Infidel and gentile are synonyms. Let’s not forget the lovely word goy, that is oft bandied about in Jewish circles. Every race and religion has members that seem to practice bigotry, so it’s hardly a Muslim monopoly.
Nope not what you thought, but being wrong must be a common occurrence for you.
The PLO calls for Jihad - an Islamic thing.
Try again. Maybe if you say something bad about my mother in your next post you will come off as the intelligent speaker of truth. I ALMOST feel sorry for you
It is a sad thing. I still do not believe, with all the PC crap in the US, that the hate thing is nearly as institutionalized in school and in religious centers in this Country.
Also, just like you said (Before I continue, let me state that I am NOT condemning all…) I am not so petty to attack you on your comments even without that statement - and I certainly did not mean to say all Muslims are terrorists and all others are good.
Oh, I realize that. I just wanted my position to be perfectly clear in case someone else was unaware of my stance.
My personal slant is that its not the religions or the political parties or the ___________ that is the problem, its the people in them who hijack the podium. In other words, there are a lot of jerks out there who use the platform and visibility of certain positions to push their own agendas, not those of their organizations or constituents. Take one of my favorite whipping boys, the Republicans. I know not all Republicans are evil, and some of their policies make sense. However, certain powerful members of the party use their power to line their own pockets at the expense of the poor. Ditto Democrats.
To return to the point of this string-most Muslims are people like us. However, a certain minority has hijacked (unfortunate but accurate choice of words) the forum of international attention. They have stated that there can be no peace until the Israeli state has been pushed back to the sea (Arafat). They have called for jihad against Israel and their supporters (chiefly the USA). This being the case, they need to be watched. But, since membership lists for Hamas, the PLO, et alia have not been published and our intelligence penetration into those organizations is minimal, anyone from that cultural background merits scrutiny upon entry into the country. Not arrest-scrutiny. Not only FIM’s, but also FIF’s, but primarily FIM’s (FIF’s have, so far, only been a minority of the participants in the jihad).
Yes this is unfortunate, but this is the framework of the struggle we are in. So far, we have not committed the same kind/magnitude of abuses of power that occurred during WWII with the Japanese Americans. Or that occurred during the Civil War under Lincoln (he suspended Habeus Corpus, etc.). And it is our duty to make sure we watch the watchmen, and prevent such abuses. One such abuse would be if the profile FIM eclipsed all other factors, without sufficient justification for that eclipsing, and that, as yet, has not happened.
First in reply to december
I am afraid I can not locate the citation from which I derived my opinion, so my personal observation shall have to suffice for the time being as I have not the time to research and dig about to validate:
By personal obs and recollection, it strikes me that Xians are overly represented in the PLO bodies, something along double of their est. 3-10% of the population. Attracted to the organization by its secularism and Arabist focus, at least historically. Given the Xian exodus post 1967, many of these folks are located in exile now, e.g. in the US where I found just about every other Xian Palestinian with some connexion with the PLO or subsidiary org. This in part results from the rise of the explicetely Islamist elements such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas and so forth, who have ‘stolen’ Muslims from the PLO.
Now this little cretin:
Although I should know better than to argue with a teenager, my dear little cretin, the following might just seep into other’s skulls:
Jihaad: yes an Islamic term, just as Crusade is a Western Xian term. Some PLO leaders recourse to the word, which in Arabic is quite simply striving and struggling, by no means indicates they are an Islamist organization, any more than Bush’s use of Crusade indicates that the US Gov’t is an Xian one. It is a cultural reference you moron.
I think blown still mistakenly believes that Jihaad means ‘holy war’.
To be fair, the American media has done little to disabuse us of this notion.
Well, to be perfectly fair to him, although lord knows why I should be given his clear stupidity, PLO people have clearly used it in a Jihaad as holy war sense, but again there we have it in the same context as ‘crusade’ usage in English – not a denominational usage per se, but a kind of generic Arabic culture, ‘fight the bad dudes’ context. However at the same time, e.g. Arafaat arguing his usage of Jihaad on at least one occasion meant struggle can also be credited (I am not sure myself, it is hard to get in someone else’s mind in the end).
In any case, the essential point is that an Arabic speaker of a secular organizaation, an avowedly secular organization with Xian members using the word Jihaad, does not make the organization ‘Islamist’ or Muslim radical, any more than Bush’s use of Crusade reflects so on the Am. gov’t; although in either case obviously one’s political enemies can make hay out of it.
Collounsbury:
Thanks for taking about half the years off my life - I would love to be a teen again. It is sad that you somehow feel that calling me a teen makes you so correct - you are just wrong again. LIYF I have been witness to the Arab terror for more than 35 years.
Even your own last post admits to the Islamic connection.
You are insane if you believe that the Muslims do not have much hate for Israel and the US - Even when a Muslim is interviewed in an attempt to dispel their violent characterizations they can’t lie good enough to hide their hate for the US just because of the support for Israel thing - it is obvious that because of the US/Israel connection that an exception to the we are a peace loving religion is OK.
It is true that there are hate groups in the US, but the only government presence there is for the purpose to make arrests. Your beloved Arab world has government sponsored terror and hate education in the schools. That is why I agreed with:
“Is there a single word that captures the religious chauvinism of a group that disdainfully dismisses all non-Muslims as “infidels”? Because that’s an appellation that’s very commonly tossed about in the overlapping Arab/Muslim worlds. If that isn’t a classic example of entrenched, structural bigotry, I don’t know what is.”
Yousef Islam really rallies the Jihad forces when he speaks, dosen’t he?
Once again, its the vocal violent minority that carries the argument and ruins the peace.
Blown & Injected is right at least in the sense of the government sponsored terrorism and schools that teach hate. Its well documented. There have been interviews on CNN where teenage schoolboys look up from surfing the web and say to the camera that they revere the suicide bombers, and are actually considering terrorism as a valid life path.
Government sources as well as the NYT, WSJ, AP, Reuters and other news sources routinely report on money trails, personal connections, etc. linking Syria, Iran, the Saddam Hussein Iraqi regime, and even the Saudis to terrorist organizations (although the latter group does so mostly with private funds, not government money).
[Slight hijack:]
I am reluctant to join this thread, but I do take issue with those people who argue the equivalence of Americans and Muslims to produce terrorists, then use the example of McVeigh and bin Laden. I think there are simple but important differences between the two:
- McVeigh was an example of an Christian American who deliberately murdered his fellow Americans. Osama was an example of a Muslim Saudi exile who murdered not his fellow Muslims, but Americans.
As far as I know, I don’t recall an Christian American who personally declared war on Islam (or Arabs) and then went about murdering innocent Muslims. If I’m wrong about that statement, I’d appreciate it someone could enlighten me.
(And please don’t use Bush, Cheney, etc as examples - no matter what you think about the morality or wisdom of the war, I think it’s clear that America displayed remarkable restraint. Yes, innocent Iraqis/Afghans died, but it’s pretty apparent we didn’t intend to harm innocents in these two unfortunate countries.)
- McVeigh did not enjoy ANY broad support (overt or tacit) of his countrymen for his act. The image I have of McVeigh is him being led out by the feds in disgrace to a chorus of boos.
On the other hand, I suspect Osama did enjoy at least tacit - if not overt - support from a large number of Arabs and/or Muslims for his act (although I defer to Collounsbury’s professional assessment of the broad support Osama enjoyed).
[/slight hijack]
Carry on.
IIRC, there are 15,000 muslims in the US armed forces. They must do a really good job of hiding their hate for the US, hmm? :rolleyes:
Oh great another lets see if we can focus on one remote issue to try to prove error :rolleyes: If I were to just focus on such remote issues I could say that a Muslim in the US armed forces that did bomb his own officers was proof that they do not do a really good job of hiding their hate for the US.
The Muslims in the US do not seem to be part of the culture that breeds the hate and violence I was referring to in my replies.
Oh wonderful. Well, I am faced with two binary choices (a) a you are lying about your age, and in fact are a teenager and a stupid immature git or (b) you are not lying about your age, and are not only a stupid bigotted git, but also one who’s been incapable of advancing intellectualy for half his life.
I may add Arab is not a synonym for Muslim, a fine portion of that Arab teror from the 1970s was Xian Arab, e.g. George Habash’s group. I of course have also been witness to terror, of course I also recall Tamil terror, RC and Protestant Terror, Orthodox terror, etc.
Well if you read for comprehension you will see it admits an ‘Islamic’ connexion in the same manner as the ‘Christian’ connexion for crusade. You really are impossibly dim, aren’t you?
Shrug, so we continue to spew ignorant bile, very nice. Glad to see the confirmation that my initial post and follow-ons were correct: (a) you were too stupid to get the Islam and Muslims vocab thing (b) you are an ignorant hate filled git.
Thanks for playing, now fuck off dearie.
Go fuck your self asshole - see I am old enough to use bad words.
Thanks for the not all Arab are Muslims - who would have known. Are you really that dim to figure WTF
“‘Christian’ connexion for crusade” - yeah, so what?
Hurry up with some more of your brilliant posts before the men in the white coats put you back in your room
B&I, could you please explain this statement. It reads like you are stating that all Muslims hate the US. Is this your belief?
No.
I am good friends with a Muslim coworker.
See my post a few back from here. Drawing an absolute from such a statement is just being argumentative. Like picking on the Arab/Muslim thing - some generality should be obvious, it certainly is not the Eskimos strapping bombs to themselves. Israeli Jews - of course not all Israelis are Jews, but Collounsbury would probably take such a statement, without the disclaimer, and say something like I guess you think all the Jews in the US are Israelis.
I was just talking about Muslims that I have listened to in interviews, granting some time to the other side, often stumble when pinned down about specific actions. They talk about how their religion forbids and condemns violence, but have some warped justification for the terror attacks on Israel and the US.
My dim little friend, please do reread my notes, again this time for comprehension, should that be in any way remotely possible, for yourself.
There is no point in arguing with an insane person. I will not reread I will ignore your useless rants.
If you are so dim you cannot get this simple issue than you are truly hopeless hence the reason that I feel sorry for you, almost.
Dude, the guy you are calling “dim” lives and works in the Middle East, speaks fluent Arabic in several dialects, and has strong connections to local business and political leaders. Moreover, in these debates he brings a powerful array of scholarly cites leavened by nuanced, informed analysis, with the occasional “motherfucker” thrown in for punctuation. In short, while he can be withering in his replies, Collounsbury knows his shit.
You, OTOH, are merely airing your prejudices and arguing from ignorance.