Lady Gaga vs. the Occupation

A moderate suggestion: Palestine isn't the only driver of violent anti-American extremism. But it sure does matter.

BY THOMAS HEGGHAMMER | MARCH 31, 2010

In recent weeks, U.S. Gen. David Petraeus and others have made headlines by suggesting that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict increases anti-Americanism in the Muslim world. The Wall Street Journal's Bret Stephens takes issue with this claim, arguing that cultural Westernization -- in the form of Lady Gaga and other imports that scandalize Muslim conservatives -- is a more important cause of anti-Americanism in the Muslim world than the Palestinian conflict. Stephens notes that Islamists resented American culture well before the Palestinian issue became prominent. As key evidence, he cites Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb's rants on American culture following the latter's stay in the United States in the late 1940s.

Stephens is absolutely right that Islamism as a general phenomenon is partly a reaction to cultural Westernization and modernization. Islamists are indeed defined by their rejection of secularism, and like religious activists from other faiths, they dislike consumerism and sexual promiscuity. However, Stephens is wrong when he asserts that Westernization is a major driver of anti-American terrorism and that what happens in Palestine does not matter for the fight against al Qaeda.

Islamism and anti-American militancy are not the same thing. There are millions of Islamists out there, but only some engage in violence and only a tiny fraction fight America. The available evidence suggests the latter care more about Palestine than Lady Gaga.

By citing Qutb at length, Stephens proves my point and undermines his own. Qutb was indeed disgusted by aspects of American culture, but he neither waged nor advocated violence against the United States. Qutb's jihad was against the Egyptian regime, not America.

To the extent that Westernization causes militancy, the violence it inspires is nearly always directed at other Muslims, typically against regimes in Arab countries, because these legislate over matters of public morality. Jihadists are idealists, but they are not so utopian as to think they can stop Westernization by attacking America. However, they do think that by installing Islamist local governments, those governments can take measures to limit social liberalization.

Militants who attack the West, such as al Qaeda members, represent a different phenomenon. They argue that the fight against secular Muslim regimes (and by extension Westernization) is less urgent than attacking non-Muslims who kill Muslims and occupy Muslim territory.

How do we know that Palestine is more important than Westernization for the anti-American jihadists? First, al Qaeda's leaders have spoken more often about Palestine and other political issues (pdf) than about moral corruption. Second, when al Qaeda recruits cite their reasons for joining, they more often mention Palestine, Chechnya, and other political issues (pdf) than they do examples of Westernization. Third, incidents of anti-American violence and vandalism in the Middle East have tended to increase during or shortly after dramatic events in Palestine. Fourth, recruitment to al Qaeda has tended to expand during or shortly after escalation of hostilities in Palestine. Fifth, al Qaeda militants are happy to embrace aspects of Western culture when it suits them -- witness the use of videos and music in jihadi propaganda -- and they are arguably more pragmatic about matters moral and ritual than many other Islamists.

BEN STANSALL/AFP/Getty Images

 

Thomas Hegghammer is a senior research fellow at the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment and author of Jihad in Saudi Arabia. His views do not represent those of his employer or the Norwegian government.

BUDAHH

6:53 PM ET

March 31, 2010

What an incitfull argument

The thought that the Palestinian issue is triggering higher recruitment to Al Qaeda is ridiculous. If Israel will dissapear tomorrow then do you possibly think that iraq and afghanistan will become peacefull democratic countries. don't forget the U.S is the great satan and Israel is the samll one.
The problem is not a peace agreement with the Palestinians, but it is what Israel and America stand for. If you suggest that muslims around the world care about the oppression of others muslims and that is the reason they decide to fight back we would have seen revolutions, and at least heard of somebody speaking out against the terrible killings in darfur the and cruel treatment of any resistance to regimes in the arab world.
The arabs in the world don't care about each other the arab league is a joke they have not spoken about anything besides Israel, Shia and Sunna killing each other have nothing to do with Palestinians since Iran sponsors terrorist of all kinds without descrimination as long as it is aginst the west.

If this is true it means Israel cannot do anything because it helps recruit terrorist. Believe me that they will find another reason if it wasn't Israel, it would be Imperializm, or democracy or drinking, or women, or infidels, If you think that the effect on the Al Qqeda recruit is more than something that was born in Afghanistan in 1989 when they were fighting the soviets. Israel had not created afghanistan.
The main issue in the arb world today is Sunna Shia conflict and the palestinian issue is only used as political rhetoric.

It is a very dangerous argument to make because it might shift the public opinion in the U,s against israel if people think Israel risks American troops while they are fighting abroad.

So unless you have direct evidence don't incite against an ally which is fighting for it's own survival against evil.
By the way since the U.S war on terror started we have gotten Al Qaeda in Gaza on israel's boarders which we never had before the war on terror.

 

STACKOLEE

7:52 PM ET

March 31, 2010

The argument that stands in the way of progress

Palestinians in the west bank could equally be said to trying to survive against evil, moralising the issue doesn't accomplish anything except appeal to emotion. Of course petty nationalisms will override muslim solidarity but that only proves that Palestine is so galvanising, even to non muslims.

 

BIGZEEZ

11:02 PM ET

March 31, 2010

Israel and the US are not the only democracies

The US and Israel are not the only democracies in the world. There is a reason other, even more liberal democracies, such as Canada, Norway, or Belgium don't get attacked. They do not get involved in the region. You're right it's not just about Israel, but support for Israel is one of the biggest.
True Arabs does not have the moral high ground to discuss human rights, but neither does Israel. Anyhow, that is besides the point, it is about American interests not Lady Gaga.

 

BUDAHH

3:59 AM ET

April 1, 2010

YOu are right they are not the only ones but

Don't forget the London bombings, Madrid and how many plts were foiled.
Becasue Israel is at the front of the Muslim world, and the U.S is a World superpower which represents the west if you want to make a statement against the west you don't attck Belgium

Why does Israel not have the morality, it is a democracy which is fighting terror since it was created, we can argue about the Settlements, but belive me that any country which has to deal with what Israel does will not be as considarate with human rights and freedonms, just look at the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq

 

DENVERITALIAN

12:33 PM ET

April 1, 2010

^

Allan Green, are you aware of how shockingly narrow minded you consistently come across as with every comment I've ever seen you post? I doubt it, as awareness involves having a certain amount of willingness to entertain an opinion other than one's own and not just immediately trying to discredit anyone who doesn't share the same self-serving worldview as you do.

 

TOOLBAG

5:20 PM ET

April 1, 2010

Cause of terrorism

Trying to simplify a concept as complex as terrorism into a handful of categories may prove to be a little shortsighted. The Israel/Palestine conflict is but a rallying point for fanatics on either side. One of the many reasons for terrorism and fanaticism is globalization. When a culture is left behind in technology, economy, and overall prosperity, elements of that culture will look for a beacon of strength or source of pride. Terrorist causes can provide that. Often the leaders of these people are allowing and even encouraging these people to reject globalization in order to keep them in this position in order to continue exploiting and manipulating them. However when you look at the Saudi Arabian ruling class you will find a very prosperous people who continue funding Wahabism, which is one of the most intolerant forms of Islam. The difference between these two types of fanatics is one has to worry about where they will get their next meal and the other would seem to have nothing to worry about. So what is the reason for Saudi Arabian fanaticism? I don't have an answer. Some would say that it is the very nature of Islam to be intolerant. I don't believe that is it. Al Qaeda will recruit using any reason that suits them, they blame the West for Global Warming. No doubt they will use that as a recruiting tool. Muslims have rebelled against oppression in the many times in the past. The only problem is they often will devolve into a tyrannical despotism. This may be an aspect of the culture as well. Or it is a result of situation these countries found themselves in at the time. Often when new countries are formed they make up for the weakness of the state in the strength of the leader. That is not something that is true for Muslim societies only. There are many reasons for Terrorism and Fanaticism. They are not isolated to Islamic cultures. Ignoring that will not lead to resolution of these crises.

 

ZT

5:26 PM ET

April 6, 2010

RE: Freeda2

I applaud you for using the word "Jew" and at least not trying to mask your antisemitism behind political criticism.

 

ROMNEY

10:14 PM ET

April 19, 2010

Funny

I noticed the same thing. Glad it's not just me.

 

CHRISMADDEN

9:59 PM ET

April 22, 2010

agreed!

You couldnt put it any better! We are wasting way too much money on war on terrorism! Every Nation is and this is causing panic in some nations were it isnt necessary! The US has started a war they shouldnt have gotten into! Obama doesnt help either a reason why maybe? Dont know but its obviously helping our economy (sarcasm). Chris from Steve Madden boots

 

SINBAD

7:22 PM ET

March 31, 2010

Irresponsible

I sure Lady Gaga would like to thank you for putting her face up as a target for Muslim extremist. Jerk offs. BTW. If Muslims don't like it they can go fuck themselves.

 

BUDAHH

8:54 PM ET

March 31, 2010

Great Khalid Mufti of jerusalem

Some new ammunitiion for you isn't it. What does that mean, if highs chool students in those countries are mad, that means they are being brainwahsed by someone since highschool students don't usually care that much about world politics. If it wasn't that it would have been some other reason to get them mad at the west, besides the only reason they have to be mad which is the ragime they live under.

 

ERVD

10:32 PM ET

March 31, 2010

funny

yeah, right... "the hate us for our freedom." what a load of crap that is.

I have never met a single Muslim who gives a damn about US culture, Lady Gaga, etc. all Muslims I know do care about Palestine.

abu muqawama says it all: http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2010/03/lady-gaga-westchester-county-haifa-wehbe-southern-lebanon.html

 

CARRIEBEE

12:22 AM ET

April 1, 2010

Rad Muslims Love to Hate

Nothing drives religious extremists like hatred. They love to hate. It is coursing through their veins. It is their driving force. Their nature. That's it.

 

MELK

11:32 AM ET

April 1, 2010

Palestine as a driver of anti-American extremism

Of course. In the same sense that women are a driver of male sexism, gays a driver of homophobia and African Americans can be a driver of white racism.
What exactly is the author's point? It's still not an excuse. The problem is the existence of Israel, not the plight of the Palestinians.

 

SMCI60652

3:54 PM ET

April 1, 2010

Ok here's a fair challenge

All the folks that think the problem is "Islam's" hatred of Western Secularism and all its resultant "decadence," please cite the quotes from Osama Bin Laden claiming that this is the reason he founded Al Qaeda.

AND

All of those who think that the problem isn' t just "Western Culture," but primarily the way certain Western Countries have treated certain Muslims historically, please cite the quotes of Osama Bin Laden claiming THESE are the reasons he's fighting us.

** ofcourse I use Bin Laden because let's face it, he's the quintessential Jihadist in our minds.

Let the best research win.

 

SCOTTM2009

5:28 PM ET

April 1, 2010

wrong challenge

Since bin Laden is not the main founder of al-Qaeda, why would we focus on his words? Bin Laden was always the "frat boy" with the money, not the intellectual or philosophical driver of al-Qaeda or anything else. Further, his words are not even reproduced til 9 years after the founding of al-Qaeda, when he finally declared a jihad against America. Al-Qaeda existed for 9 years BEFORE he declared jihad against us, and it had nothing whatsoever to do with Israel whe it was founded. Furthermore, al-Qaeda as an entity was a merging of two earlier entities that had existed for years already, one of them since the 1920's - also nothing to do with Palestine or the nation of Israel (that did not even exist at that time).
Maybe you should research something beyond CNN.

 

SMCI60652

6:06 PM ET

April 1, 2010

Scott M

First of all, point to where in my questions I mention Israel.

Second of all, your claims about Bin Laden's insignificance fly head-first into the story of Al Qaeda accepted more-or-less as fact by most experts, including Lawrence Wright, Gilles Kepel, and the author of this piece, Thomas Hegghammer - who are all among the leading authorities on Al Qaeda in the world.

Third, you are right about the Jihad against America coming about 10 years after the actual founding. But again, why that's relevant here, I don't understand. The correct argument would be to point to where in that declaration he cites "western decadence" as the causus belli.

Also, I'm interested to hear your views on why precisely it is, as you point out, that these movements started springing up in the 1920s and not say, a century or two centuries prior to that?

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

 

SHIVEH

4:07 PM ET

April 1, 2010

Don't get distracted.

Let’s concentrate on solving Arab, Israeli problem. If they know about Lady Gaga, it’s because they peek at what their kids watch!

 

DR. SARDONICUS

8:46 PM ET

April 1, 2010

Get a clue

What sociopath extremists on either side do or say, in the real world or above in this post, cannot be influenced by reason and is therefore not relevant to anything except armed force. However, what the man on the street believes can be, and is. And without support from the man on the street, the extremists become the ineffectual, miserable wackos they really are.

The average Muslim on the street is forbidden by the Q’ran to attack the innocent – the only thing that has contained Islamic terrorism, despite the West’s bungling but repeated attempts to aggravate it.

The average Muslim on the street is enjoined by the Q’ran to counter-attack anyone who attacks a fellow Muslim; which is what Israel is doing, every day, against Palestinians.

Every time another Muslim is assaulted by non-Muslims, another few (many?) dollars, and thus bullets, go to support Muslim terrorists.

The Q'ran is published in English and in talking book format. Its dos and dont's are very clear, when it comes to war. The entire book takes less than ten hours to scan, or listen to. Get your own clue.

 

ZT

5:34 PM ET

April 6, 2010

The convoluted bit isn't the

The convoluted bit isn't the Quran, it's the politics. To say Israel is constantly attacking innocent Palestinians is patently absurd-- they have an army that follows ROE, prosecute soldiers who don't, and have a supreme court that checks state action to defend human rights, like any properly-functioning democracy.

There are over a billion Muslims in the world, hundreds of millions of whom live in nations with substantive non-muslim majorities or minorities. Many of these Muslim groups are involved in complicated, nationalistic conflicts that can't be easily simplified. To say that the other 1,000,000,000 muslims are supposed to judge everytime an innocent muslim is "attacked" and respond with vigilante justice is asking for global terrorism. We have political instutions precisly because things are never this simple.

 

ITGURU42

9:10 PM ET

April 1, 2010

In other words, the common thread

is that we're talking about a barbaric religion that would be far better left back in the 7th century - a religion based on genocide, hatred, and despotism, founded by a guy who had penis envy of the persian Sultanate.

Come on. The "muslim street" wants to kill a guy for being Lebanon's version of Dionne Warwick, and beat a woman senseless for daring to sip a beer.

"The average Muslim on the street is forbidden by the Q’ran to attack the innocent" - practice 'taqiyya' much? Any member of Dar Al-Harb - the "domain of war", the non-muslim world - is by definition of all major Muslim scholars NOT innocent. We're all targets, doubly so for those of us who choose atheism or a non-"of the book" faith. See, according to definition, the "of the book" set get the choice of convert, live as slaves, or die: we "pagans" get to convert or die, period.

 

VOICE OF MODERATION

9:10 PM ET

April 1, 2010

marginal drivers

It's probably accurate to say that the Israel/Palestine conflict is the biggest salient issue for at least a plurality of Arabs in terms of those who disagree with or fight the West (the Iraq war was probably more salient for a while, but it seems to have died down). However, we should realize that it's salient in many people's minds because it is constantly discussed and is perceived as the greatest injustice, and that ending that conflict would only redirect ire to that of the next most salient issue. Thus, for our purposes, how much the Palestinian issue drives Arab anger could really be better considered as "what is the marginal utility of solving the Palestinian conflict"?

As there are plenty of other drivers of Arab anger toward the West (Lady Gaga perhaps being one, but probably not near the top of the list), it's likely that popular rage would most likely start focusing on the next insult. Sadly, I would speculate that that issue would turn out to be the mere existence of Israel inside the 1967 borders. If there are certain people who are brought to arms by the West Bank issue alone, and would cease to be angry (or drop below a certain threshold of anger that we find unacceptable) about anything else, then that's the marginal benefit of solving the Palestinian issue.

VoM

 

ITGURU42

9:20 PM ET

April 1, 2010

"Sadly, I would speculate

"Sadly, I would speculate that that issue would turn out to be the mere existence of Israel inside the 1967 borders."

The charter of the PLO (aka the "Palestinian Authority") still calls for the destruction of Israel, period.

The charter of Hamas still calls for the destruction of Israel, period.

Arafat, when he signed the Oslo Accords, was on Palestinian radio the next day reminding "his people" in Arabic that it was a "great deception", quoting as his example Mohammed's breaking of the fake "truce" with the Quraish in Mecca and invoking the "Phased Plan" to "liberate the territories of 1948" (their code for "wipe out Israel").

Oh, by the way, what was Abbas's right-hand man Nabil Abu Rudeineh saying this past week? Right - "We are ready for any Arab option. If they want to go to war let them declare that and mobilize their armies and their people and we will follow suit.."

Anyone still stupid/gullible enough to think the Palestinians/Arabnazis want "peace"?

 

ZT

5:36 PM ET

April 6, 2010

Good point, but a lot

Good point, but a lot advocates are using this to say that the US should distance itself from Israel, not that we should re-double efforts to solve the conflict.

 

CHARLES MORGAN

10:00 PM ET

April 1, 2010

Everyone is missing half of the issues

There are really three issues raised by this article and only the first one is ever addressed. It is not enough to ask only whether Israel is the cause of the world's islamo-fascist problems. The second issue is, assuming that the first question is answered in the affirmative, what then could be done about it and thirdly, what should be done about it.

As a preface, any intellectually honest person, who is not being disingenuous, will acknowledge that Israel has no connection to the following disputes: the Russians suppressing Chechnya, or India fighting Pakistan, or Shi-ites fighting Sunni’s in Iraq, the Philippines fighting muslim rebels, or Thailand fighting muslim rebels or the Egyptians fighting the muslim brotherhood or the Lebanese fighting Hezbollah or Afghanistan fighting the Taliban or Saudi Arabia fighting Al-Queda. If Israel were to disappear, these other disputes would continue ad infinitum. If you disagree with this, then just stop reading now because we don’t live in the same universe and thus can’t communicate with each other.

But, let’s assume that if Israel were to do something, then all these other disputes would disappear. That appears to be the premise of the article. I submit that the premise is faulty.

First, what could Israel do to make all the other disputes disappear?

I submit, nothing short of Israel disappearing would satisfy the islamo-fascists who blame Israel for everything. (And then the islamo-fascists would continue their quest for world domination using another scapegoat.) If Israel were the size of a postage stamp, it would not be enough. All of the liberal academic discourses on the subject seem to assume that if only Israel were to withdraw to its 1967 borders, there would be peace on earth. Those writers don’t read what the islamists write. If you read the fatah manifesto, you will learn that Israeli withdrawal to any line is just part of a phased plan of the Palestinians to take over all of Israel. And Hamas, that controls half of the Palestinians, has made consistently clear that when they refer to “occupied” territory, they are referring to all of Israel. Actually, it is only the western media that has made an assumption that all the Palestinians want is Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. The Palestinians have never said that is enough.

And what has been the track record of withdrawal? When Israel withdrew from Lebanon, they were met with the capture and killing of their soldiers by Hezbollah and thousands of missiles were shot at Israel. Hezbollah has more thousands of missiles ready to shoot at Israel again.

When Israel withdrew from Gaza, then Hamas fired thousands of missiles at Israel also.

So rather than buy peace, withdrawal provokes more islamo aggression against Israel.

Second, assuming that there is something it could do, should it?

What should Israel do?

Here is the most important issue. Even assuming all of the world’s islamo problems are because of Israel and further assuming that Israel could do something to make the Islamo’s happy, (humor me here), what should Israel do? I submit, and this is the major point of this comment, Israel should do nothing. Why? Because that is appeasement. Ever hear about that? Ever hear about Chamberlain pre-WWII? Ever hear about “moral hazard”? Ever hear about morals?

Let’s just focus on the simplest example: Jerusalem. More than two thousand years ago, both the First and Second Temples in Judaism were built there. It is the holiest site in the Jewish religion. Many many years later a mosque was built on top of those temples after the muslims conquered it. After WWI, Britain gave the area to Jordan and Israel. Israel allowed freedom of worship for all religions and respected holy places for everyone. Jordan, on the other hand, shot at Israeli worshipers at the Western Wall, desecrated Jewish cemeteries and tore down Jewish synagogues and didn’t allow the practice of Judaism. After Jordan attacked Israel in 1967, Israel prevailed and the whole city is now united and there is freedom of religion for everyone. Should Jordan’s aggression be rewarded? Should they be allowed a “do over” as they say in golf? Wouldn’t this encourage more aggression? Wouldn’t this send the wrong message to islamo’s that they can attack and lose and then suffer no consquences, thereby encouraging more aggression?

When your child becomes demanding that he wants to play rather than go to sleep at bedtime, does the parent give in to the child’s demands and spoil the child or does the parent set rules so that the child learns how to behave? That is the analogy here. The islamo’s and Palestinians are like children. I submit that just because they complain, is that a reason to give in to them? Does the world reward who complains loudest or does the world reward good behavior?

Israel won’t be a willing party to being thrown under the bus, to be a scapegoat, for some ill-conceived idea that its existence is somehow an impediment to peace. The sooner the civilized world recognizes this, and stands up for this principal, the sooner a united front can be the vanguard of a new age of courage against islamo tyranny. As Churchill said, we shall never surrender.

 

MSAYOUFI

3:14 PM ET

April 2, 2010

Everyone is missing half of the issues

Mr. Morgan - you are missing the whole issue here! First, your use of inflammatory terms such as "islamo-fascist" clearly shows your biased stance on this issue. I can only think of those right wing extremists in the American/British media or the Zionist Israelis who are so keen on using such terms to provoke a large portion of this universe (over one billion 300 million Muslims!). Second, your premise is at it core faulty. You argue that ALL the other conflicts involving extremist Muslims in the world have nothing to do with Israel’s occupation of Palestine. so my question to you would be: did you conduct a field study or poll to find out what is the reason behind their fighting? Let me give one part of the answer for that: in every single conflict you mentioned, Israel is seen as the aggressor who is killing not only fellow Muslims, but also innocent children and women (ex. Israel’s Operation Cast Lead of early 2009). Thirdly, Jerusalem has always been a land where all religions are practiced freely. you can keep on arguing (same as the divisive and racist Zionist movement have been arguing) that the Jews were there first and that their temple was destroyed, bla bla bla), but i would like to remind you that if we were to agree with that argument, every single nation on this earth will have to find another place somewhere on this planet or elsewhere in the universe to build their nation again, because as the Jews claim they were in Palestine first (which is also not true since Canaanite have inhabited that region way before the Jews did), Native Americans can claim that every one on north America as well as south America should find another place to live and give them back their land.
I agree Islamic extremism is a major problem these days, but if history repeats itself, this issue will disappear when the majority of peaceful Muslims reject the extremists; and that can only happen if their dignity is restored and they are allowed to live in the prosperity that the west has been enjoying for the last 2 centuries.

 

CHARLES MORGAN

3:37 PM ET

April 2, 2010

"allowed to live in the prosperity"

"they are allowed to live in the prosperity that the west has been enjoying"

Thanks for reminding us of the jealousy factor. As the West has progressed scientifically, financially and culturally, the arab world has gone backwards on all three fronts. Astounding when you think about, considering that the arabs are sitting on more than half of the world's oil. And what do they have to show for it? Let's see: gold-plated limos, 100 room mansions, imported women from Europe, racehorses, indoor ski runs. Any recognized universities? Nope. Any nobel prizes? Nope. Any great industries? Nope.

Current estimates are that the oil will run out in less than 100 years. At that point, the leverage that the arabs enjoy now in intimidating the West will be gone. I look forward to it.

Here are some inspirational comments that hopefully will abolish the idea of appeasement:

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? - Patrick Henry

You ask, What is our policy? I will say; "It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us: to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy." You ask, What is our aim? I can answer with one word: Victory - victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival." - Winston Churchill

If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties - Winston Churchill

We shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender - Winston Churchill

We dare not tempt them with weakness… Can we forge against these enemies a grand and global alliance, North and South, East and West, that can assure a more fruitful life for all mankind? Will you join in that historic effort? - John F. Kennedy

And here is the best yet, spoken just a few days ago:

"The measures to fight terrorism should be expanded, they should be more effective, more harsh, more cruel," - Russian President Dmitry Medvedev

 

MSAYOUFI

3:54 PM ET

April 2, 2010

pathetic Charles

you said it yourself: "we don’t live in the same universe and thus can’t communicate with each other". for a moment i thought you were a rational creature, alas, you are just another right wing/zionist psychopath who thinks that ALL Jewswill be exterminated and Jesus will then show up and bring peace to the world! or that that Jews will build their temple again!! good luck in your ignorance pal!

 

XORO

4:32 PM ET

April 2, 2010

"majority of peaceful Muslims reject the extremists"

majority of peaceful Muslims reject the extremists.... really? Does such a group exist, has it ever existed? Who are you kidding? it is high time to call this bluff.

The fact is, such blatant terrorism is thriving because the rest of the muslims are silent or active supporters of it. Show me any example anywhere in the world where any muslim country, group, organization has actively done something to stop the or even protest or criticize the acts of islomic terrorists? answer is NONE.

west/ others (read non muslims) should let muslims live in dignity to stop them from become terrorists?? really? your sense of dignity is relly well conveyed through honour killings, beheadings, forced conversions etc..

 

BLUE13326

10:42 AM ET

April 2, 2010

If you read bin Laden's fatwa

If you read bin Laden's fatwa it is clear that his main issue is the US presence in Saudi Arabia and the mideast, and his main concern is overthrowing the Saudi monarchy; because he believes that the main impediment to overthrowing the Saudi monarchy is the US presence.
All issues are secondary to these concerns.

 

XORO

11:22 AM ET

April 2, 2010

Everyone and above all the Author, is missing the BASIC issue

Well commented Charles.

What the islamists really have is a nuisance value. Give to us what we are demanding or else we will create more nuisance, nuisance in this case means kiiling innocent people. Their true agenda is islamization of the world and they will not stop untill that aim is met or until their capacity to engage in terrorism is destroyed forever. The fact that islamic terrorism in Philipines or India has nothing to do wth Israel proves this point. What did the the thousands years old budhha statues that were destryed by talibanis in Afghanistan have to do with Israel? How were the scores of people from different nationalities and relegion that were killed in Mumbai attack linked to Israel-Palistinian conflict? On the contrary as per the documentary on CNN on Mumbai attack, when the terrorist found out there was a muslim couple among the hostages in Taj hotel, they let them go and killed others. So really it is about muslims vs non muslims a.k.a infidels.

"Jihadis are idealists".. really? Is growing cannabies to fund terrorsism ideal? Is kiiling innocent people women and children ideal? please do not romantisize crime by such stupid statments.

I come to FP for some great articles, but at the same time lack of depth and logic in articles like these totally disappoints me. It will serve the author and others like him to grow out of textbook research with some fancy imagination and be more realistic, thourough and thoughtful in their approach, specially on serious matters like islmic terrorism which is threatening the very existence of the word as we know of.

-infidel (thankfully)

 

THOM

3:11 PM ET

April 2, 2010

Sami ET AL

Here are the values of certain Muslims spelled out clearly:

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/pakistan802/video/video_index.html

Watch the film Sami and Mufti if you care to dedicate yourself for 36 minutes to something outside of your self-indulgent rants and re-posts on FP.

Yes we know Muslim extremism is a modern phenomena birthed by the formation of modern day Israel.

I'm sure Muslim raiding parties in North Africa (http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/slavery-sudan-islamic-fundamentalists.html) bemoan the Palestinians when they butcher thousands of innocent people.

How does London feel about the IRA? Guess how Putin feels about Chechens - oh the Chechens hate Israel and by proxy the US because they deal so heavily with the two.

The Mughals had nothing the best intentions when they charged across India and slaughtered every Hindu they could find, of course their motive was Israel and the US, wait...I guess that's a bit earlier, hmmm, well at least India hasn't had any problems with her neighbors since...wait...

Yes, Muslim FANATICS have but one goal and that is the Islamization of the world. They will use whatever motivation exists be it a Danish cartoon, an indignant author (Salman Rushdie), a Jewish State, a morally bankrupt culture, if you're Shia they hate you cause they're Sunni (and any combination there after).

I'm sorry that Democracy will not enforce your religious beliefs on me. I'm sorry that I will not stone a woman for showing her face. I'm sorry I won't behead a criminal in a soccer stadium. I'm sorry my police won't grab a homosexual and hang him in the street.

Poll Americans and they will overwhelmingly agree that their values are shared not by Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, the Emirates, Afghanistan, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban....no, but they will say Israel.

AMERICA HAS IDEALS AND SHE WILL EXPRESS THEM BEYOND HER NEED OF SECURITY. IF YOU'RE A LIABILITY BECAUSE YOU ARE A PR DISASTER WELL WE'LL BE THERE FOR YOU AND TRY TO STEER YOU ON A MORE CORRECT PATH BUT SHE WILL NOT ABANDON YOU.

TWO STATES, TWO PEOPLES!!!!!

above all peace

 

DR. SARDONICUS

10:53 AM ET

April 3, 2010

Pots Calling the Kettle Black

As I said, there is no arguing with extremists. Their vacuous logic echoes the worst among their adversaries. Each side feeds off the other, paints the Other with the worst of their own failings. It's called transference and it's a symptom of delusion.

There will be peace, one way or the other. Peace over the dead bodies your raving rhetoric has produced, or peace despite the worst fears you have embraced as guiding principles.

You rave medieval trash as if we were still fighting with swords. The weapons available today will turn your raving curses into hacking coughs and death rattles -- none of your shiny military toys will do a thing to slow that down. Too bad the innocent will have to perish in great numbers, on both sides, thanks to your collective psychosis.

Your statements stink of fear; fear breeds violence. If you want peace, you are going to have to learn to bend over backwards to compromise with your enemies; as will they. Otherwise, you will learn nothing from this transaction, except the latest way to get everyone killed.

Then, presumably, you will be satisfied.

 

TOOLBAG

5:40 PM ET

April 9, 2010

Pots Calling the Kettle Black

Unfortunately with as with most dreams, such as the one you propose, reality will interupt them. The idea that it is possible to get two completely different cultures to "bend over backwards to compromise" is unrealistic. We have to work in the reality we have.

 

OHREALLY

10:00 AM ET

April 4, 2010

Compassion for Palestinians?

If the Muslim world really cares about the plight of the Palestinians, I wonder why we've heard nothing about their persecution by the very same Muslims who, as one poster here put it, care about that more than anything else.

The only Arab country that allows anyone of Palestinian descent citizenship is Jordan, and then only on a limited basis.

Syria and Lebanon do not permit Palestinians to own property or enter certain professions.

Kuwait and Iraq have expelled their entire Palestinian populations.

Several hundred thousand Palestinians still languish in refugee camps, not because Israel won't allow them to return, but because their Arab hosts refuse to allow them residence anywhere else in those countries. Not even the PA will allow residents of camps inside the areas they control to be relocated into permanent housing elsewhere.

The only solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict that the Muslim world is interested in is the one that does not include the continuing existence of Israel as a Jewish state. For that matter a solution involving the creation of a Palestinian state is not necessarily as popular among Muslims as one would think. Antun Saadeh, considered to be the founder of the Syrian Baath party claimed all the territory lying in the area bounded by Turkey, Iraq, the Suez Canal, the Mediterranean and present day Saudi Arabia, as a part of "Greater Syria". Even Syria's current constitution refers to a "Syrian Arab region". There have been other claims to this region by Egypt and Jordan as well.

 

ZT

5:23 PM ET

April 6, 2010

Palestine Conflict --> Terror: So What?

Too many supporters of Israel have been unwilling to accept that Petraus is right in his assesment. They're afraid of the inevitable conclusion: That the US should cut off support.

However, I don't think that conclusion follows.

The complexities of the situation and the history are too much for the average American voter or average world Muslim. Even many people in the conflict zone have incomplete knowledge, though to a lesser degree. The world's double-standard towards Israel comes from two major sources (which do not, unlike many Israelis and American Jews think, include vanilla antisemitism.)
The first is the general way a free press works-- the media can go to a conflict zone, show horrible pictures, report on specific incidents without historical context or depth, and leave the world completely uninformed. That's just what sells, and Israel is the victim because it's the only country that's relativly accesable and has a free press in such a consistent conflict zone. (So many more people are dying in Darfur, the DRC, possibly Burma, and elsewhere-- but there's virtually no coverage.) While this undermines Israel's Western support, things are even worse in the Middle East where Al-Jazeera dominates and markets itself on anti-Western editorialization.
Secondly, the Islamists themselves activly try and create the image of an inevitable clash of civilizations: The worldview is attractive because it provides simplicy and purpose. Insofar as this is the case, any Western country in the Arab world-- especially one that's constantly fighting-- is going to work very nicely and make for good Crusader analogies.

The US needs to improve its image, but we have to understand that public opinion in the simple sense is crude, finicky, and downright ignorant. While we need to reach out to the Muslim world (and the rest of the world), we can't abandom principled support for fellow democracies and those in need. Following opinion polls as foreign policy will lead to inconsistency and lack of credibility, which is an even worse (or at least just-as-bad) long term image. Thus, we need to have the balls to say that support for Israel is increasing terrorism, while having the balls to say we're not going to let this hijack our policies.

 

CHRISTAIN

6:47 PM ET

April 21, 2010

How the Middle East Made Me

How the Middle East Made Me Give Up Journalism Why Is Pakistan Trying to ... Lady Gaga vs. the Occupation Who's Afraid of a One-State Solution? ...affliction clothing

 

LAV007US

6:37 AM ET

April 23, 2010

Palestinian issue used to be

Palestinian issue used to be the only major reason for anti American sentiment in Muslims. But its no longer the only culprit.

Now there are many other reasons like wrong doings of 2nd attack on Iraq. And also the behavior of American military in Afghanistan and Iraq where they don't care about human rights of native country men.

I also feel that Pakistan will be another headache for Americans as it can not afford to be an ally to US. It will backfire not openly but secretively.

Anti American meetings, gatherings are held in Pakistan openly and the Govt does not stop these people. They simply can't!

 

JBAYER

1:05 PM ET

April 23, 2010

Interesting.... but silly

I have no concept nor understand of what is in the mind of another human being who desires to kill and inflict great harm. Sadly a few bad seeds ruin the pot on both sides of the fence and it is hard to separate the rhetoric from the facts.

Short term problems are hard to distinguish between long term problems with all the noise. The issue is not more power, or control - it's education. on both sides. The current policy so far seems to be the taking enough short term loan to buy the house, but that's a bad strategy.

Just my humble comments. I hope we can get to a real solution and better our planet.

 

SUSANJ

5:31 PM ET

April 23, 2010

Super weird

I just have to say Lady Gaga is one of the most interesting people in the world. She always dresses up in the weirdest outfits that you wouldn't see any one else ever wear. insanity workout-turbo fire

 

SERVANTES

9:56 PM ET

April 29, 2010

I agree with you, Jordan is

I agree with you, Jordan is travesti the hero of every individual mind. Of course, we travesti are also very okey like the air jordan shoes..