Arab Winter Setting In -- Gonna Be a Doozy...

[Ian]

Austin Texas nuclear plant evacuated due to possible Al Qaeta threat: http://www.infowars.com/nuclear-reactor ... in-austin/

You should probably try reading beyond the headline of right-wing paranoia blogs.

Ditto that. Too many links to decidedly unobjective "news" sources.

Coito's right about one thing he mentioned though - many of these people are protesting the US as a whole. It's because they have no concept that the Uncle Sam has no jurisdiction over what some two-bit filmmaker creates. They also seem to have been duped into thinking that this movie is some well-seen thing over here.

[Sean Hayden]

Aren't all such actions aimed at the West even when it ain't a westerner killed? They claim in no uncertain terms that it is the influence of the West that threatens Islamic fundies, and it is the West that has prevented a new golden age for Islam, and they are very good at spreading this message as evidenced by the number of westerners that actually sympathize with the bullshit. There are people that really believe Islam, free from our influence, would achieve something enviable in terms of governing and human rights. What a fucking joke. It is precisely the opposite, the inequality of the sexes, total submission to Islam, lack of the freedom of expression, which our influence counters that pisses them off so.

When I say them I mean the fundamentalist Islamic leaders, Saudi -looking at you.

[Cormac]

It is true though. The reason we see photos of reasonably westernised scenes in North African and Middle Eastern Countries about 60 yeats ago was because they did have very strong democratic and secular movements. As these were systematically suppressed under the jackboot of Western puppets, it created great disillusionment and created a vacuum ready made for Islamist extremists who have an attractive combination of "Faith and Fatherland" - ready made for successful recruiting.

What the....?

Dude -- prove your case.

I'll start. Beirut. 40 years ago+ it was the Paris of the Middle East. It wasn't "western suppression" that destroyed it. It was Islam and the wars to drive out Christians and Jews from Lebanon. They succeeded. Lebanon was once majority Christian. Now Christians are a small minority. And, we all know what happened to Beirut.

And, you can feel free to identify the "strong secular and democratic movements" in arab Muslim countries...lol.... I'll wait.

The history of North Africa, Arabia, and "Persia" since the Ottoman Empire began to crumble is a classic "Great Game" story in which the major powers have competed for control. In the pre-oil days, control of the Panama Canal, and since oil, control of the resource.

Control was easiest to establish through a series of puppet regimes and the deliberate suppression of entities such as a unified Arab state,(as had been promised in return for Arab support against Germany and the Ottomans). Then events like the creation of Israeland the betrayal by Britain of the Palestinians, the overthrow of (democratic and pro-American) Iran on behalf of Gulf Oil - a British planned but US executed coup which installed the despotic Shah. This by the way led directly to the rise of radical Islam in Iran as the people turned to the Islamic Revolution.

Because the West more or less was the number one foreign "ally" for despotic regimes it is the focus of radical Islam.

We've even been caught on the hop by finding ourselves on the wrong side in the so-called Arab Spring.

People in the region are very conscious of how we have deliberately stood against their democratic rights, and the USA as the lead country gets most of the blame.

In a culture where religiosity is high, and apostacy is rare and deadly, and democracy has been heavily discredited the opening is ripe for radical Islamism to attract mass support, which it does. It will continue to do so no matter how long the War on Terror continues. So American boys and girls are being sent to die in an unwinnable war which in reality is a thin veneer to cover the latest flavour of resource war in that hemisphere.

That rationalization is belied by the fact that between like 1760 and 1812 about 1.5 million "westerners" were kidnapped and sold into slavery by Muslim powers, and that the US had no interests or dealings or power over the Muslim world at that time. The avowed rationale - the stated rationale - expressly communicated by a Muslim ambassador to Thomas Jefferson was that the Qu'ran gives them the authority to do what they want with "infidels."

So, if it's the "oppression" from western powers that is causing them to attack westerners, then why were they attacking westerners before the westerners ever engaged in this "oppression?"

Then there was the military subjugation of all of North Africa and Spain and large swathes of South Eastern Europe. Islam behaved every bit as badly as did the crusaders.

You don't seem to understand that I am not arguing that they are right, but that this belief exists, and it is the source of their radicalism. The Qu'ran is an enabling factor.

Mind you, if I was an inhabitant of Saudi Arabia looking at the corrupt and despotic government, and then the Western support, I'd be inclined to pick up a gun.

The main point I'm making is that unless the root cause is addressed, Al Qaeda and their fellow travellers will find fertile recruiting ground in every single Muslim population. Like the mythical hydra cut a head off, and another will appear.

[Cormac]

Well, then we'll just consider them a microaggression.

[Coito ergo sum]

It is true though. The reason we see photos of reasonably westernised scenes in North African and Middle Eastern Countries about 60 yeats ago was because they did have very strong democratic and secular movements. As these were systematically suppressed under the jackboot of Western puppets, it created great disillusionment and created a vacuum ready made for Islamist extremists who have an attractive combination of "Faith and Fatherland" - ready made for successful recruiting.

What the....?

Dude -- prove your case.

I'll start. Beirut. 40 years ago+ it was the Paris of the Middle East. It wasn't "western suppression" that destroyed it. It was Islam and the wars to drive out Christians and Jews from Lebanon. They succeeded. Lebanon was once majority Christian. Now Christians are a small minority. And, we all know what happened to Beirut.

And, you can feel free to identify the "strong secular and democratic movements" in arab Muslim countries...lol.... I'll wait.

The history of North Africa, Arabia, and "Persia" since the Ottoman Empire began to crumble is a classic "Great Game" story in which the major powers have competed for control. In the pre-oil days, control of the Panama Canal, and since oil, control of the resource.

Control was easiest to establish through a series of puppet regimes and the deliberate suppression of entities such as a unified Arab state,(as had been promised in return for Arab support against Germany and the Ottomans). Then events like the creation of Israeland the betrayal by Britain of the Palestinians, the overthrow of (democratic and pro-American) Iran on behalf of Gulf Oil - a British planned but US executed coup which installed the despotic Shah. This by the way led directly to the rise of radical Islam in Iran as the people turned to the Islamic Revolution.

Because the West more or less was the number one foreign "ally" for despotic regimes it is the focus of radical Islam.

We've even been caught on the hop by finding ourselves on the wrong side in the so-called Arab Spring.

People in the region are very conscious of how we have deliberately stood against their democratic rights, and the USA as the lead country gets most of the blame.

In a culture where religiosity is high, and apostacy is rare and deadly, and democracy has been heavily discredited the opening is ripe for radical Islamism to attract mass support, which it does. It will continue to do so no matter how long the War on Terror continues. So American boys and girls are being sent to die in an unwinnable war which in reality is a thin veneer to cover the latest flavour of resource war in that hemisphere.

That rationalization is belied by the fact that between like 1760 and 1812 about 1.5 million "westerners" were kidnapped and sold into slavery by Muslim powers, and that the US had no interests or dealings or power over the Muslim world at that time. The avowed rationale - the stated rationale - expressly communicated by a Muslim ambassador to Thomas Jefferson was that the Qu'ran gives them the authority to do what they want with "infidels."

So, if it's the "oppression" from western powers that is causing them to attack westerners, then why were they attacking westerners before the westerners ever engaged in this "oppression?"

Then there was the military subjugation of all of North Africa and Spain and large swathes of South Eastern Europe. Islam behaved every bit as badly as did the crusaders.

You don't seem to understand that I am not arguing that they are right, but that this belief exists, and it is the source of their radicalism. The Qu'ran is an enabling factor.

Mind you, if I was an inhabitant of Saudi Arabia looking at the corrupt and despotic government, and then the Western support, I'd be inclined to pick up a gun.

The main point I'm making is that unless the root cause is addressed, Al Qaeda and their fellow travellers will find fertile recruiting ground in every single Muslim population. Like the mythical hydra cut a head off, and another will appear.

Well, let's assume your stated root cause is, in fact, the root cause (arguendo). What do we do about it?

[Cormac]

Austin Texas nuclear plant evacuated due to possible Al Qaeta threat: http://www.infowars.com/nuclear-reactor ... in-austin/

You should probably try reading beyond the headline of right-wing paranoia blogs.

Ditto that. Too many links to decidedly unobjective "news" sources.

Coito's right about one thing he mentioned though - many of these people are protesting the US as a whole. It's because they have no concept that the Uncle Sam has no jurisdiction over what some two-bit filmmaker creates. They also seem to have been duped into thinking that this movie is some well-seen thing over here.

It doesn't matter though.

The correct response to this should be the production of an overwhelming number of videos that depict Mohammed in a bewlidering variety of depraved circumstances*.




*Take them from the Koran, it is full of them.

[Coito ergo sum]

Austin Texas nuclear plant evacuated due to possible Al Qaeta threat: http://www.infowars.com/nuclear-reactor ... in-austin/

You should probably try reading beyond the headline of right-wing paranoia blogs.

Ditto that. Too many links to decidedly unobjective "news" sources.

Coito's right about one thing he mentioned though - many of these people are protesting the US as a whole. It's because they have no concept that the Uncle Sam has no jurisdiction over what some two-bit filmmaker creates. They also seem to have been duped into thinking that this movie is some well-seen thing over here.

All it was was a report of an evacuation. Was the facility evacuated or not? If it was, then it was. If it wasn't, it wasn't.

What is the real story beyond the headline here?

[Cormac]

Aren't all such actions aimed at the West even when it ain't a westerner killed? They claim in no uncertain terms that it is the influence of the West that threatens Islamic fundies, and it is the West that has prevented a new golden age for Islam, and they are very good at spreading this message as evidenced by the number of westerners that actually sympathize with the bullshit. There are people that really believe Islam, free from our influence, would achieve something enviable in terms of governing and human rights. What a fucking joke. It is precisely the opposite, the inequality of the sexes, total submission to Islam, lack of the freedom of expression, which our influence counters that pisses them off so.

When I say them I mean the fundamentalist Islamic leaders, Saudi -looking at you.

In general I agree. Saudi is a bad example though. They were put into power, and are maintained in power by the West.

(Mind you, if the West pulled out, China or Russia would step in).

[Ian]

Austin Texas nuclear plant evacuated due to possible Al Qaeta threat: http://www.infowars.com/nuclear-reactor ... in-austin/

You should probably try reading beyond the headline of right-wing paranoia blogs.

Ditto that. Too many links to decidedly unobjective "news" sources.

Coito's right about one thing he mentioned though - many of these people are protesting the US as a whole. It's because they have no concept that the Uncle Sam has no jurisdiction over what some two-bit filmmaker creates. They also seem to have been duped into thinking that this movie is some well-seen thing over here.

All it was was a report of an evacuation. Was the facility evacuated or not? If it was, then it was. If it wasn't, it wasn't.

What is the real story beyond the headline here?

I was referring to other links. Too much from the Weekly STandard, FoxNews, the National Review, etc cetera...

I'd have the same reaction to somebody who frequently posteed "news" from Moveon.org, Salon.com, etc.

[Coito ergo sum]

One from foxnews and and one from the weekly standard. The foxnews link I used because all it was doing was quoting Jimmy Carter. And, the Weekly Standard was a short bland report of a mob outside the London consulate.

What is wrong with that? These were just straight news reports, not even opinion pieces. Was there not a mob outside the US embassy in London? Did Jimmy Carter not say what he said?

And, "too much"? Dude - one link each is not a lot, and given the bland, rote factual nature of what was reported, to start bitching over the source is just deflection.

It seems the three sources objected to that I linked to -- Weekly Standard (London mob), fox News (Carter Quote) and InfoWars (evacuation of nuclear facility) were all just stating reports of events that happened. They were not offered as criticisms of anybody, or critiques or opinions, or arguments for or against any political person or opinion. Just news.

Were they wrong? If so, explain. If not, stop bitching.

[Sean Hayden]

In general I agree. Saudi is a bad example though. They were put into power, and are maintained in power by the West.

(Mind you, if the West pulled out, China or Russia would step in).

I like Saudi though because of the influence their universities, mullahs etc. had/have on the problem. It is strange right, I mean you mentioned wanting to pick up gun and that is perfectly understandable. But if you fought with them, you would be fighting the West not because they prop up an evil Islamic government, but because they interfere--according to "your" scholars and heroes"--with the spread of Islamic rule into the rest of the region.

I realize it's not that simple, but that is there in the problem.

[Cormac]

In general I agree. Saudi is a bad example though. They were put into power, and are maintained in power by the West.

(Mind you, if the West pulled out, China or Russia would step in).

I like Saudi though because of the influence their universities, mullahs etc. had/have on the problem. It is strange right, I mean you mentioned wanting to pick up gun and that is perfectly understandable. But if you fought with them, you would be fighting the West not because they prop up an evil Islamic government, but because they interfere--according to "your" scholars and heroes"--with the spread of Islamic rule into the rest of the region.

I realize it's not that simple, but that is there in the problem.

The desire I'd have to pick up the gun in that scenario would be wholly because I'd feel that both Sauds and the West were oppressing the people, and it would have nothing to do with so-called Islamic Scholars - a group about as useful as any other theologian - which is to say about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

The fundamental issue is that there are good reasons on the ground for very muslims to feel very angry at the West, which creates fertile ground for Radical Islamic recruiters.

[Gerald McGrew]

Coito's right about one thing he mentioned though - many of these people are protesting the US as a whole. It's because they have no concept that the Uncle Sam has no jurisdiction over what some two-bit filmmaker creates. They also seem to have been duped into thinking that this movie is some well-seen thing over here.

According to a reporter who's been in Cairo for a while now, several of the protesters are convinced the US gov't produced and promoted the movie as part of its continuing "war on Islam". The reporter stated that in many of the middle eastern countries that were ruled by dictators (Egypt, Libya), there is a culture where conspiracy theories are not only rampant, they are deeply held to by most of the public. He compared those countries to N. Korea, in that the dictators foment an insular sense of "us vs. them", where the regime is constantly telling its people that the "outsiders" (the US) are forever plotting and scheming to bring down their country, culture, and way of life.

So no matter how much they're told the US gov't had nothing to do with this film, they simply don't believe it. Throw in what you described above (limited concept of free speech), and you have a recipe for the events of the last few days (except the raid on the Libyan embassy, which was an orchestrated attack that lasted 4 hours).

[Cormac]

Coito's right about one thing he mentioned though - many of these people are protesting the US as a whole. It's because they have no concept that the Uncle Sam has no jurisdiction over what some two-bit filmmaker creates. They also seem to have been duped into thinking that this movie is some well-seen thing over here.

According to a reporter who's been in Cairo for a while now, several of the protesters are convinced the US gov't produced and promoted the movie as part of its continuing "war on Islam". The reporter stated that in many of the middle eastern countries that were ruled by dictators (Egypt, Libya), there is a culture where conspiracy theories are not only rampant, they are deeply held to by most of the public. He compared those countries to N. Korea, in that the dictators foment an insular sense of "us vs. them", where the regime is constantly telling its people that the "outsiders" (the US) are forever plotting and scheming to bring down their country, culture, and way of life.

So no matter how much they're told the US gov't had nothing to do with this film, they simply don't believe it. Throw in what you described above (limited concept of free speech), and you have a recipe for the events of the last few days (except the raid on the Libyan embassy, which was an orchestrated attack that lasted 4 hours).

Denials are probably served up as further evidence reinforcing the theory.

[redunderthebed]

Extremist Christians protest against gay marriage. Extremist Muslims imprison and execute homosexuals. Same thing, basically.

The only difference is the conditions are different they sing from very similar fucked up hymn sheets.I think we forget this in the whole debate which really in a large slice of society isn't about islam but the fact that strange brown people follow it which is i'm sure amusing to the 87% of the muslim population who aren't arab hell the largest muslim nation on earth is indonesia which has far far more in common with china india and malaysia (shhhh dont tell them that) than any a-rab country than the bigoted arsewipes crap on about.

The "War on Terror" is a stupid hypocritical concept the idiocy of which is astounding.

Considering the USA when it doesn't get what it wants does a shitload of terrorising people just ask the people of south and central america.Especially chile of which the client regime of augusto pinochet killed more people than september 11 (with the help of harboured nazi war criminals) which is appropriate since he took power on september 11.

It also gives the likes of Russia, Iran, China, Indonesia, and lots of other dictatorial shitholes to crack down on their opposition by calling them terrorists.

Correct although imperfect indonesia has being a democracy since 1997 or thereabout when they chucked out suharto after the US backed a brutal dictator who killed thousands of his own people not to mention attempts to ethnically cleanse parts of indonesia even before slobodan milosevic was commie functionary. Another nice piece of terrorism that the US can always wash its hands of.

But yes the minute a tinpot dictatorship is being challenged the T word gets pedalled out.

Just goes to show you that Muslims are ignorant barbarians.

It's always fun how christian bigots and athiests can find common cause.

I don't think religion comes into it mate muzlems are a popular target of bigots of all varieties.

Every generation has to have a group to bash and discriminate against of which most even generations after still trying to pick up the pieces from.

Anyhoo there was a rather large carry-on over this horseshit in sydney today with the usually heavy handed response by the NSW pigs and then blaming it on the protesters for having the gall (sp?) to exercise their democratic right to do so no matter how much i think this is a rather retarded beat up.