[El Santo]

I apologize that I joined the game at halftime.

trying to make sense of "root causes" at MEMRI.org (Terrorists are Motivated by Cultural and Religious Factors, Not Poverty)

So, it turns out that you are correct that suicide bombers aren't driven by poverty... even though you got the light beer version of the reference. Next time dig a little deeper.

However, in my cheap twelve-second psychoanalysis of your posts, your underlying logic doesn't just suck, it's racist. Paraphrasing, it goes something like this:

"Muslims are bad people. If you don't believe me, google their beheadings of family members or abuses of women, and you will see what I mean. Since muslims are bad people, us 'murcins are charged with the task of ridding the world of them. We are justified in our military action in the middle east, because, well, Saddam was a bad guy, that Bin Laden dude is a bad guy, and there are new bad guys like Al Zarqawi and Muqtada Al Sadr that also need to be killed, because they are bad people who do bad things"

Why this is wrong: just because someone else does something that is wrong does not give you the moral superiority to wrong them in return. Does it piss me off when I see people blowing up train stations in Madrid, or pizza parlors in the Gaza Strip? You bet your ass it does! I think that the Muslim religious leaders and political leaders should absolutely hold these people accountable - it is their duty as muslims to do so. They certainly have the power to stop the recruitment of terrorists.

- However -

I am not a muslim. I don't know you, but I am willing to bet my Bullit that you aren't either. I don't pretend to understand how the power structure works in that culture, and you shouldn't either. The only people who are accountable to me are either in my own culture, or people who do things directly to me. That's why I supported going after Al Queda in Afghanistan.

We shouldn't be in Iraq. We shouldn't be considering going into Iran. Your acceptance of these atrocities at the hands of our government means that (1) you are a racist, and (2) you are failing in your job to hold your own government accountable. That is the value of sedition- it allows you to be able to sleep at night.

I'm betting you don't have the sack to answer any of this head on, just like your fellow neo-cons. Go ahead, dodge it and call me a frother.

 

[valve bouncer]

Go ahead, dodge it and call me a frother.

Ummm.....errr..... you're not a frother mate. Twinkie is, and a particularly rabid one at that.

Frother= right wing fruitcake.

 

[$tinkle]

well allow me to retort.

you "conclude" - incorrectly so - that where i am now is where i'll always be.
you paraphrase instead of quote; this diminishes any chance of being seen as anything but a caterwauling partisan hack whose biggest (perhaps only) strength is somewhere between making strawman arguments, or going all-out ad-hominem.

think about how short-sighted your opinion of me is. According to your "findings", if followers of a certain religion were eliminated, you project onto me this would soon all go away. We're not fighting arab muslims (although it may be a side effect in most theaters), but rather a culture of hatred. This culture has a foothold in the middle east with a growing fan-base in se asia, & now we are trying our level best to wrest it away from those purveyors. by far the worst peddlers of this extremism are the wahhabists. Go take a another dozen - hell, make it a baker's dozen - seconds & read up on "the enemy within: our friends the saudis"

don't be intellectually lazy and drink the light beer version of my posts (e.g. thread titles): actually read everything, in its context, & check my sources.

you say muslim leaders have the power to stop the recruitment of terrorists. i can only assume you've seen this demonstrated & can kindly point me toward those events. if you still think this, i also assume you haven't broken away mid-read to check the saudis thread which i just supplied.

you say the only people who are accountable to you are those within your own culture & those who do things directly to you. But, what did al-queda ever do to you? What makes al-queda unique? that they actually pulled the trigger?

this cute little thread of yours is rather telling the extent to which you would model situational ethics. i have not laid a foul tongue on you, yet you have no compunction about "calling me out" for - dare i say - the infidel that i am. You have a problem with my "foreign policy". I have "no right to comment on muslim issues".

i know of another particular group who's chagrined at such brash talk.

but i won't so much talk about these people, nor stop the discussion at the events they cause; i would like to discuss their ideas & goals, and the motivations behind them.

do you?

 

[fluff]

Root causes of terrorism, eh?

This sentence "This may explain the reason why some youths belonging to rich families and others who are well positioned in the state's civil service hierarchy are implicated in terrorist crimes." is interesting as 'some' terrorists are indeed rich, some are also poor, drawing a conclusion from this alone is difficult. The majority of terrorist footsoldiers come from states were there is indeed a great deal of poverty and very uneven distribution of wealth. Percieved injustice is much more of a motivator, poverty often leads to such feelings.

Much of the fundamental Isalmist ideal is a return to a pure Islamic state to eradicate injustice. That such as al-Zawahiri, bin Laden and al-Zarqawi can justify to themselves the slaughter of innocent people in pursuit of this aim is more than a little screwed up.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Why this is wrong: just because someone else does something that is wrong does not give you the moral superiority to wrong them in return.

.....

I think that the Muslim religious leaders and political leaders should absolutely hold these people accountable - it is their duty as muslims to do so. They certainly have the power to stop the recruitment of terrorists.

Isnt that what all this is really about? That their political and religious leaders are, in fact, supporting it instead of stopping it? That doesnt leave us, as victims, alot of wiggle room for what we have to do to deal with terrorism.

 

[Changleen]

"Victims" Whatever Dude.

 

[El Santo]

you "conclude" - incorrectly so - that where i am now is where i'll always be.

I can only hope I am wrong about you. I certainly hope that you are open to seeing how your viewpoint is, indeed, inciting the same 'culture of hatred' that you charge our enemies with.

I'll start here:

you say muslim leaders have the power to stop the recruitment of terrorists. i can only assume you've seen this demonstrated & can kindly point me toward those events.

Do you seriously want to debate the power of religion in shaping viewpoint of their constituencies?! Isn't the converse of this point exactly what you are using as evidence in your previous post'?! Gimmie a break! Your attempt to obfuscate the focal point of this discussion is transparent. Keep your eye on the ball chief!

think about how short-sighted your opinion of me is. According to your "findings", if followers of a certain religion were eliminated, you project onto me this would soon all go away. We're not fighting arab muslims (although it may be a side effect in most theaters), but rather a culture of hatred. This culture has a foothold in the middle east with a growing fan-base in se asia, & now we are trying our level best to wrest it away from those purveyors. by far the worst peddlers of this extremism are the wahhabists. Go take a another dozen - hell, make it a baker's dozen - seconds & read up on "the enemy within: our friends the saudis"

I have read this article, and more at length, Baer, and agree that the track record of the Saudi royal family isn't phenomenally humanitarian. I'll also throw a quote back at you, incidentally from your own reference, that speaks to the heart of my 'calling you out':

from the center for religious freedom:
Within worldwide Sunni Islam, followers of Saudi Arabia’s extremist Wahhabi ideology are a distinct minority, as is evident by the millions of Muslims who have chosen to make America their home and are upstanding, law-abiding citizens and neighbors.

This is one of the few paragraphs you didn't highlight in some way to make your point, because it's inconvenient and damaging to what you are trying to spew - the majority of Muslims are peaceful folks - despite your attempts to paint them otherwise with the myriad crap you post here.

don't be intellectually lazy and drink the light beer version of my posts (e.g. thread titles): actually read everything, in its context, & check my sources.

I called that weak facsimile you posted 'light beer' because the original study was published in Science magazine, which I'm not sure, but think might be a more reputable source than Memri.org.

you say the only people who are accountable to you are those within your own culture & those who do things directly to you. But, what did al-queda ever do to you? What makes al-queda unique? that they actually pulled the trigger?

What did they do to me? You know that the world trade center and the pentagon were attacked on 9/11/01 by Al Queda, right? That falls under the umbrella of 'my culture and country'. Felling the WTC is not the same thing as 'Saddam is a meanie'.

And pulling the trigger is exactly what makes al queda unique! Because attacking groups of people for fear that they may eventually do something to us is just plain stupid. I'm pretty sure that despite his actions, Wolfowitz, Chaney and Rummy don't have a functional crystal ball.

but i won't so much talk about these people, nor stop the discussion at the events they cause; i would like to discuss their ideas & goals, and the motivations behind them.

do you?

Please. Volley.

 

[N8 v2.0]

...obfuscate the focal point...

Whoa!!!!

 

[El Santo]

Whoa!!!!

I'll be sure to use smaller words for you in the future.

'to deliberately confuse for the purpose of weakening an argument'.

Is that better, brah?

 

[N8 v2.0]

I'll be sure to use smaller words for you in the future.

'to deliberately confuse for the purpose of weakening an argument'.

Is that better, brah?

No habla...

 

[$tinkle]

more "vagina monologues", eh? okey-doke; don the full-face & body armor, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

I certainly hope that you are open to seeing how your viewpoint is, indeed, inciting the same 'culture of hatred' that you charge our enemies with.

really? do i have talking points about how to categorically, indiscriminately, with extreme prejudice, hate members of other religions, or just those who have hijacked it? do i state whenever we [non-muslims] are in a muslim land, we are to behave as though we are in enemy territory? do i state it would be lawful to kill someone who converts to islam? do i call for the elimination of a muslim nation, or just those who have hijacked it?

please start to recognize a theme here, lacking in any nuance

Do you seriously want to debate the power of religion in shaping viewpoint of their constituencies?! Isn't the converse of this point exactly what you are using as evidence in your previous post'?! Gimmie a break! Your attempt to obfuscate the focal point of this discussion is transparent. Keep your eye on the ball chief!

the converse of "the power of religion in shaping viewpoint of their constituencies" is "the power of constituencies in shaping viewpoint of their religion", which does indeed obfuscate the focal point of this discussion

I have read this article, and more at length, Baer, and agree that the track record of the Saudi royal family isn't phenomenally humanitarian. I'll also throw a quote back at you, incidentally from your own reference, that speaks to the heart of my 'calling you out':

This is one of the few paragraphs you didn't highlight in some way to make your point, because it's inconvenient and damaging to what you are trying to spew - the majority of Muslims are peaceful folks - despite your attempts to paint them otherwise with the myriad crap you post here.

correct; and it affirms my point which i will now make unambiguous: "a minority within islam, specifically wahhabists, specifically the spiritual leaders therein, openly supported by the saudi government, is a serious problem within our borders"

if you don't get that now, then allah help you

What did they do to me? You know that the world trade center and the pentagon were attacked on 9/11/01 by Al Queda, right? That falls under the umbrella of 'my culture and country'. Felling the WTC is not the same thing as 'Saddam is a meanie'.

And pulling the trigger is exactly what makes al queda unique! Because attacking groups of people for fear that they may eventually do something to us is just plain stupid. I'm pretty sure that despite his actions, Wolfowitz, Chaney and Rummy don't have a functional crystal ball. Please. Volley.

boy do i feel dumb for that whole world war II thing, it was the japanese that attacked us, not the germans and the italians.

 

[El Santo]

the converse of "the power of religion in shaping viewpoint of their constituencies" is "the power of constituencies in shaping viewpoint of their religion", which does indeed obfuscate the focal point of this discussion

LOL.

Okay, that is funny.

 

[El Santo]

more "vagina monologues", eh? okey-doke; don the full-face & body armor, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

This trail is not worthy of my armor and full face. Too small.

really? do i have talking points about how to categorically, indiscriminately, with extreme prejudice, hate members of other religions, or just those who have hijacked it? do i state whenever we [non-muslims] are in a muslim land, we are to behave as though we are in enemy territory? do i state it would be lawful to kill someone who converts to islam? do i call for the elimination of a muslim nation, or just those who have hijacked it?

I don't know. Do you? Seems to me that you have made it a point to highlight all the ways that those Muslimoids are deserving of our JDAMs of freedom.

"a minority within islam, specifically wahhabists, specifically the spiritual leaders therein, openly supported by the saudi government, is a serious problem within our borders"

Alright, now we are getting somewhere! Be sure to let me know how we can clearly and easily identify these people out of the sea of other Muslims,
and I'll bid you farewell!

Oh, wait! That's the problem that El Santo guy is trying to point out! Ah screw it, let's just kill 'em all! I mean, who really cares? There's 1.3 billion of 'em, and well, they all look alike!

if you don't get that now, then allah help youboy do i feel dumb for that whole world war II thing, it was the japanese that attacked us, not the germans and the italians.

Quite the student of history, aren't we? I guess a misanthropic Iraqi doofus with a then-crippled army is poses exactly the same threat to US interests as a friggin' precision killing machine that blitzkrieg'd all of europe and was shelling our last ally over there into rubble. Good call by you!

Embrace the dumb, $tinklebrah.

 

[Changleen]

Please. Volley.

This guy, the one you're bothing to argue with, believes in absolute evil.

Just so you know.

 

[MikeD]

boy do i feel dumb for that whole world war II thing, it was the japanese that attacked us, not the germans and the italians.

Actually, Germany declared war on the US first, in response to our declaration of war on their ally, Japan.

Just a point of historical accuracy; I don't think it has much to do with the discussion at hand anyhow.

 

[$tinkle]

perhaps your correction - which is appreciated - is truly in order.
jihadistan has declared war on the infidels in the 90's via fatwas;