jews have lived in the same place continuously for 3,300 years and it was the Muslims and Pan Arabists who relentlessly sought to drive Jews out of the Middle East.
Except for Egypt, all of the belonging to Muslims was conquered territory. In stark contrast, all of the land belonging to Zionists were purchased. It is a horrendous, anti-Semitic lie to equate Zionism with any militaristic movement
No other group in the history of mankind has been more persecuted than the Jews. As far as how Palestinians are treated, nowhere in the Middle East are they treated better than in Israel. The rest of the Arab world treats them like dogs.
“No other group in the history of mankind has been more persecuted than the Jews.”
Pure hasbara.
Jews have been persecuted for their greed and theft.
The Merchant of Venice was about the Jewish practice of loaning money to people knowing they have little chance of paying the sum back. They then loose a pound of flesh, regardless of the harm done.
Israel demanded an extra guarantee on the $38 billion we just gave them. Apparently, they learned Shylock’s lesson that people will balk at paying debts that involve physical harm. Think of the bankers and too big to fail.
So if people are starving we still have to give Israel the $38 billion – no excuses; no matter the harm to life or limb.
Who writes those contracts and who signs them? Jews and their agents (congress).
Shylock was a fictional character.
Evidence that Jews are any greedier than gentiles?
Evidence of theft?
Former Supreme Commander of NATO and U.S. Secretary of State Gen. Alexander Haig…described Israel as “the largest US aircraft carrier, which does not require even one US soldier, cannot be sunk, is the most cost-effective and battle-tested, located in a region which is critical to vital US interests. If there would not be an Israel, the US would have to deploy real aircraft carriers, along with tens of thousands of US soldiers, which would cost tens of billions of dollars annually, dragging the US unnecessarily into local, regional and global conflicts.”
“Shylock was a fictional character.”
As were Romeo and Juliette. Shakespeare was masterful in his perception and ability to present his perception. Shylocks are known today because of who and what they do. “Too big to fail” is an example. No matter the harm and no matter that they knew the harm was inevitable, they proceeded. That is theft in any man’s language.
Banks today demand a pound of flesh?
That is not theft.
“That is not theft.”
It’s actually fraud but the result is the same; depriving people of their wealth regardless of the collateral damage. How Israeli-like.
Evidence that Theodore Herzl, the father of Zionism, approved of Western antisemitism?
Evidence that all Zionists approve of Western antisemitism?
Evidence that all Jewish Zionists hate non-Jews?
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Zionism_AgeDictators.html
There are bucketfuls of quotes to that effect, also by other prominent Zionist leaders.
@Jack Green:
These are straw men you’re setting up, of course. Especially with the qualifier ‘all’…
I didn’t set up any straw men.
Mona said: “Zionism is the corresponding hatred of non-Jews adopted by those Jews who embrace it.”
I was just asking for evidence.
Read the book: State of Terror: How terrorism created modern Israel
-Mona- is that you? Mona? …defending Zionism [Nazism]…of course that’s you. We thought you were no longer going to comment here. Damn hypocrite.
God, you are so stupid, showing yet gain that you cannot read — as when you laughably accused this site of not criticizing Obama for killing Muslims. The idea that I “defend” Zionism is a better inanity yet. And do see this.
At no time did I say I would never comment here again. What I did say is true. I have an interest in making sure the other anti-Zionists here know of and make recourse to a particular source.
The author forgets what is at the heart of the issue. Trump, GWB, GHB, weren’t around in the year 900. Also, the author forgets who our chief was during the first World Trade Center bombing (that would be Bill Clinton). There’s little historical context here to recognize the Middle East (and let’s clarify…Islam) has had hatred for the west for over a thousand years. Regardless of our policies, Christians have been persecuted in the Middle East for hundreds of years. I’m not sure what Christians in the Middle East did to deserve that, and I’m certain western foreign policy hasn’t really been the cause of it, so the article is less than objective.
Vivek Jain
“…….Emails were leaked, not hacked
by William Binney and Ray McGovern…….” (1-5-2017)
According to Ray McGovern at Consortium January 20, 2017 (“Obama Admits Gap in Russian ‘Hack’ Case”; https://consortiumnews.com/2017/01/20/obama-admits-gap-in-russian-hack-case/):
Of course this is absolutely true – with a very high degree of confidence. There is also significant evidence that Russia hacked the DNC based on private contractors familiar with the malware identified on the DNC network like F-secure and Fireeye (not to mention US intelligence). Crowdstrike was correct in their determination.
While there might not be any conclusive evidence that the Russians handed the emails over to WikiLeaks via a third party, Russia had every motive to do so – a very big motivation. Resetting relations with the US is critically in the interests of Russia which could result in ending “unfair” sanctions against Russia; a more hands off approach to eastern Europe by the US (i.e., a world carved into areas of “interests” between the superpowers (Russia, US and China); America taking a more isolationist position in the world (similar to the years prior to WWII); a revamping or disbanding of NATO (removing threatening NATO forces from Eastern Europe); resetting roles in Syria; nuclear disarmament; and the US joining Russia to fight terrorism world-wide including in Syria (despite Assad being the biggest single terrorist on the planet).
In addition Hillary Clinton represented a threat to Russia – and Russian interests in Eastern Europe and especially Ukraine. Clinton publically criticized the Russian elections in 2012 and she also threatened to create a no fly zone in Syria. She most certainly would have continued and pushed for rebel support in Syria. Clinton Erlich writes in Foreign Policy (“The Kremlin Really Believes That Hillary Wants to Start a War With Russia” :
“……..Let’s not mince words: Moscow perceives the former secretary of state as an existential threat…….”
The Russians – from their point of view – would have been foolish NOT to intervene in the elections. There was so much at stake. US intelligence assessment could not possibly be more correct. There may be no smoking gun, but a very high degree of confidence based on their “footprints” on the DNC computer and motive – a critical part of any investigation.
Thanks.
“…and motive – a critical part of any investigation.”
No. Motive means very little, especially when the purported evidence hasn’t been vetted by impartial parties – at least more impartial and more public than the secretive intelligence agencies.
This is, of course, “absolutely true – with a very high degree of confidence.”
Of course it is sillyputty no matter what you think. As Gator said quite plainly:
“……..Actually, evidence of motive is generally admissible in criminal cases in most jurisdictions……”
The motive was critical for Russia. As I pointed out with so much riding on the US election for Russia, they decided to hack the DNC and turn over the emails to WikiLeaks. Granted, there is no smoking gun (that we know about), but that is good enough for me to convict the former little KGB agent.
Thanks (with a high degree of gratitude).
Apples and oranges. Plainly.
Until “evidence” is vetted as stated, it’s a nothing burger. No matter what you think.
craigsummers twists and invents info to supports whatever racist claim he’s feebly trying to make. Gosh, with that kind of skill, he’s qualified to work for the State Dept!
“…….whatever racist claim he’s feebly trying to make……”
Yep. I’m an anti-Putin racist. Regardless of that really fucking stupid claim, there is nothing invented in that post Vivek.
Thanks.
This has gone on a lot longer than 1776..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvFl6UBZLv4
If motive is evidence than the evidence for blaming Russia because elections were lost , is motive for DNC ‘s false accusations.
But there is evidence for Russian hacking as indicated by private cyber-security firms – even if you don’t believe US intel.
There is no evidence of Russian hacking for purposes of influencing the US elections. Obama said that during his last press conference when asked to specify on the Podesta emails and HRC files. Furthermore please specify who paid these cyber security firms and why the IC didn’t get to examine the servers ?
In a foremsic examination, motive is not sufficient.
Considering just how many times the US/CIA have interfered in the elections of other countries, Muricans don’t have a leg to complain on, should the Russkies really have meddled.
http://observer.com/2016/10/2006-audio-emerges-of-hillary-clinton-proposing-rigging-palestine-election/
“forensic”, of course.
“……..Considering just how many times the US/CIA have interfered in the elections of other countries, Muricans don’t have a leg to complain on, should the Russkies really have meddled……..”
Complain all you want about the CIA or the state department, but it is irrelevant on whether Russia interfered in the US election. After all, Russia has a similar history with the Warsaw Pact countries. In the case of the election of the internationally recognized terrorist organization, Hamas, obviously the Palestinians were better off if someone did interfere in those elections since they have brought nothing to Gaza but war.
Don’t get me wrong Gert. Palestinians aren’t stupid. They knew what they were getting when they elected Hamas. They knew what the Hamas charter stated. They understood that Hamas would never accept a Jewish state. They knew that Hamas would agitate for war firing rockets into Israel – and they got what they voted for. Simple Gert.
They voted for Hamas because what went before didn’t deliver a thing. Much like Tony Blair was voted in because Britain was tired of Thatcher. Or Trump got voted in because Obomba/Clinton/DNC had nothing to offer.
Hopefully, Prof Walt’s words will bring some sanity to the insane environment!!
“Five Ways Donald Trump Is Wrong About Islam”
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/17/five-ways-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-islam/
Great article. Unfortunately its more than 1 page and has no maps, so our commander in chief will pass on reading it.
As an atheist for whom all slavish devotion to any “faith” is a complete mystery, I cannot begin to fathom the desire on the part of those who claim to care about human rights to import adherents of the most regressive religion on earth. Christianity and Judaism had their periods of infamy, but that is literally ancient history. There is only one worldwide religion today within which we find widespread deliberate oppression of women, intentional illiteracy, cliterectomies, stonings, beheadings, people being burned alive, crucifixations, mass torture, honor killings, executions of homosexuals, acid thrown in women’s faces, no due process for rape, etc etc. Literally everything about Islam should horrify classical liberals. If there were only thousands instead of 1.6 billion believers, Islam would be regarded as a truly bizarre cult much like scientology. US society has enough problems dealing with the irrational beliefs of the religious zealots already here. Why import more problems with irrationality and superstition that we may never be able to extinguish with reason?
Every time an Israel apologist rants about Palestinian terror, about Hamas rockets & etc, they should be called out as lacking standing to object to terrorism. Zionist history of terror makes the Palestinians look like pikers. Moreover, the Palestinians act in defense; they are the oppressed, the victims of murder and ethnic cleansing and gross, ongoing land theft.
They simply lack(ed) the resources to succeed at terror that the Zionist terrorists so copiously had/have:
Book review of State of Terror.
This is nothing but racism, simple jew-hatred.
“Zionist history of terror makes the Palestinians look like pikers”
And your objective evidence in support of this is … what exactly?
Your view on the Palestinians is at best simplistic – even the UN have condemned them for war cries in targeting civilians and use of ambulances to carry weapons, storing weapons in hospitals and schools.
Palestinian terrorism started in the 1930s, before WW2 and before there was a Jewish state and was based on nothing but Jew-hatred.
Well, well, well… another bullshit exit and return; surprise, surprise. I guess, that, upon reflection, the reality of being surrounded by “like-minded people” wasn’t that appealing after all. Can’t blame you there Mona.
Zionist terrorism began in the 1930’s as self-defense from Palestinian terrorism which began in the 1920’s.
Zionist terror against was already happening in the first decade of the 20th century. See Thomas Suarez’s book. The book also documents the enormous extent to which the British determined that the Zionists were repeatedly and egregiously provoking the Arabs so the Zionists could go on killing rampages and then claim “self defense.”
Read the book. (Not that you will or would care to; you are a hasbara troll.)
The inflammations started even before then.
From the newspaper, Filastin (Palestine), August 27, 1913
“These Zionist foreigners come to us after humiliation and expulsion from their own countries. They take advantage of our kindness, then soon become our masters and use their strength on us. They look at us with contempt. When we seek to open our children’s eyes to the dangers around them we are accused of racism, savagery and hate. In their newspapers they write, for European consumption, that we are arousing the people against them, trying to slaughter them and wipe them out. Is this not the story of the wolf and the sheep?”
Evidence of the murder of even one Palestinian by a Zionist in 1913?
Zionist terrorism began in the 1930’s surely,
but not as a defence.
Just as the mexicans are invading the US for a takeover of political control..
“The policy of the new organization was based squarely on Jabotinsky’s teachings: every Jew had the right to enter Palestine; only active retaliation would deter the Arabs; only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish state”.
seeing a pattern here?
Is it OK to murder legal Mexican immigrants?
Is it OK to murder illegal Mexican immigrants?
not since the alamo.
Was it OK to murder Jewish immigrants?
Arabs continued attacking Jews in the 1930’s & Zionist terrorism began as self-defense from these attacks.
oooooooh.
and it continues today for no reason at all?
no, it continues today for every reason at all.
sleep on it.
Are you saying that terrorism is OK?
<a href="http://forward.com/opinion/363545/the-disturbing-alliance-between-zionists-and-anti-semites/?attribution=articles-hero-item-text-1".The Disturbing Alliance Between Zionists and Anti-Semites
As I discuss in several post below, Zionist terrorism and fascism can be extensively read of in Thomas Suarez’ new book, State of Terror The above-linked article in the Forward also covers some of the same ground, but is less than forthcoming about how most political Zionists — not the so-called extremists — were pro-terror and pro-Nazi.
For example, the Forward writer claims that, e.g., David Ben-Gurion rejected any affinity for Nazis. As Suarez documents, the truth is Ben-Gurion favored dictatorships and lamented that:
Ben-Gurion specifically objected to an “American Mandate” in Palestine, because he knew they’d never be able to manipulate the U.S. into betraying the indigenous Arabs — that American rhetoric about democracy was antithetical to the Zionist project. (The historical reasons Zionists could finagle British support are extensive and covered many places, including in Suarez’s book.)
The Jewish Agency made a report identifying “the democracies and their Atlantic charter” as “enemies of Jewry,” because those democracies at least in form opposed ethno-nationalism and inequality at law, both of which are inherent in Zionism.
Further, Menachem Begin, after Kristalnacht, specifically opposed programs to deliver German Jewish children to safety in England, because he preferred that the “half” who would survive Nazis be drawn to Zionism and come to Palestine as Zionists to ethnically cleanse the Arabs. Virtually all icons of Zionism from the Mandate era were pro-terror and held an affinity for the Axis powers.
Mona: Ordered three to give away.
Good on you! I’ve just lobbied several Intercept writers to either review it themselves or to commission it.
“The Jewish Agency made a report identifying “the democracies and their Atlantic charter” as “enemies of Jewry,” ”
Enemies of Jewry … bet they’ve never used that before …
It is a very old tactic of instilling fear in your cult members; tell them they will be attacked unless they return to the flock for safety.
To make sure, the elders simple attack their own people in a false-flag event and declare that such is what happens when people stray.
Goering laid it out.
If the TI comment section proves one thing its the alliance of anti zionists and anti semites.
Listen, you slanderous bastard: there is no such alliance. The anti-Zionists here have pointed out nuffy’s antisemitic stances frequently.
But the alliance between Zionists and the Butchers of Murican Empire? Now that alliance is very real!
Nuf is but one of many including your bud barabbas Gert.
Again: wrong, you IDIOT! Barabbas in NOT my buddy. Keep slandering and not addressing the issues: it’s all you have left, arsehole.
Don’t worry, it’s not a big deal. Zionist like Gil literally have nothing to say in the face of Suarez’s documentation of the vileness of Zionism and Zionist terror and other crimes. What else are they gonna do? Misdirection and other forms of hand-waving is all they got.
Well, and lying. I’ve found a few Zionist reviews of the book, and they’re simply astonishing, likely presuming those reading won’t actually have a copy of the book at hand. (Such as, e.g., declaring that a claim is not footnoted when it quite literally and simply is.)
Dont know about unnamed zionists reviewers Mona, but you must have presumed i wouldnt have read the article where you made those false claims about Ashkenazi Jews.
One only has to read the thread to see that you , nuf and barabbas, share the same views,use the same name calling tactics, and lack the ability to put forth a cogent argument.
You are quite literally an IDIOT. You should know by now how easy it would be for me to show deeply anti-Islamic Zionists, like so many that hang out at a site you recently linked to, i.e. HarrysPlace. HP, (The Brown Sauce) is of course only the slightly polished tip of the iceberg, Richard Millett unapologetically harbours members of the Jewish Defence League and its Zionist sympathisers. Zionism is positively dripping with Islamophobia. Gil G. As faux-liberal you’re aware of that, as you indictaed much earlier.
As regards name-calling, you deserve far worse than I have time to dispense here.
Do please also point out which cogent argument YOU have put forth here.
I’ll wait.
1. Gert is not my buddy
2. excuse me for disliking zionists and liking jewish persons.
3. Dr Hajo Meyer, a jewish person who lived thru the holocaust, despised zions and warned the planet about them.
4. zionism is not a people nor a religion, it is a cult.
5. Who would have murdered Seth Rich, shooting him in the back as he walked?
When you claimed “Zionists” killed Jesus you proved what you are. That you like a Jewish bigot proves nothing.
Dear G-d, Dr Hajo Meyer is a “Jewish bigot”? In what way?
There is a difference between zionists and “Jewish persons.” Not all Jews are Zionists – in fact, a lot of Jews I know dislike Zionists for giving a false representation of them.
craig, yer get’n beat bad, really really bad, everything you say yer get’n stuffed bad, really really bad. Ordinarily i would advise you to find a new line of work, but i wont because….. YOU LIE and everyone knows it. Let’s discuss the USS LIBERTY.
Sure. Which of the many govt investigations finding that the Liberty was a case of fog of war do you want to start with.
“Which of the many govt investigations finding that the Liberty was a case of fog of war ”
Utter bullshit. The Liberty attack was designed to get America to bomb Egypt as Israel was starting the 1967 war.
http://www.ussliberty.org/bostondeclaration.pdf
Read the death-bed statement from the Captain tasked with covering up the attack by Israel.
Israel spent 90 minutes bombing, staffing, napalm, torpedoes; everything they had. Motor patrol boats even machine-gunned the life rafts. The fucking Israelis wanted every man dead and they wanted America to bomb Egypt.
The crew of the Liberty avoided catastrophe for the world. It took until 9/11 before the Jewish State, Saudis, and Cheney got it done.
The fact of the matter is Israel never claimed Egypt bombed the Liberty, not even for a second. On the other hand in the case of 240 US marines and sailors murder by Iranian trained terrorists there was never any question of the perps or the target.
“…….If the TI comment section proves one thing its the alliance of anti zionists and anti semites…….”
Or the alliance of the anti-Zionist far left and the antisemitic far right.
No.
But your continued, unwavering support for the Butchers for Profit in Washington is duly noted.
As well as your undiluted cheering for the Butchers for Land from TA/Jerusalem, of course…
German Intel Clears Russia on Interference
by Ray McGovern
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/15/german-intel-clears-russia-on-interference/
good find. Ray McGovern is the shit!
Here’s McGovern in Charlottesville from a few years ago (first of a three-part video):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DXtgR4WoEE
from part 3 of the talk:
See especially his comments at 9 minute (on “necks”) and 12 minute marks (on “oaths” and what we are obligated to do)
Meanwhile back in Left Field…
For JTRIGing key polls (the ones used to drive predetermined government and MSM sanctioned narratives) to confirm (or deny) Americas growing Muslimophobia is all in a day for the US NSA.
For JTRIGing key news stories to inflate the popularity of establishment narratives and deflate the popularity of antiestablishment narratives seek the proud and the few at GCHQ.
JTRIGing the Five Eyes opposition (to minimize those resisting government and MSM sanctioned narratives) to weaken their positions is natural and free at the ASD.
JTRIGing the Americas. Serving US hysteria. Well we’d expect nothing less from the CSIS.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-%E2%80%9Crussia-scare%E2%80%9D-coalition-isils-%E2%80%9Cuseful-idiots%E2%80%9D-19502
Victory by the “Russia scare” coalition will limit America’s ability to fight ISIL, complicate efforts to win UNSC support for tough enforcement of the Iran nuclear deal and give China more leverage over both Moscow and Washington.
Mona
“…….My participation here is going to be limited, at best. It would perhaps be useful if some of you made note of the book, speech and material on Zionist terrorism I discuss below. This work virtually always will be relevant when the subject of Islamic terrorism arises, and especially when, as here, the article also pertains to Israel……”
It’s a classic case of whataboutery and an attempt by you to change the subject Mona. It has nothing to do with Jewish (or Arab) terrorism during the Arab Rebellion which lasted from 1936-1939. What would be relevant is how our one-sided support for Israel stokes Islamic terrorism in places like Chechnya, Indonesia, Malaysia, Sudan, Russia, China, Algeria, Somalia and so on. Nice try though……
at least you acknowledge our support for Israel is one-sided.
We didn’t give the Palestinians hundreds of billions of dollars over the last several decades.
The US supplies much more aid to Israel, but that mainly arose from the 1960s when Israel was seen as a counter weight to the Russians, who had strong alliances with Egypt and Syria amongst others. It has been sustained since because a large part of the American people want it to continue and Pro-Israel lobbyists are very effective.
However the US has also given around 5 billion in aid to the Palestinians and has made multiple attempts to broker a peace deal with a two state solution.
The Palestinians have by and large fought the idea of a two state solution and support the destruction of Israel.
The dissent in Palestine was influenced also by the discovery in October 1935 at the port of Jaffa of a large arms shipment destined for the Haganah, sparking Arab fears of a Jewish military takeover of Palestine..
Haganah?
The opinions of the American People have nothing to do with US Foreign or Military Policy. We are only here to be extorted by a militaristic ruling class. We are dumbed down and taught to fear an imaginary enemy. Yesterday it was communism, today it is terrorism, tomorrow, if there is a tomorrow, will be another ism. This is so our rulers can take our tax dollars, or sons to use as soldiers to loot a country and protect the colonizers.
In contrast, Mohammad was a warrior, so it is highly unlikely that Islam is a religion of peace, more like a religious teaching exploited by warriors. Similar to any military culture, Islam demands complete submission. Most Islamic countries are dictatorships, so even if the people of those countries don’t like Islam, they are forced to accept it, or suffer severe social consequences.
That is the reality of our world.
“The opinions of the American People have nothing to do with US Foreign or Military Policy. We are only here to be extorted by a militaristic ruling class. We are dumbed down and taught to fear an imaginary enemy.”
– turk151
In the real world, who is responsible for being willfully dumbed down and extorted? Who is responsible for voting for US foreign and military policies the American People do not know how to discuss? Nobody?
@gert, photsymbyosis, other anti-Zionists re: Zionist terror and pro-Nazi views
My participation here is going to be limited, at best. It would perhaps be useful if some of you made note of the book, speech and material on Zionist terrorism I discuss below. This work virtually always will be relevant when the subject of Islamic terrorism arises, and especially when, as here, the article also pertains to Israel.
The same author and book heavily document the extreme extent of Zionist affinity for Nazis, antisemites and cooperation with them.
The extent to which Zionist depravity is as deeply repugnant as that of any Nazi cannot be overstated. Between that reality and the horrific history of Zionist terrorism, recourse to this material is highly recommended. If you do not own the book, State of Terror, it truly is a must-have.
it is hard to believe that 4 teams going about the country for months would be able to precisely converge in different places and timely so as to be in the air at the same time and at the same endpoints without an extensive planning and co-ordinating committee in an operations as flawless as the ones in Dubai or Egypt of Iran – especially after the screwup at Entebbe (that’ll never happen again, no more mistakes). Which would also indicate a follow-the-money interest. By the way, did anyone lose a competitive adversary? Someone who perhaps had the same targets in other ventures?
Entebbe was only a screwup from the point of view of the murdering terrorists of the PFLP and their fellow butcher and supporter Idi Amin.
What screwup at entebbe? PFLP terrorists kidnapped a bunch of Jews and threatened to murder them all, helped by Idi Amin, a notorious racist and mass murderer. IDF commandos rescued almost all the hostages alive and lost their commander in the process. It was an incredible success and taught the Palestinian terrorists the consequences of attacking Israel
Thanks Mona, I will certainly look into that book but Lenni Brenner’s ‘Zionism in the Age of the Dictators’ covers much of that subject matter.
It can be found here, for those who don’t already know about it:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Zionism_AgeDictators.html
Yes, I’ve read Brenner, but Suarez’s work is far more extensive — including some 680 endnotes, some of them long paragraphs quoting several sources. Many of them are primary, including the Zionist Organization of America, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the CIA and the UK’s National Archives at Kew. There’s really nothing else like it.
Sorry that you are limited in our activity. Same here. Best of luck.
Correction our=your
You have no credibility when it comes to providing information on this topic Mona. The last time I checked one of your sources I found you got the facts wrong on part of it and totally made up other parts.
Even if, for argument’s sake, Mona made some mistake or other, that does not invalidate all of what she asserts.
Your reasoning here is akin to that of a Holocaust denier. But then you always were a dumb Murican Idiot, you just happen also to be a rabid Zionist to boot, just to make your predicament worse.
How am i acting like a holocaust denier? I made up no lies Mona did. Not just a mistake but lies made up of whole cloth.
I love how those who continue to reap the benefits of the most muderous empire in history complain about Americans. You show nothing but you own bigotry and hatred Gert.
Holocaust deniers claim to find some piece of evidence in the mountain of Holocaust evidence, then claim this invalidates ALL evidence. You’re doing the same vis-a-vis Mona.
%
So much petaulant ‘nerner… nernerner’ nonsense in one sentence, it’s almost a tour de force.
I’m not British but that hardly matters: I have and continue to denounce the slaughter for profit by various Empires throughout the times (wherever they are geogtaphiclly or temporally). It is what eventually made me anti-Zionist too, of course.
“Americans”? No, you silly twit. 99 % of Americans are VICTIMS in their rulers’ games for profit and power. I have nothing but sympathy for them but note that many, like imbeciles of your variety, can’t even see how they are being conned!
“petulant”, “geographically”, of course.
Mona has the facts correctly.
it is important for people to have a thoro knowledge of events. The more one knows then the inconsistencies and blank spaces can be surmised so that one’s current understanding of relationships, loyalties, ambitions, and agendas can be properly reconciled to see the truth. For instance in the MURDER OF SETH RICH who was shot in the back walking away and not robbed indicates a murder for betrayal as the motive. Hmmm, who might have benefitted most? Hmmm, girlfriend? nah. family? nah. Well what other very important relationships did he have? Oh, his position as the tech guy for the DNC computer systems which presumably had held the emails that could make or break a national election for the president of the United States and for which millions were spent by very interested parties.
let me put my thinking cap on?
nah, dont need it this time.
have a nice day.
The only ones who profited from the Seth Rich murder is Alex Jones. The dopes who believe his nonsence enable that profit.
“My participation here is going to be limited, at best.”
Too bad. I hope there are writers like yourself who will be willing to contribute and shut down lazy posts. It’s a service that’s needed in a sea of willful ignorance and outright lies.
The author makes good points why Muslims hate the U.S. but leaves out all the murders and killings Muslims caused in Europe. I am talking about Charley Hebdo and the Parisian killings along with the Nice killings and the Berlin killings and the many other murders in Western countries that are not reported here in the U.S. Where and how does Islam or the author justify those killings?
The reason why Muslims and those of other faiths will never get along is that Muslims cannot separate Church from State. Until there are distinct divisions, with the Church or Religion, taking a second place to rule of law, then Muslims will never be compatible with American life. Violence can be stopped, appeasements given, narratives spun but you will not change the mind of the religious zealot. Religion has to take less of an importance than rule by humane laws. With the stubbornness and self righteousness of most of humanity, it is doubtful this will ever happen. So Trump is actually well founded to study this and revamp the vetting system because the people of any religion that glorifies itself over rule by humane law is a threat to all the citizens of society.
The Muslims hate us for our French-fried destruction of Libya, the sauteing of Iraq, all while we braise Syria to death. When will the Chef redo the menu?
eh, read on.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/lavon.html
what you mean “we”?
also check out the USS LIBERTY.
by “we” I mean the good old US of A.
Americans are doing the cooking in the Middle East.
Israel is blending slowly the ingredients.
John Dickerson beat-up Reince Priebus in the school-yard today.
Rep. Adan Schiff explained how the leak about Flynn was OK because it exposed wrong-doing unlike what Snowden or Manning leaking things did …
and John McCain still doesn’t like Trump.
Qui bono? Who benefits from this manufactured fear? Google, “The Lavron Affair.” From Wikipedia article:
“As part of the false flag operation,[1] a group of Egyptian Jews were recruited by Israeli military intelligence to plant bombs inside Egyptian, American, and British-owned civilian targets, cinemas, libraries and American educational centers. The bombs were timed to detonate several hours after closing time. The attacks were to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptian Communists, “unspecified malcontents” or “local nationalists” with the aim of creating a climate of sufficient violence and instability to induce the British government to retain its occupying troops in Egypt’s Suez Canal zone.[2] The operation caused no casualties among the population, but did cost the lives of four operatives: two cell members who committed suicide after being captured; and two operatives who were tried, convicted, and executed by Egypt.”
The ruse would have worked, had not one of the bombs detonated prematurely,
and the ruse would have worked had not the thermite been seen and video taped and had not the presence of the dancing israelis been documented and the coverup of the dancing israelis been documented as well.
Is $3.5 billion per year for a country the size of Bakersfield incentive enough to perpetuate the profit-from-fear money laundering racket?
google
“the Lavon Affair”
– no r
Minor point: “Cui bono”. C not Q.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-for-the-super-rich
Good link. Save that for the next time Macroman touts the affordability of the automobile and crap like median income.
the emphasis and focus and drive on producing for wallstreet to build build build to grow grow grow is a recipe for the cancerous growth of a dead end.
Wallstreet is the new Frankenstein.
Here’s a question:
If all this Islamic hate toward the US is the result of its (admittedly horrible) foreign policy, why is it that we here in Europe seem to be on the receiving end of much more islamic terror when we have no foreign policy that leads us to invade countries or kill thousand of civilians?
Very good article Jon.
I’ve been paying close attention to the Evangelical Christians in my life for decades. I’m a believer, but not attached to any “brand” name religion. Evangelicals become extremely vocal about America’s duty to bat for Israel at any cost, in order that the these evangelicals be saved via End Times prophecies. I’ve actually pushed buttons intentionally regarding too much aid to Israel, why Jews should be protected more than non-Jews, just to understand this obsessive paradigm regarding Israel.
What I have learned is that evangelical Christians actually crave and pine for the End Times in order that they get to meet their maker in the second coming. Blindly supporting all things Jewish or Israel, they are every bit as obsessed with their religious prophesy as the Muslims are with theirs.
It seems to be a “See me God? I’m loving Israel! Do I still get my ticket on the bus to Heaven?” mentality. It’s not about the Jews or Israel, it’s about these people getting their deliverance. Very self-centered, very short sighted, very blind and very destructive for our civilization.
Now… apply this scenario to our “representatives” of the Christian faith, the evangelicals especially. Tel Aviv knows very well that evangelicals in Washington are this obsessive about Israel and he’s taken that to the bank for Zionists. He uses AIPAC in the US to grow that power and use the US military as his own 1000 lb. gorilla through guys like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Peter King, Mitch McConnell and a host of others with influence and involvement in the Pentagon and military-related depts.
This evangelical radicalism combined with its Muslim equivalent is the disaster and the blow back Ron Paul spoke of throughout his campaigns. We have warring radicals who care not about life right now because they pine for life after the great conflict.
Donald Trump is not an Evangelical I hope. I have not researched it. But I do know that he likes his fortune as does Vladimir Putin, and neither wants to die before they get to spend a lot more of it or live in a bunker for several years. No jewelry stores or fancy restaurants down there.
We’ve got to contain the evangelicals in Washington and control the flow of Muslim immigrants who could snap in the middle of watching anti-Muslim rants by America talk radio evangelicals. I think Trump knows all this.
Call me crazy, but that’s my assessment of this situation.
The biggest problem with this editorial is that it only goes back decades. We need to go back to the Seventh Century to understand why Americans, as well as all other non-Muslims in the world, are afraid of Muslims. In a nutshell, it’s because they want to kill us for not being like them.
God gives mankind the gift of choice, basically between degrees of good and evil. Islam gives mankind the choice of assimilate or die, in direct defiance of our God given choice between good and evil. Does that mean that Muslims are all evil? Absolutely not. No more than all who proclaim to be Christian, irreligious, Hindu or Buddhist are all going to be either good or evil, most Muslims are just people wanting to live decent lives utilizing their individual faiths to help them along. The difference with Islam is that Islam teaches peaceful living only as it pertains to Muslims. Islam also teaches violent aggression when it comes to those who are not Muslim. That is where the fear comes in.
The Twentieth Century saw the longest period of low aggressiveness from the Islamic world since the inception of Islam in the Seventy Century. That was due to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire during WWI, when Islamic factions sided with Germany. Even after their defeat during WWI, Islamic factions once again sided with German Nazi’s in WWII. From WWII until current times, Islam has been spreading throughout the world with Muslims quietly moving into every corner of the world. Now that this enemy is embedded from within other countries, they are once again becoming more and more aggressive in order to fulfill the purpose of Islam; to dominate the world.
Compelling argument, but let me ask you this: At any point in their history, have these Muslims enjoyed comfortable lives, in stable societies where the majority of citizens had the potential to succeed?
Religion exists as a coping mechanism, to fill in the gaps in our understanding of the world. If our existence is one of hardship and hopelessness, our religion will reflect that. And yes, religious beliefs are capable of changing. As an example of this, modern day Catholicism is a far cry from the era of the Crusades. The typical Catholic lives a life so far removed from the hardships of the middle ages that the idea of serving in an “army of God” seems absurd.
This is the stupidest article ever printed by The Intercept.
What is this:
“By contrast, the Democratic, liberal perspective laid out by Obama makes no sense at all. We’ve never done anything particularly bad in the Middle East, yet … some people over there want to come here and kill us because … they’ve been exploited by violent extremists who’ve perverted Islam and … gotta run, there’s no time to explain.
“Regular people could sense that anyone mouthing this kind of gibberish was hiding something, even if they didn’t realize that Obama was trying to keep the U.S. empire running rather than concealing his secret faith in Islam.”
What is the writer saying? Is he quoting someone? Is he mocking someone? It’s too vauge to make any sense. WTF?
Is it me? Is it you? Did I watch too much TV?
Good. Mona is back to destroy another thread!
it is important for people to have a thoro knowledge of events. The more one knows then the inconsistencies and blank spaces can be surmised so that one’s current understanding of relationships, loyalties, ambitions, and agendas can be properly reconciled to see the truth. One of the factors in making such determinations is the push-pull factor from outsiders who have the aura of being not giving.
have a nice day.
craigsummers unfortunately is back to profess his love for Imperialism, Murican Exceptionalism and its Israeli cousin, Zionism.
Arseholes will be arseholes.
Havent seen Craig profess love, but I have seen tons of hate from you Gert and your ally the anti Jew barabbas.
What I love is those who claim they are anti zionist make common cause with those that have dropped theit masks.
Gil G blows a dog whistle.
Yep and the anti semite dogs responded.
Too funny.
Learn to spell. Then get back to me.
Who would benefit most by a war between christians and muslims?
you will not successfully answer this question.
The pictures in your article reminded me. I have this aversion to explosions. I think people should lead their lives without being blown up.
@Alexi: Terror in modern era was begun by Zionists
Zionists. Zionists innovated much of modern terror. Zionist used Jewish children to blow up buses full of Arab civilians. Israel would not exist but for Zionist terrorism. Zionist terrorists — who used children — slaughtered tens of thousands, including other Jews who morally opposed them.
See the rest of the speech to the British House of Lords by Thomas Suarez, author of the horrifying new book: State of Terror: How terrorism created modern Israel. (The work relies on hundreds of primary sources, many of them Zionist and British.)
Modern terror was invented by Zionists. The State of Israel is carrying forward terror under the aegis of a state.
Against his better judgment, President Harry Truman recognized the State of Israel in 1948, but feared doing so was contributing to an eventual WWIII. In great part, Muslim terror mimics and is responsive to Zionist terror, and the U.S. that is complicit in it.
ah.
there it is.
if the israeli ergun terrorists were willing to kill anyone to accomplish their goals, and if their goals are not yet completed, and if their goals are territorial expansion, and who currently slaughter Palestinians for their land, one might ask.. Would not these same members also be willing to arrange, co-ordinate and precipitate an attack on the World Trade Center?
It occurs to me now that in Hillary’s missing emails, there would be written discussion about territorial expansion of israel in some fashion and with much assurance and support. (this would fit a missing piece of that jigsaw puzzle).
Hmm…
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/19/opinions/9-11-spiritual-guide-dies-bergen/index.html
Mr. Schwarz did an interesting job until the end with his recommendations.
Why not just walk away from the Muslim / Arab world?
Why not pull the U.S. military out of the Middle East now that we have drill baby drill?
Why not restrict future immigration from the Middle East since their cultures do not match the U.S.?
Americans don’t fear Muslims, they just hate them because Americans are born of murderous pioneering racism. Muslim men don’t play sports or drink a Bud over a barbie, Muslim women aren’t pretty enough or slutty enough to lust after, as a social group they are either insanely rich or grindingly poor and so rarely fall within the American way of thinking. The religion is alarming in its success both by conquest and conversion and is the traditional foe of Christianity. They are not so-poor-as-to-be-pointless like most black Africans, passively nerdy like Orientals or easily brought into the fold like Europeans. And Americans love to toady the rich, and the richest of the rich are the Saudis, and the Saudis hate any other Muslims that threaten their Hajj and Oil gazillions, and so the Americans, giddy with dreams of the New Rome and ever willing to kiss some rich arse, willingly jump on the wagon and run off to play murderous and hateful Empire.
Your mind has turned to toilet waste. To describe America’s role as merely a “horrendously counterproductive and morally vile” stance is to completely ignore both America’s complete complicity and duplicity in these matters and also fail to state that America continues to target states that are not funding, harbouring or manning the terror organisations it claims to be at war with, quite the opposite in fact as the terror groups are being used as an excuse to attack those countries on Trump’s list.
And how can you say Russia are making it worse in Syria and beyond when you have no idea what is even happening there? There are real and identifiable players in Syria with real and identifiable strategies and goals but I have yet to see a single report that presents anything close to a sustained and comprehensive understanding and documenting of it all. America says it is bombing ISIS – it is not, it is bombing the pro-Assad army and militias. Russia says it is bombing ISIS, it probably is, along with anti-Assad groups. And in the middle of this never-ending shitstorm are the everyday people of Syria who have done not a single thing wrong and probably hate every politicised and militarised clown destroying their modest and innocent lives.
But I guess you forget that in the comfort of your “office” every time PayPal bankrolls your wilful ignorance and stupidity. Good grief – if anyone believes in God or the American Dream after all this hatefulness then they really are a hopeless moron.
Context is king … It’s easy to uncover dirty laundry and misgivings about any nation, sate, city, organization, or family … since they are comprised of incurable people. Although, the context of this issue is Islam is butchering people in the name of Mohammad’s actions and writing and for two millennia. Since their original rape of the Middle East with Mohammad’s gangs of thugs through the infiltration and brutal conquering/conversion of Northern Africa, Asia, and parts of Europe (The original crusades before the second crusades ignited to save their country and people); all before the USA existed. The cause and effect of the original Muslim agenda is world domination and conversion. This is a two thousand year trend based on a perverted ideology despite the “peaceful” Muslims who choose an abbreviated version of Islam, follow their conscience, and somewhat passive in their following the Koran. The core problem is a war of ideologies with one side having an end-game mission and cosmic cause to carry out their intolerant and militant agenda.
edited for clarity …
and the settlements continue to expand daily …
As they should since that region is the second most liberated society in the world. More of it would settle the biggest problem in the world: Islam. If the Jews would lay down their weapons, we would have a slaughter of an entire people. If the true followers of Islam would lay down their weapons, we’d have peace. Again, context is king and its logic rails against obvious bigotry and racism.
“If the true followers of Islam would lay down their weapons, we’d have peace. ”
Sure, Israel would just remove all Palestinians peacefully …
Jews demand special treatment by identifying as Jewish. There can not be a race of Jews. Study up on speciation and you will find Jews and Christians and Muslims all have traces of each in their DNA.
The idea of a family tree is no longer accepted by most scientists; a braided river is a much more realistic model.
Christianity, Judaism, Islam; Satan’s Trifecta.
I answer fools according to their folly.
Americans had a love affair with radical Wahhabi Islam for decades since they were “our natural allies” in the fight against (1) Godless Communism during the Cold War and (2) Iranian Shia revolutionairies post-1980. The CIA supported the Egyptian Brotherhood in Egypt in the Nasser era, and also the Taliban in Afghanistan in the 1980s. As far as the Saudi relationship, that really took off c. 1975:
If we look back to when Saudi Arabia really came into the U.S. orbit, it goes back to the assassination of Saudi King Faisal in March 1975:
http://www.boldfacenews.com/the-strange-assassination-of-king-faisal/
Kissinger and Ford had just agreed with the Shah of Iran to support a military intervention in Saudi Arabia if an independent leader was to take power:
So now let’s see what Prince Nayef’s role was in the aftermath of the assassination of Faisal, courtesy Wikileaks trove of State Department cables:
Thank you, photosymbiosis, Very useful, indeed!
Roosevelt dies seven days later, on April 12.
and
thanks for your invaluable contribution
The hypocrisy of the LEFTIST PRESS-titutes, which is nearly ALL of them, is insufferable. They rail against the CHRISTIAN CHURCH for its incompetent and self-protective handling of pedophilia with ever greater heaping helpings of derision (never mind that the actual perpetrators of the crimes are protected ‘minority’ classes of the LEFT) but have NOTHING of critical nature to offer to the CULT OF ISLAM for the real-time, real-world SLAUGHTER thoroughly soaked throughout its own LITURGY and History against everyone else it labels as ‘INFIDELS’, something it’s ‘god’, ALLAH, is claimed to have authored and something which can not therefore possibly be forgiven.
One bad apple spoils the barrel. The needle in a hay stack. Repeat reports of sabotage and massacres.
It’s the JEWS wot did it!!!
What a bunch of [email protected] this article is. LOTS of people HATE other countries policies, yet you only find ONE group bent on blowing up buses of schoolchildren.
Any bombs going off in Beijing as a result of their Tibetan policies?
Any JEWS seeking vengeance on Germany by blowing themselves up in discos?
Any Cherokee stabbing children in their sleep?
There is but ONE group that justifies this beastly behavior; but one group who’s HEROES are noted for the singular act of mass murder of civilians.
Do you think Egyptians rose up against the Muslim Brotherhood because of American policies?
Now, I’m someone who absolutely HATES Donald Trump. I 100% disagree with any type of cockamamie ban on Muslims or a database of Muslims etc etc. It’s vile.
I also have big issues with American policy in the MENA.
But I’m not so STUPID as to be convinced for a second that anything justifies Islamic Terror. Nor am I stupid enough to take terrorists at their words when they make excuses for mass murder or the glorification of murdering scum, unlike the rest of you.
What was Operation Cyclone?
Beat me to it.
“What was Operation Cyclone?”
A very twisted operation designed to funnel profits from the increased sales of new mobile homes into DNC coffers.
Who here justifies Islamist terror, Alexi?
Zionism and American/Western support for it has a lot to answer for. But if you can’t distinguish between Zionists and Jews, then it is you who is being antisemitic.
First and foremost: ofcourse nothing justifies (Islamic) terror. To assume that only Islam justifies murder (or whatever other act of violence) of civillians is really ridiculous though. Not only are there far more Muslims who detest the violence perpetrated by radicals then there are those who justify it. But there are also several religious and secular ideologies that can and do justify violence against civilians. Nationalism being one. The Tamil Tigers are responsible for the most suicide bombings in the year 2016. Just last week the White House released a statement that calling the “Yemen raid a faillure was a disservice to the Navy Seal who died”. But it is apparently completely justified that a little girl and 15 other civillians died. Now who glorifies and makes excuses for murdering scum?
There are lots of examples of the type you want. There was Tibetan violence at one time. There were armed Jew uprisings against the Germans during WWII. There was Native American violence against the colonists, and it could be pretty savage.
Populations do get subdued at times by force. But it’s also worth noting that most retaliatory political violence only occurs while the oppression is ongoing.
IRA violence, Baader-Meinhof, US civil war, Spanish Civil War etc etc etc etc…
The Crusades/Holy Wars
Signed,
Bill Maher
more questions…
Who murdered Seth Rich?
How is a bullet in the back anything other than a mark of BETRAYAL?
Who pre-wired wtc7 for detonation?
Who set the traps for investment fraud and the theft of American homes?
Who set the thermite charges in the 1&2?
Who benefits by a conflict between christians and muslims?
Who believes that power is won by the art or deception thou shall make war?
What assurances did Hillary Clinton give to friends in the missing emails?
Who hacked the DNC and gave the emails to WikiLeaks? The Russkies…..
Emails were leaked, not hacked
by William Binney and Ray McGovern
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-hacking-intelligence-20170105-story.html
German Intel Clears Russia on Interference
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/15/german-intel-clears-russia-on-interference/
I’m OK with that, but that in no way clears them of interfering with the US elections as well as the elections in France – and possibly elsewhere in Europe. It should be also noted that prior to this release by the BND, German intelligence said Russia was interfering (al-Jazeera; BfV: “Russia is trying to destabilise Germany” @AJENewshttp://aje.io/8l78):
The BND made the accusation late last year. Possibly Russia has pulled back considering they were caught red-handed interfering in the US elections.
Thanks.
I wasn’t aware that the Chinese govt, was bombing Tibetans every two or so years, and depriving them of water, building walls around them with military checkposts, bulldozing their houses, spraying their crops with poison, dropping white phosphorous, etc., etc., etc. But I’m sure you make a good point in your head.
I wasn’t aware that the German govt, was bombing Jews every two or so years, and depriving them of water, building walls around them with military checkposts, bulldozing their houses, spraying their crops with poison, dropping white phosphorous, etc., etc., etc. But I’m sure you make a good point in your head.
I wasn’t aware that the US govt, was bombing The Cherokee every two or so years, and depriving them of water, building walls around them with military checkposts, bulldozing their houses, spraying their crops with poison, dropping white phosphorous, etc., etc., etc. But I’m sure you make a good point in your head.
The best way to diminish the source behind both terrorism and the need for immigration is to stop the oppressive nature of our foreign policy and the bombing used to enforce it.
If a foreign power was oppressing and bombing, or placed it’s military on U.S. soil and killing our innocent women and children the U.S. and its people would not sit idly by accepting a collateral damage justification.
Our citizenry with all its guns, resources and determination would strike upon the occupying forces along with the homeland of that force with reckless abandon and certainly not consider ourselves terrorists.
Additionally, if a foreign power backed, supported and supplied another foreign power that was oppressing and bombing the U.S. The U.S. would have the overwhelming justification of its citizenry to strike upon the homeland and forces of that foreign power with the same reckless abandon.
Perfect. Exactly.
Great article, Jon.
The combination of false political choices (e.g., do nothing vs escalate in response to a terrorist act) and asymmetrical exercise of military power mostly explains the escalation of violence we’ve witnessed, IMO.
Application of the Powell Doctrine (use of overwhelming force) might work with localized armies, but it’s counter-productive when a history of indiscriminate, overwhelming military response is a root cause of conflict.
A combination of honest assessment and proportional response might not be enough to de-escalate the mess we’re in, but it might halt further escalation.
The author is certainly correct about the choice that President Obama made to avoid mentioning the long and troubled history of U.S. actions in the Middle East. But it is worth noting, in this context, that when Obama made even the vaguest reference to past flawed actions by the U.S. in a speech in Cairo in 2009, the right screamed for eight years about what they called an “apology tour.”
“if the speech marked a rhetorical shift, it did not chart new ground in terms of U.S. foreign policy. Instead, it signals the reemergence of liberal imperialism, packaged deftly and skillfully through the person of Barack Hussein Obama.”
– Deepa Kumar
https://socialistworker.org/2009/06/12/looking-beyond-symbolism
Just as Ida Wells systematically dismantled and exposed the racist lies about Black Folk, so we must debunk the Islamophobia and more importantly stop the violence against our Sisters and Brothers.
How are you going to DEBUNK CHRISTOPHOBIA when it’s both true and also suffered by every Moslem on Earth?
On behalf of all Muslims in America, I thank you Vivek Jain.
Love You too.
ditto
Obama ‘took’ office with a massive outpouring of public support and an overwhelming mandate: CHANGE … and beg the world for forgiveness for the prior eight years of lies, theft, anarchy, pillage and torture.
Not to mention waterboarding … and probably a whole lot worse.
Good stuff-
Mr. Schwarz
Blaming the west for Islamic terrorism is driven by anti-westernism which holds no one responsible except the west for the violent religious-political movement(s). There are numerous Islamic terrorist organizations (hundreds) in the world which are actively seeking to gain power and impose sharia law on the population killing mostly Muslims in the process. Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, TTP, Afghanistan Taliban (etc.) kill mostly Muslims for power. All terrorist organizations have political goals including the much admired al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda has a long and distinguished track record of supporting, targeting and murdering women and children. In fact, the track record of al-Qaeda shows zero concern for Muslim deaths. ISIS has set new standards for brutality. There are no terrorist organizations attacking only western targets for revenge without political goals which include imposing sharia law, subjugating Muslims (and Dhimmis) in an anti-democratic society and reinstating the caliph. Radical Islam is a world political-religious (anti-globalist) movement much like the failed communist revolution only much smaller in scale.
This is the worst kind of propaganda perpetuated by terrorist like Abdulmutallab in unison with the radical left. The killing of Muslims by the US (supposedly) drives the anger of al-Qaeda leaders like Awlaki and Bin Laden as well as common terrorists like Abdulmutallab (*see quotes below by Bin Laden and Awlaki). Islamic terrorist organizations like al-Qaeda murder for power – not for revenge. Al-Qaeda is a political-religious movement with political goals. Certainly, they would love to change our foreign policy, but not because we support ME dictators who oppress Arab people, or because we have bombed seven Muslim countries recently. That’s ridiculous. Islamic organizations like al-Qaeda are anti-democratic to the core of their beliefs and would rule in a similar fashion as the racists and bigoted Taliban under sharia law. Most importantly, they are willing to kill as many Muslims as possible to gain power
No one kills more Muslims than Muslims – like in Syria. Sunni terrorist kill more people from terrorism than any other group and Muslims are the largest target of their attacks. That is an extremely odd way to revenge the killing of Muslims by the US. Al-Qaeda supported the Afghan Taliban in their rise to power which included attempting genocide on the apostate Shia Hazaris. About 70% of the civilian (Muslim) casualties in Afghanistan in 2015 were caused by the Taliban. That’s Muslims murdering innocent people (Muslims). In next door Pakistan, Al-Qaeda aligned with the extremely brutal TTP (Pakistan Taliban) in their war on the Pakistani State. This has included the brutal targeting and murder of countless Shia in Pakistan – mostly civilians with many suicide bombings conducted on worshippers in local mosques. Also in Pakistan, resisting (Muslim) Tribal Chiefs were murdered by the dozens. The TTP has carried their war on Muslims to the extreme in war crimes targeting a children’s military school killing over 150 people, mostly children. The TTP targeted and attempted to murder Malala Yousafzai at age 15 for her girls education advocacy. Those are al-Qaeda Allies responsible for targeting and murdering thousands of Muslims in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Al-Zarqawi led the brutal Iraq branch of al-Qaeda murdering hundreds, possibly thousands of Muslims while attempting to initiate a sectarian war between Shia and Sunni Muslims. In Yemen, Amnesty International called the takeover of Abyan Province by al-Qaeda a “human rights catastrophe” – and they continue to murder primarily Muslims in that war. AQIM is intent on overthrowing the Algerian government targeting civilians – Muslims and non-Muslims. Al-Qaeda’s former branch in Syria, al-Nusra Front, is still at the forefront of a brutal war pitting Muslim on Muslim violence, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Wherever al-Qaeda operates, Muslims are the primary “beneficiaries” of their drive for power.
The idea that Islamic terrorist like Bin Laden care one iota about the US killing Muslims is laughable; however, it does make for the continuation of a great narrative beginning with Columbus landing in North America.
*Here is the mass murderer, Bin Laden lying about how the killing of Muslims underlies their attacks against the US:
And who can forget the words of Awlaki given a forum for his propaganda by Jeremy Scahill a couple of days after Jews were targeted at a Kosher Market during the Charlie Hebdo Massacre. This is simply classic propaganda by the radical left to blame Israel. The Intercept has never even acknowledged the murder of the Jews at the market. However, the timing of the quote by Awlaki was impeccable:
More comedy by an al-Qaeda operative.
Or maybe, it is driven by rational assessment of cause and effect.
Largely a post-Iraq phenomenon, isn’t it?
That’s true of all terrorist organizations in history, I believe, not just Islamic ones.
Your entire argument seems to be that these are organizations with backward behavior/beliefs and political motives. I fail to see how any of that detracts from the idea of blowback.
You can believe whatever you choose Jose, but it’s a little odd to complain that the US is killing Muslims while you kill Muslims. In fact, it seems somewhat hypocritical – just a strange way to get revenge in my opinion. It’s kind of like the US getting revenge on the Japanese for bombing Pearl Harbor by killing Americans.
Or kind of like McVeigh taking revenge for the deaths of Americans by killing Americans including children. No one is claiming it’s a rational response. But it does have causes, one of which is blowback.
If your ultimate goal is to ignore terrorism against Muslims then you can present the blowback argument as the main cause. What you fail to consider (I think purposely) is that any nation becomes a target of Islamic terrorism as soon as that nation decides to help what the terrorists consider enemies.
If the government of South Africa continuously warns Indonesia of an imminent terrorist attacks, then the terrorist groups in Indonesia would consider South African citizens as valid targets. It would be completely irrelevant whether South Africa has any military force or economic interest in Indonesia. What you are essentially stating is that your government should not even help the Indonesian government against terrorism because the terrorist groups that have been killing Indonesian Muslims for years will now target you. That is a weak argument because those same terrorist groups keep saying they will target you anyway.
No. I don’t think blowback is the reason intervention should be opposed, unless you want to use a purely utilitarian argument. I’m not a utilitarian. The right principle is that intervention should be opposed because it violates self-determination. Wars of aggression, like the Iraq war, are clearly wrong on principle, beyond the consequences we’re still seeing.
“The right principle is that intervention should be opposed because it violates self-determination.”
1) The statement discounts what the locals request and the degree of intervention. Neither Iran nor Chile requested US intervention in their countries. But this is fact that an elected government in Iraq openly, publicly and officially requested American intervention in 2014. This is the same government that demanded the US departure if conditions were not met. And the US did leave. Top candidates in the last Afghan election openly told voters they would ask for US intervention. Those candidates were elected.
The degree of intervention also matters. The US government does not have troops in India, but US law enforcement and intelligence agencies share information on terrorist groups with India. That constitute an intervention at least to the terrorists’ perspective.
2) The statement is also simplistic. The Americans cannot deny how useful the French intervention was in helping the American Revolution. The French cannot deny how useful the American/British intervention was in helping them against the Nazis. Your argument suggests that the French should not have intervened in the American colonies even if the intervention was aimed at weakening a common enemy. And the Americans should not have asked the French to intervene even if France’s help would facilitate their fight for self determination.
I think you need to clarify your position regarding intervention because intervention does not just mean sending 100, 000 troops to a sovereign state. There were no US troops in Iran.
So,
Does the US tell a government picked by the people “No, I will not share information about terrorist attacks on your soil and I will not sell you equipment to fight terrorist attacks on your soil because that would violate self determination”?
Or
“Even if the terrorist groups you are fighting clearly will come to the US and kill US citizens, I will not provide you any help to fight them because that would violate self determination?”
Both policies would be self defeating. In the first case, the other country will respond in kind and not share information with the US. In the second case, the terrorist groups could win and become more powerful when they decide to attack the US.
Are there cases where intervention is warranted on moral grounds? Perhaps, but that assumes international actors are morally able to make such determinations, and I don’t believe that to be the case. “Humanitarian intervention” is merely used as a pretext when other interests are at play, and genuine scenarios (Rwanda) are not addressed, but simply used as propaganda props to promote further “humanitarian intervention” in the future. The idea that a government can ask for assistance is also problematic if said government is not representative of its people. For those reasons, I think it’s better to stick to a simple principle: do not intervene in the affairs of sovereign nations.
I did not write anything related to humanitarian intervention. I asked you to clarify the degree of intervention. I also provided two cases where the US might not have to send a single troop to a sovereign state, but its assistance to a sovereign nation would be considered an intervention. In both cases it would be in the interest of the US to assist that sovereign nation. You have not addressed my argument. You have deflected towards humanitarian intervention.
“The idea that a government can ask for assistance is also problematic if said government is not representative of its people.”
Let’s say for instance, the top candidates of the Afghan elections who were elected and the hundreds of Afghan elders (Shura) do not represent the Afghan people. Let’s say the US has ONE ambassador in Kabul. The US has no troops, no intel officers in that country. My question is simple:
What if the Afghan government tells the US: “I need your help to fight that terrorist group that’s blowing up markets and schools. You also know that same group is killing your citizens on your soil. I don’t need your troops here. I just need information about that group.”
What should the US answer?
The US should answer ‘no’. It’s possible to simultaneously believe that what’s going on in that scenario is horrendous, and also believe that intervention is to be avoided. Incidentally, I don’t believe the Afghan government is legitimate, and I’d apply that to any government/constitution created during an occupation (yes, even Japan/Germany.)
“The US should answer ‘no’.”
That is a self defeating strategy. By answering no, the Afghan will answer in kind: they will not provide any information about that terrorist group to the US since the US refuses to do the same. And if Afghanistan has a very poor security infrastructure that terrorist group will be able to gain strength and become a more powerful enemy of the US than it was before. Actually, that strategy is even irrational: you are refusing to provide information to an ally or a neutral entity against a common enemy that is gaining strength against you.
That strategy would only work in world when countries are completely separated by walls: no movements of capital, humans, no communications.
“Incidentally, I don’t believe the Afghan government is legitimate, and I’d apply that to any government/constitution created during an occupation (yes, even Japan/Germany.)”
It is up to the Afghans, Japanese, Germans…to decide whether or not their government is legitimate. Of course, you must impose some beliefs on yourself in order to support your argument. It is completely irrelevant whether that belief is a misrepresentation of reality.
What if the US wasn’t there killing Muslims. Would that not make the Muslims that are killing Muslims argument vanish? Or do we just HAVE to be there killing Muslims?
craig, yer get’n beat bad, really really bad, everything you say yer get’n stuffed bad, really really bad. Ordinarily i would advise you to find a new line of work, but i wont because….. you bring out the best in US.
I love it when those exposed as anti Jewish refer to those claiming to be anti zionist as “us”. An insider has now confessed to the alliance. Too funny.
“Largely a post-Iraq phenomenon, isn’t it?” Jose
No, it is not. This is a list of Islamic terrorist organizations founded at least a decade before the Iraq war.
Juhayman ibn Muhammad ibn Sayf al-Otaybi led a group that took over the Saudi mosque in 1979
The Armed Islamic Group (in Algeria), The Islamic Group (Egypt), Jemaah Islamiyah (Indonesia), JMB (Bangladesh), Abu Sayyaf (Philippines), Turkistan Islamic Party (China)
You could go further in history and you will find more. Those groups have RARELY attacked Westerners. They have mostly killed other Muslims (thousands of them). You cannot look at those facts and just dismiss them when analyzing the reason behind the fear of Muslims.
The idea of blowback suggests that Western governments should not even help other Muslim governments asking for help to fight terrorist groups. Moreover, it fails to explain why those terrorist groups attack targets that have absolutely nothing to do with their internal politics.
This is not to support US, UK, France, Russia policies in the Middle East. The blowback argument is just not as strong as the author tries to present it. Switzerland never sent troops to the Middle East. Its citizens got attacked and killed by an Islamic group. Argentinians citizens got killed on their soil. It is completely irrational to believe the Middle East would be more peaceful tomorrow if every single Western troops would leave tomorrow, and every single Western embassy in the region would close.
“The idea of blowback suggests that Western governments should not even help other Muslim governments asking for help to fight terrorist groups.”
Help is one thing, fighting their enemies FOR them is another and that is what the seem to want.
“Help is one thing, fighting their enemies FOR them is another and that is what the seem to want.”
Most of the fighters against ISIS are Iraqis and most the fighters against the Taliban are Afghans themselves. The Taliban was toppled by the Northern Alliance with the help of Western forces. I have never heard neither the Iraqis, Kurds, Afghans saying the US must fight for them. They have all said they needed help and looking at the number of casualties from local fighters it is accurate to say they are the ones fighting with the help of Western forces.
There’s data on political violence in the Middle East. While there’s always been a background level of violence, the post-Iraq uptick is clear and substantial.
I hear Trump is looking for a new National Security Advisor, craig.
*how’s your Russian?
Very little knowledge of the Russian language is necessary to work for Trump. How do you say in Russian: “I will continue to kiss your little KGB ass Mr. Putin”?
‘Pootin’tator’ … in Trump vernacular. *TI does not support the cyrillic alphabet
craigsummers is an inveterate supporter of liberal/US/Western Imperialism, wars for profit and Zionism. Some here content he also supports torture, as long as it is done by his side of choice.
He’s a reactionary arsehole like few others here.
It’s 5% time, apparently …
Exactly. Now do you have anything to say about what I posted?
I’m not wasting my time on your piffle, matey.
Then turn tail….matey
craig, yer get’n beat bad, really really bad, everything you say yer get’n stuffed bad, really really bad. Ordinarily i would advise you to find a new line of work, but i wont because….. you bring out the best in US.
what complete horse shit.
get your ordinance and personnel out of everyone else’s country and conflicts, plumb the depths of the terms, “sovereignty” and “self-determination” and then maybe you can continue the lectures about terrorism and some moral high ground. until then the chicken/egg nonsense is pure equivocation.
Thanks for showing the flip of the coin. Hard sell in a Nations that has been safe and insulated for a few decades. Most are not up to giving up a few America lives to terrorism to buy our own freedom and set a good and Constitutional example of using war as a last not first resort.
Radical measures require radical enemies
-or-
Your privacy has been drafted into the military
I think the more or less unquestioned acceptance of total surveillance both reflects and drives fear and hatred of muslims.
The government’s public stance on the necessity of “collecting it all” changed drastically after 9/11. Demonizing muslims became a very easy way to get everyone on board with the long time dream of full take surveillance.
Such a radical departure from previous public positions (and the constitution) requires a new and radical enemy.
We fear muslims because we value the “sacrifices” that are taken from us.
Either muslims are evil, or our own government and elected leaders have manufactured a fake enemy for the purpose of taking away our rights, privacy and autonomy.
That is the choice we have been given by both parties.
You can’t be surprised when, given that choice of two, a lot of people go with “muslims are evil”–if for no other reason than it is by far the choice with the least amount of work involved.
Think about it–someone is taking away our rights and autonomy. It is either the unprecedented danger of islam, or our own government.
Whether we perceive it consciously or not, this choice has been, and will continue to be, repeatedly pounded into our head.
Disagree, for most 9 to 5 working Americans or unemployed sofa bound MSM consumers the surveillance state is invisible. They simply believe the narrative that America only is trying to do good for the modern day “savages” in the Middle East and they are ungrateful terrorists. This is a nation that slaughtered off 10 million native Americans, took their land, and extolled how great, free, brave, and exceptional they where for it.
@gliderboy
Patriot Act, TSA, Stop Loss…I can go on for awhile.
Are you really arguing that we have not been forced to make many “sacrifices” because of 9/11? And that average people don’t see post 9/11 as a crack down/patriotic sacrifice?
TSA alone is enough for people to hate muslims. Say it one more time…TSA alone is enough for people to hate muslims.
I understand that it is very reassuring to believe that everyone else is an ignorant bigot who is beyond influence by you and the good guys.
But it really is just excuses for bad behavior by your chosen in group.
The best part is that your bigotry against americans is no different than bigotry against muslims. You feed the narrative against muslims because you make the same arguments as muslims haters, but just against americans.
I believe that the term Islamophobia is grossly misused as it has been expanded to include criticism of the tenets of Islam. That said I believe that the real reason that more people have a negative view if Islam and its adherents is because since September 11th the public has actually paid attention, and the media have been reporting, on how Muslims act worldwide. Despite the frequent assertions that Islam is a religion of peace the public, and not just in the USA, have experienced the exact opposite. It is not just the Radical Fundamentalists, but the much more important attitudes of the common Muslim on issues like sexism, religious toleration, homophobia and ethnic minorities that is framing it response. Germany has seen this in spades from the recent immigrants. An an article I just read yesterday shows this. In Egypt the government has opposed female genital mutilation for years but a poll found that half the society still support the practice. This was part of a larger discussion that while some governments are trying to modernize Islam the actual average Muslim is this as an attack on the Islamic law code.
“In Egypt the government has opposed female genital mutilation for years but a poll found that half the society still support the practice. ”
There is no discussion on male genital mutilation in Israel; they’re all-in. The only debate is whether the rabbi should suck the genitalia of a new-born after the mutilation. It’s about 50/50 on sucking, according to Haaretz.
Judaism, Christianity, Islam; Satan’s Trifecta.
Making an assumption that you operate from a liberal/leftist moral baseline; it is dangerous to cast such moral statements when “your clan” condones and has slaughtered millions of innocent children and till the day of birth (as Hillary recently supported). Your logic is twisted, to say the least, if you compare a symbolic (although weird) act of removing foreskin to the genital mutilation of women to control them and sex slaves and not experience pleasure. It is symptomatic of a condition that I am sure if difficult to pronounce.
This article is what is called a limited hangout.
See, this article fails to mention that Muslims are savages that throw gays off buildings, oppress women, marry and rape children, behead dissidents, and blow up schools. I am 100% pro anything that keeps that filthy religion as far away from my country as possible. They are people who would kill me, a Gay American, if they had the choice. Look at Europe: it’s being destroyed by those savages. I say we bar the religion unilaterally.
You are absolutely correct that Americans and the Muslim world have much in common and their differences are often merely superficial (shooting up schools vs. blowing up schools). The US and Saudi Arabia are two of the world’s two closest allies. It is true that the US has been saddled with a Constitution that constrains its government in ways that an absolute monarchy does not. But Saudi Arabia has been careful not to rub America’s nose in this fact, so the relationship is one of mutual respect.
Benny,
I admire your wit.
If Fake news begets fake comments … Benitoe is humming like a ‘well-oiled machine’ this morning.
Totally seconded. :-)
I, too, am a gay American. What you are missing, my friend, is that if those extremists came here and began throwing people like you and me off of buildings, plenty of Trump’s supporters would be only too happy to look the other way while they did it.
Why do you think the people that are advocating for that kind of behavior to never make it’s way to our shores would be content to let it happen if it came here?
Your animosity towards conservatives and Trump supporters is largely unfounded and your attempts to create a correlation in extremism between them and the beliefs and behaviors of Muslim majority nations (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/22/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/ I think you being a homosexual would find Sharia Law being widely support in the majority of Muslim majority nations to be quite concerning) is naive.
The left tries to paint conservatives (who, again, are widely Christian) as radical when historically and currently that is not the case. Countries that are founded upon Judeo/Christian principles (though I would argue its more the Judeo/Protestant values rather say Catholic values) and continued to employ them (the West basically) tended to have nations that employed greater freedoms for their citizens and advocated for protection minorities much more heavily than those that have not and this is especially true in Muslim majority nations. I challenge you to name one that has not been founded in those values but retains those principles that you would find in the US Constitution for example.
The reality is there is no place you would rather be gay right this moment than the US. A large majority of the US believes in the values that grant you the protections you enjoy now and of those they voted for Trump. Minorities continue to back a party that still praises Woodrow Wilson (http://www.bu.edu/professorvoices/2013/03/04/the-long-forgotten-racial-attitudes-and-policies-of-woodrow-wilson/).
I hope you can find some peace because if you truly believe that “plenty” of Americans would let you a fellow American suffer things that occur in the Middle East, Indonesia, and Africa routinely then you must be deeply fearful and angry.
Finally, in response to the article the US did not make those countries hate their own and impose and widely support Sharia Law (which I would imagine you would agree is a hateful set of rules).
Touche Mark.
I believe you are very mistaken regarding how the average American would react if radical Muslims were in the United States tossing gays off of building rooftops.
I believe the vast majority would defend gay Americans rights very quickly and decisively.
The way things are going it may only be a matter of time now before we find out who is right.
As a central Floridian (and incidentally, bisexual), the show of solidarity we saw across the region after the Pulse attacks has me doubting your words.
Would you Trumpism-apologists stop using the “look at Europe, being destroyed by savages” excuse. I, as a European, am sick and tired of people who chose an orange fascist appropriating my continent in an effort to remain blatantly bigoted. We’re actually fine, thank you.