I heard one of Canadian who escaped from one of the hotels start talking about root causes. I mean, really.
And how come this torture of the Jewish victims hasn't been splashed all over the front pages? Talk about premeditated actions.
Shouldn't the British be the last ones to give counsel to the peoples of the Indian subcontinent?
Posted at 2008-12-01 06:36:28 [PermaLink]Yes, isn't it ironic how these "tolerant", "multicultural" types shift so readily into "White Man's Burden" mode? "Poor irrational savages! Can't expect any more of 'em, what?"
If WE did this, of course, it would be raaaaciiist.
We keep hearing about muslim grievances. Let's say we kept a list on a sheet of paper. Now, on the other side of the page, list all the grievances of the muslim victims, like the Africans in Darfur, the Kuwaiti's and the Kurds who were attacked by Sadam, the Indians, etc.
Which list is longer? If the African Sudanese attacked the Arab Sudanese like this, what would we say?
I agree that people like Damian don't hold terrorists to the same moral standards as themselves. Muslim Terrorists are treated as what they are, terrorists, while the elite Hindu fundamentalists who created Muslim and Christian pogroms killing thousands in Orissa and Gujarat, and just recently bombed the shrine of the great Sufi saint moinuddin chishti as well as killing 40 civilians at a Muslim graveyard in Malaegon are not given a word in the western media. But of course Damian and his friends in India are hallowed saints, while the murderous muslims in Mumbai are terrorists.
Posted at 2008-12-01 11:11:51 [PermaLink]Dom, the kurds attacked by Saddam were when Saddam was an active ally of the West against Iran. Moreover, Saddam was never a devout muslim, but an old style stalinist fanatic. If the african sudanese attacked the arab sudanese, you would say nothing, because of course it is of no vital interest of Canada what happens in Sudan, nor should it be. Also isn't it surprising how the terrorists who attacked on 9/11 were from countries we ostenibly backed during the Gulf War (Saudi, Kuwait, UAE), while countries we did not protect such as Rwanda did not attack us. This can only mean that a non-interventionist foreign policy is the best policy for Western nations.
Posted at 2008-12-01 11:17:16 [PermaLink]The bombing at the shrine of Moinuddin Chishti was well covered in the press; there is even a wiki entry on it. The same is true of the Malaegon attack, although as far as I know only 5 people were killed, one injured. (How many people died when Muslims rioted over cartoons?)
That Sadam was an ally of the US means nothing. Stalin was an ally during much of his carnage also.
My point was a simple one. Gather together all the Muslims in one room and let them voice their grievances. Most -- the Sudanese, the Kurds, the Marsh Arabs, the Kurwaitis, Afghan women (and men)etc, etc -- will claim that other Muslims have oppressed them. As will most non-muslims living in Muslim countries. This phrase, Muslim grievances, is just hackneyed. There are no grievances that can justify what has just happened in Mumbai, let alone all the other places in the world where Muslims are rioting. Good heavens, they must be the most aggrieved people in the world to explain all this mayhem!
Dom, my point was that it is only Muslim terrorists that are highlighted in the media, it is never terrorists of other ilk. The 2006 malaegon blasts i mentioned killed 37 ppl, the 2008 7 more, and you neglected to mention the thousands killed in the Gujarat and the scores of Christians killed in Orrisa a couple of months ago, the 68 killed in the Samjhauta express bombing last year, never mind the tens of thousands killed in Kashmir. Nowhere did I justify the terrorist attacks, I merely replied that the value of human life deemed by the media is based on who attacked them, not on them as equal, individual human beings.
The only way Saddam conducted his atrocities against the Kurds was through the use of chemical weapons procured from the American military
Moreover, nearly the entire political structure in Muslim countries from tunisia to bangladesh is populated with the puppet rulers of the west. If they were no backed by the West, a far more representative government would be in places, and a far smaller pool for fanatic terrorists would exist. Our responsibility in Canada is to act smartly and not prop up oppressive governments we like, and attack oppressive governments we don't. but to let the region internal politics decide by themselves how they will proceed.
I agree I think in future we should stand back and let Muslims kill each other, or oppress each other such as the Taliban, Saddam, and the rest of them.
Posted at 2008-12-01 13:58:30 [PermaLink]'I think in future we should stand back and let Muslims kill each other, or oppress each other such as the Taliban, Saddam, and the rest of them.'
That's what we did all through the second half of the 20th century. Look where it got us. When Muslim extremists start killing, they *don't* just kill each other; they kill us, too, by preference (as they showed in Mumbai), wherever they can find us within their reach.
Muslim terrorists apart from being more numerous than the other lot, also export their terror overseas, ie London,Madrid, New York,most other terrorists at least stick close to home.!
Posted at 2008-12-01 15:03:18 [PermaLink]I agree with stephen on his first point. The problem is that America has intervened in Lebanon, Afghanistan, the Gulf, supported the Shah, Mubarak, Bourbigha, Hussain and the Algerian colonels, thrown away loyal allies that helped it defeat the Soviets (pakistan), antagonized and murdered millions of Muslims. All this in the last 30 years. Jay is decidedly uninformed of the depth and legacy of American interventionism. If America were to retreat from this ideology, terrorism done against Americans would be approximately equal to terrorism done against paraguayans.
Posted at 2008-12-01 15:50:08 [PermaLink]Muhammed: How about terrorism against certain Argentinians?
[External Link]
Mark
Ottawa
Muhammed, you're being disingenuous. Islamist terrorists have shown no compunctions about using terror against *anyone* who disagreed with them. They use it against the Dutch, for crying out loud. If the Dutch are legitimate targets, how can anyone 'retreat from this ideology' sufficiently to appease the terrorists, short of total surrender?
Meanwhile, I suggest you try finding out something about what I know and don't know before you call me uninformed. You *assume* that I am uninformed about American policy, on zero evidence. I *know* that *you* are uninformed about my degree of knowledge on the subject, because you have never made the slightest attempt to find out anything about me before lobbing silly accusations.
Just because someone disagrees with your ideology does not prove that they are ignorant of the facts.
Jay, any idea where our pal Ajsuhail is these days?
"The problem is that America has [...] liberated millions of Muslims."
Thanks Mo - nicely said. That's especially true of women under the thumbs of extremists in places such as Iraq. [They're even going back to school in Afghanistan.] And yeah - further to your point, the US did re-build the Shi'a marshes [that Saddam had drained] to revive that ancient Muslim culture. Don't forget the Muslims in the US - they enjoy the rule of Law, voting rights, property rights, gender equality... You're right-on, man. The US has had a profoundly positive effect on the Muslim world.
And the Aussies were attacked in Bali,and the Muslims are still harping on about the crusades ! so even if the U.S declared peace on everyone tomorrow, that would not stop the extremists avenging past grievances
Posted at 2008-12-01 16:35:51 [PermaLink]Muhammed
"the kurds attacked by Saddam were when Saddam was an active ally of the West against Iran. "
Except for all those weapons he bought from France, Russia, and China.
Some ally! Couldn't even do his part to prop up my 401k by supporting my Military Industrial Complex.
Muhammed
"Our responsibility in Canada is to act smartly and not prop up oppressive governments we like, and attack oppressive governments we don't. "
So, if the US is naughty and deserves to be attacked by terrorists because it supports oppressive gov'ts. I guess that makes the US an oppressive gov't by proxy.
But Canada supports the US, which, according to Lefties and radical Muslim terrorists, is oppressive, I guess that means Canada deserves to be attacked by terrorists.
Is this your line of reasoning?
Muhammed
"If America were to retreat from this ideology, terrorism done against Americans would be approximately equal to terrorism done against paraguayans."
If the French Resistance were to retreat from this ideology, nazi retribution against their families and fellow citizens would be approximately equal to nazi retribution done against the Swiss.
S'funny how Mo has conveniently ignored the West's, especially Canada's, sacrifices in rescuing the Muslims in Kosovo etc.
Posted at 2008-12-02 00:04:21 [PermaLink]There is no proof or case being made against Hezbollah or Iran of the bombings in Argentina. Jay ignored all the points I made of American interventionism without backing his claims that I was misinformed with a single fact. Saddam did get all his chemical weapons from the usa, see:
[External Link]
The last few commenters have stated that I am alleging that the terrorist attacks were "deserved". Never did I say that and that is a blatantly wrong characterization of my views. The tragedy of the Danish cartoons was that nearly all that were killed were muslim, moreover all the major scholars of Islam condemned the violence done in the name of the cartoons. Moreover, to my knowledge the two killings of dutch individuals were by two mentally disturbed individuals, only one of which was a muslim. The logic of the French resistance and the American aggression is laughable, America is the aggressive party that is attacking a host of Muslim countries at the moment. If anything the F. resistance are the terrorists of today, and were as equally brutal. Anybody who reads about the French resistance realizes these ppl were no idealized saints. Ran, you made up the quote that you are saying I made. During the Taliban a grand total of 5% of the males were going to school, the lack of educational facilities and teachers was directly attibutable to the fleeing of the professional classes during the Soviet invasion never to return. While it is right to complain of women's oppression under the Taliban, the main group responsible for documenting this, RAWA, was against the American invasion and is against the occupation today.
'Jay ignored all the points I made of American interventionism without backing his claims that I was misinformed with a single fact.'
That's because I wasn't going to take twenty or thirty hours of my life to educate you on those points.
But it is a FACT, sir, that radical Islamists have been terrorizing and murdering people who have never done them any harm, and whose only offence was to speak disapprovingly about their terrorist methods. If you don't know that, you're misinformed.
We'll deal with the other issues after you've acknowledged that one.
Unfortunately, I expect to be waiting about fifty years before THAT happens.
"But it is a FACT, sir, that radical Islamists have been terrorizing and murdering people who have never done them any harm,..."
... and the majority of these victims have been fellow Muslims, more than a million of whom have died in Muslim on Muslim violence over the past several decades. The Muslim world has far greater grievances against itself than it does the West. I invite Muhammed to address that slightly problematic contradiction of his propaganda.
"There is no proof or case being made against Hezbollah or Iran of the bombings in Argentina."
BBC News - 25 Oct 2006
"Iran charged over Argentina bomb"
"The Iranian government and Lebanese militia group Hezbollah have been formally charged over the 1994 bombing of a Jewish centre in Buenos Aires."
[External Link]
Just go away, you lying Islamist fundamentalist hack. We've got better things to do with our time than "correcting" your shameless fabrications.
"There is no proof or case being made against Hezbollah or Iran of the bombings in Argentina."
The case is often made, and Iran does not bother to deny it. Iran's complicity is accepted by the Argentian government.
"Saddam did get all his chemical weapons from the usa"
Your link does not work, but I assume you can find at least one reference. There are many references to contradict this, eg:
Artillery from Russia, France, and China: [External Link]
Chemical weapons from Russia: [External Link]
"The tragedy of the Danish cartoons was that nearly all that were killed were muslim..."
I assume you didn't mean that.
"...moreover all the major scholars of Islam condemned the violence done in the name of the cartoons."
Well, the offensive cartoons were drawn by Muslim scholars, the Danish imams, themselves. It is often forgotten that the Danish cartoons were not offensive at all, and they had already appeared in Egyptian newspapers without a single protest.
"America is the aggressive party that is attacking a host of Muslim countries at the moment."
I have no doubt that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have gone horribly wrong, but it can not sensibly be called an aggression. Both countries have held elections, the Kurds and Marsh Arabs in Iraq would certainly call it a liberation. Ask yourself this question: If the "resistance" stopped, wouldn't both countries be much better off? I think the answer is yes.