Egyptians Question Culture-Extremism Link

Stunned by terror attacks in a Red Sea resort, Egyptians are in a remarkably frank debate about whether mosques and schools _ and the government itself _ should be blamed for promoting Islamic extremism.

Even pro-government media say authorities have created a climate where young people are turning into radicals and suicide bombers.

In a country more used to hearing general condemnations of terrorism, critics on Wednesday were angry _ and specific _ hammering at instances where they say the government let state media and mosque preachers, including many appointed by the government, to promote intolerance.

-

The bombers "didn't just conjure up in our midst suddenly, they are a product of a society that produces extremist fossilized minds that are easy to be controlled," Shohaib wrote. "They became extremists through continuous incitement for extremism which we have allowed to exist in our societies. Regrettably, the incitement is coming from mosque pulpits, newspapers, and TV screens, and radio microphones," which are all state-run, Shohaib said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/27/AR2005072701726.html

............................................................

Thats the sad thing about creating terrorists- they often come home.

about terrorism.....no blaming israel, no blaming US, no blaming others.

Only wish they figured it out years ago.

It's not the US, the West, etc.

Like Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir

and jump in with a total non-sequiteur.

Just read the last line of your post - you put it there. Here, I'll make easier for you to understand.

"Thats the sad thing about creating terrorists- they often come home."

And become Prime Minister like Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir.

About 2 years ago I heard a discussion on the Charlie Rose show about this very subject but it was generated by a Pakistani. The show had on various Middle East newspaper owners and professors of ME Studies. A Pakistani business man wrote a letter to a large Pakistan paper and it caused a large sensation because he said when are the Arabs going to get their act together...the Arabs are the laughing stock of the world, why are we always looking backward, why do we either have dictators or mullahs ruling us, we are the biggest cause of our own problems, etc. I wish I could remember the letter word for word because Charlie read the whole letter and then it was open for discussion. One of the best shows Rose ever did. The letter was brilliant and so was the following discussion

I would have hoped this article would have hit home with you - both literally and figuratively.

There have been a number of extremists clerics in London,WHO HAVE USED THE BRITISH FREEDOM OF SPEECH LAWS , who have preached jihad and incited hated. ( Kenny boy Livingston did a real suck up job on one of them.)

And now there are 50+ dead innocent Londoners who were targeted because they were innocents.

And dont you think these clerics played an indirect or worse, a direct role, in inciting them ?

And since I cant do anything else more useful,MY DEEPEST sympathies to you and your country over these vile attacks.

I should have referred to the Moslem world/ME more generally

Any mention of Israel = None.

No. of instances Palestine mentioned = None.

:eyes:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

n/t

is legitimate.One hopes this will change things.I fear it wont as a generation has grown up with this.

From the article...

In Al-Ahram, columnist Ahmed Abdel Moeti Hegazi wrote: "This is not just deviation, it is a culture,"


I have maintained for years the media and certain clerics that preach hatred and incite violence and terrorism is a necessary catalyst to produce a terrorist.

Israel has had to deal with the results of this foment for years...now the rest of the world has to deal with it....including countries that have sponsored it.

Like a virus, thinking terrorism lives in a vacuum and will stay in one place and will go away is a sure-fired way of having to deal with it later than sooner.

As I was watching the coverage this morning on the capture of the terrorist suspects in London, several British terorism experts agree with you, including some Scotland Yard people observing the radical preachings in the London mosques in the 1990s. The government was alerted to this but the free speech aspect of western culture allows(ed) it to continue.

that these terrorists acts are not some other countries problem.

Despite what the terrorists and their supporters desire to have the world think each act of terrorism in each country is isolated to that country, it is now deadly obvious it is not. This virus has now become a world-wide pandemic. Israel was the first affected.....Sadly those poor bus and subway riders were the most recent....

no one believes they will be the last.

all along as they were occurring in Israel.

Ummm, the 12 year olds loaded with bombs whose mothers would get 20 dollars from their illustrious leaders and promises to go to heaven.... Such a deal.

The bombers "didn't just conjure up in our midst suddenly, they are a product of a society that produces extremist fossilized minds that are easy to be controlled," Shohaib wrote. "They became extremists through continuous incitement for extremism which we have allowed to exist in our societies. Regrettably, the incitement is coming from mosque pulpits, newspapers, and TV screens, and radio microphones,"

Egypt,Pal.territories,or London....you would be hard pressed to figure out which country the author was referring to.

I have seen more than one interview with these kids rocking back and forth like zombies memorizing the Koran in Pakistan and other countries. ANd the interviewer will say "DO you want Americans dead?" and the kid says yes and the interviewer says "Do you want me dead" and the kid say yes again. I believe Dan Rather was an interviewer on one show and other journalists who I can't remember. These boys were about eight years old. Apparently these kids learn just about nothing other than the Koran and why they should want to kill Westerners. Forget arithmetic, geography, etc. The parents, the government, the religion, the culture/society, etc., all foster the same sociopathic behavior.

My guess is the terrorists are in all Moslem countries and they are moving freely in western countries. I think the only question is where will the next hits be and how bad will they be.

LITTLE TERRORIST FACTORIES.

Must be real self-satisying to turn kids into hate monsters.Unbelieveable.

because it wells up from the society. When the other poster mentioned Tim McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, etal, well, okay, fine. They are extremists that developed somewhat on their own as adults; I have no knowledge of their childhoods. But when society actively pays for and supports schools to do the same thing we are talking serious defects and pathology in the society. It is such an immense problem.

I know they're not Muslim and therefore shouldn't be picked out, but to claim that the Klan was a bunch of individuals whose extremism didn't have anything to do with the society around them is kind of pushing the envelope a bit. Same goes for talking about the murderous extremism of members of the Army of God. If you prefer we can change the names to Klu Klux Koran and Army of Allah so that we can whip ourselves up into a self-righteous rage about how those nasty and evil Islamic groups were a product of the societies that spawned them and how we hope the damaged society that is US society has examined the problems in its own societies and can grow and learn from it :)

Violet...

Denial of facts solves nothing

Answers you may hear.....

Mossad
Ariel Sharon
The US
Golda Meir
Scotland Yard
The CIA
Bugs Bunny
Elmer Fudd.

Thanks for the big giggle

Golda Meir is dead.

that Elmer Fudd is Smarmy lookin though.

So we should deny the fact that terrorism has and is carried out by non-Muslims and focus solely on terrorism when it's carried out by Muslims, even when in the case of the I/P conflict, that terrorism is political and not religious? Oh-kay...

Speaking of denying facts, you claimed that the KKK and the Army of God were/are just individuals and not a product of the society they're in. I notice you didn't address me pointing out that both groups actually were very much a product of their society, and in the case of Army of God, a definate product of religious extremism. But seeing as how they're not Moosleems, I see now that we must ignore that point...

Violet...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...up to this second, I have never written "Army of God" in any sentence on these boards.

You talked about Eric Rudolph and claimed he was an individual rather than a product of his society, and that there aren't religious extremists in the US promoting hatred and death towards other groups.


See below:


'Rudolph was a follower of the white supremacist Christian Identity movement, but investigators have never ascribed a motive for the attacks to him.

A group calling itself the Army of God claimed responsibility for the Birmingham blast and the Atlanta bombings that followed the Centennial Olympic Park attack.'

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/08/rudolph.plea/

Rudolph was very closely connected with the Army of God, which is a terrorist group in the US that does advocate murder...

btw, in future maybe you could concentrate on discussing the post yr replying to, rather than making broadbrush and incorrect accusations against the poster? Because in the case of yr accusations against me, you've got it well and truly wrong...

Also, as you've made the accusation that I embark on anti-US hatefests, would you care to point out where I've done this? If yr confusing criticism of US foreign policy with hating the US, then wouldn't you view criticism of Arab states as hate as well?

Violet...

phrase "Army Of God"



One other suggestion, since this is the IP board, I think that this is not the proper place for you to even bring up topics such as Army of God, KKK, etc. Those should more properly be in GD or in American History.

As to your your other comments, I can only express dismay at how far off base you are.

Thanks. With all these posts from other folk about the London bombings and Bali and Muslims, I would never have guessed this was the Israel/Palestine forum...

The post you just replied to explained the connection between Eric Rudolph and the Army of God....

As for my comments, I'm not sure what ones you think I'm off base on...

Violet...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4693915.stm

I found the last letter from the Chicago man most interesting

, and radio microphones". Egypt, Pal territiories, or London. You would be hard pressed to figure out which country the authour was referring to."

This Londonistan theory conjured up by a New York journalist may be exciting but it certainly isn't true. To compare scale and type of extremist propaganda in Egypt, Palestine and London is misguided.

sheesh so many of us in israel have known that this little cultural aspect would not be limited to just us..why? well unlike the tamil tigers....the suicide bombers had help from the international level..help from their comrads in syria, iran and jordan...money from iraq and saudi arabia....insperation from immans all over the world.....those speaches coming from the international arena was being heard by other muslims.....

it was obvious, as least to me, that kids who bought in to that crap would soon enough find a convienent target....and in the world of extremism its not hard, so I wasnt surprised when saudi arabia got hit.....jordan, Britan......and others will as well...the culture has spread far and wide....israel is but a side show as they spread out to eruope and other places all over the globe.....

what started in israel is now going to be a footnote to worldwide terrorism.

Did they state sponsors of terrorism think they were immune ?

I suspect they figured that as long as something happened in a mosque or a school it was okay and under control. ANd that if their fanatics used religion as part of their fanatacism, that was even better. And that it was also okay to direct hatred toward the great devils, westerners, Israel, etc. I think we are the scapegoats for severe inherent defects in the Moslem societies. I hope I don't get kicked off the boards or flamed for writing this. But I have been thinking about it this way for some time. It is the only thing that makes sense to me after reading Osama bin Laden's writings, histories of Islam, etc. The AP article somewhat touches on the defects in Islamic society. The societal problems mentioned in the Pakistani businessman's letter really went into it more deeply. Damn, I wish I would have taped that Charlie Rose show.

The last letter nails it. I wonder what percentage of the madrassas and mosques around the world are preaching terrorism.

Ted Kazinski, The Klan, Aryan Nations, ...

youre funny.

Devastating list of global terrorists you have there.

Some of these home-grown clowns are anti-choice, some are anti-industrial, some are anti-black....

You have to say one thing about American society: American schools are not teaching kids to kill Moslems, to hate whole other societies, are they? Some madrassas are teaching the kids to hate and kill westerners.

I wish these guys would get with the program! There's no such thing as Christian religious extremists in the US educational system who teach children hatred towards Muslims!! There's no problem with any sort of hatred in the US military towards Muslims, and Americans aren't brainwashed into hating whole other societies like Old 'Europe'...

Dunno, maybe we should join hands and work towards eradicating any schools that teach religion and hatred from the face of those corrupt and evil societies that allow them to flourish? But there may be a lack of interest once it dawns on some that problems with extremism in religious education isn't confined to Islam...

Violet..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4693915.stm

I have never heard about Americans being "brainwashed into hating whole other societies like Old 'Europe'..." or the other things you mentioned. But then again I have only been living in the US my entire life, I have only been to Europe a score of times because
I love it and so does everyone else I know, etc. I doubt there are schools in the USA that teach children they should be hating and killing Moslems.


I think most Moslems are peaceful but people around the world are starting to work up to a hatred level for Moslems in general, I believe, because of what is happening re terrorist activities in the name of Islam. I noticed the fatwa against violence being put out by the American Moslem organizations this week. Check the last letter of the link provided. When a person from a Pakistani family writes what he writes, I think you have to pay attention. Why does France feel it has to kick out some radical hate-preaching imans if Islam is a religion of peace? Is there a bit of a disconnect between saying Islam is a religion of peace when people know there is the preaching of hatred in the mosques, the terrorist acts continue, etc.

I think it is a good thing that some people in the ME are finally starting to take a good hard look at what is being propagated in their societies, don't you? Real change had to come from within?

I'm not surprised that with yr specific focus Islam that you haven't heard about Americans who hate other societies.It's abundantly clear that Americans are brainwashed into hating whole other societies, like 'Old Europe' or Arab societies, etc. Claiming not to have heard of it doesn't cut it, not when there are extremists in the US promoting hatred and some of those extremists are in the current Bush administration...

I think most Muslims are peaceful people, which is why you'll never see me making sweeping statements about Muslim societies the way some have done. Islam is just as much a religion of peace (or not) as Christianity or Judaism is. Singling out Islam for different treatment is done sometimes by those who hate Muslims and think that hatred towards them is justified because there are extreme elements to the religion...


Violet...

but you seem to be deflecting some facts. When a head of state cracks down on radical madrassas and is expelling foreign students , I would say there is a serious problem going on.

It's the disconnect between non Moslems hearing about the religion of peace when they have seen train bombings in London and Spain, bombings in Bali, the US.... People say why do I keep hearing the Moslems saying this and this terrorism keeps happening. What gives.

"....extremists are in the current Bush administration" promoting hatred???? I am sorry; I do not know who you reference here. I am of the opinion the Bush people are really about making money any way they can at anyone's expense ( the whole pro-corporation thing) and I can't stand any of them. But the promotion of hatred stuff? I am unaware of it.

I've read enough of yr contributions upstairs to know..

I think I've been crystal clear where I'm coming from. There is no doubt that extremists are a problem when it comes to religion, but to solely single out Muslims as a whole (as in making comments about how bad Islamic societies are)..

You honestly haven't heard of the neo-conservatives and the religious right??? You don't think they promote hatred?? Maybe you should try reading just a few threads at DU, because if any DUer claims not to know about them and the hatred they peddle, they need to open their eyes, and if they claim they don't peddle hatred, then my bet is a place like FR would be more suited to them...

It's the disconnect between non Moslems hearing about the religion of peace when they have seen train bombings in London and Spain, bombings in Bali, the US.... People say why do I keep hearing the Moslems saying this and this terrorism keeps happening. What gives.

I suspect most people possess that basic shred of intelligence that's needed to realise that its the work of extremists claiming to do what they do in the name of religion, and people who aren't vile little conservative bigots don't think the entire religion is one of extremism. With yr deep and thorough knowledge of Islam, do you try and educate people about Islam, and how Islam isn't one monolithic religion, but one of different sects like Christianity is? That the extremists are into Wahhabism, and that they view the majority of Muslims (whether they be Sh'ia or Sunni, though one is much more hated than the other but I can't remember which) as not being true Muslims? It's a lot like the extremist Christian sects that see Catholics or Protestants as not being true Christians...

Violet...

I don't go on religious right web sites, I don't watch religious right TV, I don't go on Free Republic, any other conservative web sites, etc. I think fundies are a big problem in the US but it's along the lines of trying to shove creationism, the bible, etc. on the rest of society and because they delude themselves that Bush is helping them when he is really hurting all of us economically. I don't notice specific anti Moslem, anti Hindu, etc., stuff from them, because my interests are elsewhere. Frankly I am more into the macroeconomics end of things. That is my choice and I don't have time to be monitoring the fundies.

Second, perhaps you might want to reread the madrassas story or the original story on Egypt questioning itself. I think both stories are very appropriate in light of the London and other bombings around the world the last few years. The facts contained in these stories are deflected time and time again with charges about the evils of the US. You see, I can very easily say yeah there is a lot wrong with the US but it seems (??)you cannot bring yourself to admit in any way, shape or form that there is the remotest possibility there is something wrong in the ME when even Middle Easterners are now admitting, pondering and trying to solve these exact problems explained in the articles. Avoidance, denial and deflection of serious problems help nothing and I think the people in the ME are finally seeing this. I applaud them (FINALLY!!!) for starting to discuss these extremely serious issues in their societies.


I think perhaps we should agree to disagree?

You see, I can very easily say yeah there is a lot wrong with the US but it seems (??)you cannot bring yourself to admit in any way, shape or form that there is the remotest possibility there is something wrong in the ME when even Middle Easterners are now admitting, pondering and trying to solve these exact problems explained in the articles.

I'm quite aware of the problems in the Middle East, particularly when it comes to the treatment of women in some countries. If by saying I can't bring myself to admit there's a problem, you mean you haven't seen me turn into a ranting mass of 'There's a huge problem with Islam!! It's a religion of hate!! The societies are pathological and sicks!!', well, yr going to be waiting till hell freezes over for that, because I tend to believe that sort of stuff isn't true...

Having been informed by you in this thread that you don't see religious extremism at work in the US, in its government or educational institutions, and you don't see any hatred towards Muslims, Europe, or other groups by them, I'll take that comment about being able to be critical of the US with a grain of salt till I see otherwise...

Violet....

Everyone clearly understands that Islam , Christianity, Taoism, etc., are not monolithic religions and they all have sects. I'd like to avoid the first grade stuff here.

Which people of which religion or religion's sect(s) have done the terrorist acts in Bali, London, NYC, Washington, Israel, etc?
"...solely single out Muslims..."
Facts, simple irrefutable facts....

The gulf between British and French treatment of preachers of hatred and violence was thrown sharply into focus yesterday when France announced the summary expulsion of a dozen Islamists between now and the end of August.

A tough new anti-terrorism package was unveiled by Nicolas Sarkozy, the interior minister and a popular centre-Right politician.


Nicolas Sarkozy: 'We have to act against radical preachers'
His proposals reflect French determination to act swiftly against extremists in defiance of the human rights lobby, which is noticeably less vocal in France than in Britain.

Imams and their followers who fuel anti-western feeling among impressionable young French Muslims will be rounded up and returned to their countries of origin, most commonly in France's case to its former north African colonies.

Mr Sarkozy also revealed that as many as 12 French mosques associated with provocative anti-western preaching were under surveillance. Imams indulging in inflammatory rhetoric will be expelled even if their religious status is recognised by mainstream Muslim bodies.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/30/ncleric30.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/07/30/ixportaltop.html

has , at least in a large part , has its roots with extremist clerics.

No question, they have seen what inciteful hate speech from these clerics in Pal. territories, Egypt and now LONDON can do.And they want no part of it.

US cracked down on hate islamic extremist hate speech.

UK is about to crack down on hate speech.

And France wants these 12 of these imams and there supporters to get the hell out of France.


Two things to notice....

1. France will never be criticized on these boards over this.Can anyone reading this imagine the screams of outrage had israel told 12 imams and their supporters to get the hell out of israel ? The UN would meeting in emergency session faster than you could say it.bUT WHEN France does it, you can hear your own heartbeat its so quiet.

2. Despite the same intolerable hate speech and terrorism that israel,Egypt and now LONDON have endured AS WELL AS OTHER COUNTRIES, there is a purposeful attempt to deceive the West that these are not related when the facts show that in fact they are.There are some propagandists and supporters will attempt to use any excuse ('thats because of iraq','its the occupation', 'its the british treatment of the muslims who live there') to divert,blame,and confuse from the underlying problem.(not here....... of course).

Thankfully Egypt,London and now France are aware.

with you all the way.

I was going back to some older (April 04)articles on France expelling two extremist Islamic clerics. It looks like some countries will get a lot tougher now on this.

I definitely notice that when one brings up Islamic extremists, the "any excuse" rant by Islamic apologists become operative. It consistently reminds me of two things: the doublespeak of the novel "1984" and Hitler scapegoating the Jews for all ills in late 1930s Germany. I think it is good that Musharraf and Egypt appear to be taking some steps towards reality checks

extremist islam. But London, Israel and Egypt arec still attacked for different reasons.

Do you buy the "they attack us for our freedoms" line that tries to lump it all into one problem? If so why egypt?

I would propose that the London bombings would not have occured had Iraq not occured. To deny any link for one's own self preservation of argument due to support for the war is negligence.

Israel is attacked due to the occupation of Palestine.

Egypt is attacked due to its secular and brutal regime.

I, for one, don't belive we should have attacked Iraq, I do belive Israel should exist, and i do believe Egypt should be secular (but not so brutal).

So i agree, disagree and half agree with the three seperate greivances here but obviously condemn the splattering of innocent people across public transport and holiday resorts. However to stand backa and shout they're mad they're mad, they're evil they're evil is counterproductive.

Which people of which religion or religion's sect(s) have done the terrorist acts in Bali, London, NYC, Washington, Israel, etc?

Seeing as how yr so well versed in all things Islamic, how about you give that one a shot? Then go through each one and point out why you think the motives for these attacks have nothing to do with political aims and everything to do with Islam being a violent religion. See, I've always thought that religion was used as an excuse (similar to Bush's 'They Hate Us For Our Freedoms' excuse), rather than being the motive for the attacks..

Violet...

"Seeing as how yr so well versed in all things" as you put it, I am still awaiting your answer

many dead iraqi babies among other horrors paid for by your tax dollars:
http://mindprod.com/politics/iraqwarpix.html
just a few dead babies from fallujah:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6010.html
this is what depleted uranium does to babies (well it kills em too):
http://www.web-light.nl/VISIE/extremedeformities.html
16 pages of click-able dead iraqi thumbnails (many children)
http://www.einswine.com/atrocities/iraq/

is this not terror?
Are the leaders of America not christians?
about 85% of Americans are christian..

or is it that the scale of the killing is so enormous terrorism cannot describe it anymore and we need use the word genocide to describe what these "crusaders" are doing.

Are these from car bombers? Suicide bombers? The Iran Iraq War that resulted in almost 2 million dead? Are they from Kuwait? Spmeplace else? Are they even from the Mideast? That is a very histrionic opening statement. What if you found out these were really propaganda photos from the Iran Iraq War?

“We don’t do body counts” General Tommy Franks, US Central Command

i'd like to paraphrase Barbara Bush,
"So why should you waste your beautiful mind on something like that?"

Certainly not me and I hope you feel the same way.

We are doing quotes? Here is from bin laden



"Hostility toward America is a religious duty, and we hope to be rewarded for it by God . . . . I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America." Time Magazine

American taxpayers dollars at work:

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album30
http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album28

" His reports have also been published with The Nation, The Sunday Herald, Islam Online, and the Guardian to name just a few. Dahr's dispatches and hard news stories have been translated into Polish, German, Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, Portuguese, Chinese, Arabic and Turkish. On the radio, Dahr is a special correspondent for Flashpoints and reports for the BBC, Democracy Now!, and numerous other stations around the globe."

The photos don't show who did these things.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-07-17T151123Z_01_MOL664910_RTRUKOC_0_IRAQ.xml


"Some 15 suicide bombers have struck within just over 48 hours in the capital and along the main road south in what al Qaeda's Iraq wing has declared is a campaign to seize Baghdad.

In Saturday's attack a suicide bomber blew up a fuel truck near a crowded vegetable market outside a Shi'ite mosque in Musayyib, in a lawless area U.S. troops call "the triangle of death". In addition to the 98 killed, hospital sources said 75 people had been wounded, 19 of whom were in serious condition.

"After the bomb I went over there and found my son's head. I could not find his body," said Mohsen Jassim of his son, 18.

"This is a black day in the history of the town," Musayyib police chief Yas Khudayr said."
snip

Please note it is not AMerican soldiers killing Iraqis in this story. It is amazing how many stories like this I am seeing in the news the last few months. Photos of bodies without captions don't tell a story, such as who caused the deaths. Was it suicide bombers, car bombers.... Instead of American tax dollars, perhaps it is al qaida charity dollars at work

it seems most of it (63%) is by:"anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents"... NOT AMERICANS.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/pr12.php


"Who was killed?
24,865 civilians were reported killed in the first two years.
Women and children accounted for almost 20% of all civilian deaths.
Baghdad alone recorded almost half of all deaths.
When did they die?
30% of civilian deaths occurred during the invasion phase before 1 May 2003.
Post-invasion, the number of civilians killed was almost twice as high in year two (11,351) as in year one (6,215).
Who did the killing?
US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims.
Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims.
Post-invasion criminal violence accounted for 36% of all deaths.
Killings by anti-occupation forces, crime and unknown agents have shown a steady rise over the entire period."
--------------
I will presume unknown agents is another phrase for suicide and other bombers and terrorists, again, not Americans

this from your own figures???

"US-led forces killed 37% of civilian victims.
Anti-occupation forces/insurgents killed 9% of civilian victims"

And remember,NONE of these would have died if America had not illegally invaded a sovereign country.

When you commit a crime you also assume responsibility for its consequences.Go to any court of law to see what judges and juries think of criminals blaming the victim for the aggression.

US led forces were responsible for 37%. Ergo, 63 % of the civilian deaths in Iraq are by non US led forces. MOST of the deaths in Iraq are from other Iraqis, insurgents, terrorists, criminals, etc.


DO you have any comments on the people causing 63% of the Iraqi civilian deaths? None of these 63% of the civilians would have died if insurgents, terrorists, criminals, etc had not done the killing. The US does not "make" terrorists, criminals, etc., kill Iraqi babies and other innocent civilians

the words illegal and war don't bother you in the slightest?
that you are a supporter of war?preemptive war?
Because by your logic Iran would have the perfect right to nuke the united states or israel preemptively as they are a imminent threat to its sovereignty.

so the Americans only killed 1/3 of the babies, i'm impressed by your logic.Whats a few dead babies when we can spread democracy..oh wait.. sharia law..i forgot..

insurgents, terrorists, criminals, etc. I find it interesting that you seem only concerned about the 1/3. Perhaps some of the photos you showed yesterday were caused by the so-called "freedom fighters" and the terrorists and insurgents. It wouldn't surprise me at all as most of the deaths of innocent civilians these days is from these people and NOT THE US.

You could spin it this way...

The US caused 37% of the casualties and those opposed to the US occupation only 9% of the total. Thus the US is killing 4 Iraqi civilians for everyone killed by the resistance.

And w/r to the criminal element. US generals have admitted they do NOT have enough troops there to police or control the population which has led to this state. It was predicted to happen, but he US did nothing to plan or prevent it. Whose fault is this? The anti-Occupation? Of course not.

Now of course I am being a tad sarcastic here.

The real issue is that civilians are dying and dying at a rate far greater than any period under Saddam. If Saddam was bad, what does this make the current situation? Where is the cause? You say this war was justified, but even if you assume this position (which I feel is not given the lack of support from the World), the lack of planning on the US and the celerity with which Bush and the NeoCons pulled the US unprepared into this fiasco is criminal.

At this point current predictions are that the situation is going to deteriorate further and that there is nothing the US military can do. I put to you that for all the complaining about Europe not helping militarily that there was never a military solution. You cannot fight an idea. It takes a different tack, one of the many subtleties which escapes Bush.

By going into Iraq Bush and company have ruined the US treasury, lied to the US populace on multiple occasions, and have stolen the future of at least two generations of Iraqis who are now lost to terrorism.

Iraq was Bush's Gallipoli. We are fighting the last war and have committed ourselves to the wrong engagement at the wrong time and place. As a result we are foolishly playing the enemy's game which makes us much less safer than we were Sept 12.

London and Spain are only the opening salvos of Bush's failure. It will only get worse if we continue thinking this is a military problem.

yes it is a combination where the battlefield is both ideology and military.....and the war is to be fought with both...using just one piece of the arsenal will not work.

what to me is obvious is that the situation today in iraq is that muslims, whether they are iraqis or from elsewhere are activly looking to kill iraqis.....as cold as it sounds, if they were killing americans i would have a differernt take on it. It doesnt matter that the americans, etc are more difficult to kill, they simply are not being targeted like the iraqi in the street. (btw if there was a general uprising we wouldnt see americans soldiers just walking around-the IDF stopped just "walking around" years ago in gaza-that was a general uprising)

but this actually isnt very new.....whats new about it, is the fierce opposition to a govt that is allied with the west, with civil rights, with democracy. And that is what this war is about, thats the ideological part....and if the iraqis go for shari law, then it will have been lost and a waste and a mistake....until then I withhold my judgement.

egypt as an example plays a dual game, as does saudi arabia, pretending to be allied with the west, but within the countries fiercly opposing western values...iraq is the first attempt to do it openly, whether or not the arab/muslim society can accept that is precisly what the battle is all about.

the killing being done now.....is based on the idea: western values within iraq or not

Not only did I never say this, I have never, ever thought this. I have been TOTALLY against this war from the time Bush started beating the war drums and I think it is one of the most disastrously and profoundly stupid and idiotic things this country has ever done. It is indicative of his arrogance, lack of historical knowledge of the region, his shoot from the hip style, his lack of intelligence, etc.

Now, will I argue with people when they say the US is killing "all" these civilians? Yes, because I think most people in the last few months are being killed by the the suicide bombers coming in from other countries, the insurgents, etc. (Per the web site Iraq Body Count, which supports my contention.) That does not make me a bushie. I will go for accuracy every time and first of all. Whether that accuracy supports a liberal, conservative, barbarian or Karl Marx or Dolly Parton, whatever or whoever, I don't care. First I will go for the stats. You will note these numbers are far lower than the 100,000 dead that have been on the various boards a few weeks ago, which at that time, I remarked to a poster, seemed pretty high. I think this web site seems quite concerned about accuracy and substantiation of data to the point of neutral stance and non-propagandizing, even though it supports a basic antiwar stance if you go to the contacts and commentary sections. Also since they will show up in Buzzflash, that was a plus as I like that website.

As I said to a poster here on this board, nobody forces a person to come to Iraq and blow himself up and also innocent people who are just minding their own business. That can't be blamed on the US. It has to be blamed on the person who willfully strapped those explosives on their bodies. Jimmy Carter also commented this weekend similarly, that the terrorists are using Iraq as an excuse. Of course, Bush, by starting this disaster, gives them an excuse. But the free will of that damned terrorist is the last will for determining whether some kid and his mother end up with their flesh and brains scattered all over surrounding buildings. The terrorists are trying to force their will on the people of this country when they have already voted for the government they wanted. I believe the intent of the terrorists is to install their own government AGAINST THE WILL OF THE IRAQI PEOPLE. If you do not agree with this analysis, then what would be the reason they are terrorizing all of these innocent people who have already voted for their government. To me it says, they don't care that the Iraqi people have already voted, they have no respect for their civil and voting rights and they have no respect that these citizens of this country should have the kind of government they want. What in fact is the only thing preventing the terrorists from stopping the Iraqi people having their proposed Constitution? The US soldiers. So for right now, I am very pro US soldier. They have established some order or at least the perception of some order. No society can function without some order, especially a new government under barrage from insurgents, terrorists, etc.

I think what is happening there now is an attempt to destabilize Iraq and that Constitution any way they can. The US is trying to see the Constitution go forward and that the people have the kind of government they voted in. How can this not be supported? Can anyone rationally support a terrorist who goes against the wishes of the legitimate government and its people when voting has already taken place. In a word, NO.

These disgusting bombings of innocent people and on the infrastrucure will continue until the terrorists try to destabilize the new government. Then religious rule will presumably come in and all civil rights will be out the door, especially for women. I think there is (from the time before the war began and including today) also a somewhat decent chance for a protracted civil war and that the country will split into three sections: Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis. And that this may proceed to destabilize the Middle East.


I thought before the war started that it could do nothing but deteriorate into an unfixable mess and make things worse than before the war. That is coming true. Yes, the Treasury is being drained dry, lies on top of lies have occurred over this war, we have screwed up the infrastructure, etc. It is a catastrophe of gargantuan proportions for Iraq and the US. I think the people of Iraq will be worse off than they were before the war under Saddam.

The only "police force" there right now is the US and the training of the Iraqis is taking seemingly forever. If we left today, I think there would be anarchy within a week and al qaida types would swoop right in (as they are doing anyway) and establish a theocratic dictatorship. To stabilize the country and get it running again would probably take 500, 000 US soldiers and I don't want to see that happen. It would just mean a lot more Americans get killed and the same result could still happen. I think the generals were right in their original numbers needed and Rummy fired the guys who didn't tell him what he wanted to hear about going in lean and mean.

I basically think in some fashion or other there will be civil war and nothing good will come of it. With the Constitution there will be few civil rights because the proposed sharia inclusion will preclude extensive civil rights. With a full blown theocracratic dictatorship I think Iraqis can kiss civil rights in general goodbye. No good can come out of this situation. However,I still think that some form of an even poor Constitution is better than a theocratric dictatorship. I simply don't expect the republic form of government to hold together with this amount of terrorism.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/07/31/carter050731.html


Guantanamo a 'disgrace,' says Carter
Last Updated Sun, 31 Jul 2005 15:52:12 EDT
CBC News
Former U.S. president Jimmy Carter has called the holding of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba a shameful act that extremists use to justify their attacks on the West.


Carter, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, also said the Iraq war was "unnecessary and unjust" in comments this weekend at the Baptist World Alliance centenary conference in Birmingham, England.

snip
"I wouldn't say it's the cause of terrorism, but it has given impetus and excuses to potential terrorists to lash out at our country and justify their despicable acts," he added."
snip


-------

It is this point, this last sentence immediately above that I agree with Carter 100%. Terrorists use excuses to "justify their despicable acts." One would think the so-called "freedom fighters" should have stopped their fighting once the people of Iraq freely voted for whomever they wanted a few months ago. I think they can't have any other purpose for their acts that continue day after day other than to destabilize and insert their own leaders against the will of the Iraq citizens.

Which is an excellent movie and quite appropriate and relevent to both I/P and US/Iraq.


It is this point, this last sentence immediately above that I agree with Carter 100%. Terrorists use excuses to "justify their despicable acts." One would think the so-called "freedom fighters" should have stopped their fighting once the people of Iraq freely voted for whomever they wanted a few months ago. I think they can't have any other purpose for their acts that continue day after day other than to destabilize and insert their own leaders against the will of the Iraq citizens.

I think Carter and yourself are missing a point. Terrorists do not need an excuse, they are the committed.

Rather, what their intent is to foster an environment where the opposing side will commit even stronger and more egregious acts in retribution. The hope is that these more egregious acts will cause greater sympathy among the general populace. The hearts and minds.

The US and Israel have got to realize that they are already fighting an uphill battle due to cultural and other differences and that any mis-step will not be so easily forgotten. If you will, the terrorists have the "interior lines" w/r to culture.

Israel has a rather long history of disproportionate response in the OT. Add to that the settlements, it is easy for Israel to be perceived as a conquering/colonial power and not as a caretaker.

The same with the US in their focus on the oil and oil production infrastructure and not the well-being of the Iraqi populace and culture in the days immediately following the invasion. And while the new government is more representative than the first provisional governments, they are still perceived as operating under the auspices of US military control and the entrenched (contractual) legacy of the previous (Bremmer) regimes. Even so, there was rather strong and blatant US efforts to manipulate the electoral process thru campaign funding, candidate selection and voter coercion (thru either direct or implied bribery thru food and other items) though nothing as crass as ballot tampering.

And of course you have the very real fact that for most Iraqi's, things have NOT gotten better under US control after two years of occupation. The US is now being perceived as an impediment, not a facilitator.

You ask about Sharia Law and why aren't people more concerned about it being enacted by a religious government? The issue is that US policy has essentially forced this outcome - it was rather well predicted outcome prior to the war if certain situations were allowed to come into being. At this time, I hate to say it, but I think it is too late to prevent it. The Iraqi public opinion of the US is pretty much well decided.

A strong Islamic government is perceived as not only a strong nationalistic government, but also as an effective way to counter the perceived US control and domination both militarily and culturally. Iran went the same way back in the 1980's for the same reasons - it was a local response to perceived outside domination. Afghanistan as well a few years later.

Saw it in the 60s. You can't POSSIBLY be suggesting there might be just a few parallels. :sarcasm:

There is one major diff and that is the colonialism angle France wanted to keep going. I think if Bush ever had such thoughts about Iraq, he sure isn't entertaining them anymore. All those little things in the news about reducing the US troop numbers there....

a military dictatorship to be precise.

So to someone who is well informed it looks a bit strange when one sees such wholehearted support of a military dictatorship in its oppression of schools.
Because thats what the word madrassa means in Arabic.
School.

And incase you forgot,or it was not reported in the new,i'll remind you it was the head of the ISI (pakistans version of the cia) who wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker.

You dont have to take my word for it,here are the words of Michael Meacher,he is Labour MP for Oldham West and Royton. He was environment minister 1997-2003.He has 30+ years of experience serving in the UK parliament and this is what he had to say about pakistan and who runs it:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1266520,00.html

"For years the CIA used the ISI as a conduit to pump billions of dollars into militant Islamist groups in Afghanistan, both before and after the Soviet invasion of 1979.

With CIA backing, the ISI has developed, since the early 1980s, into a parallel structure, a state within a state, with staff and informers estimated by some at 150,000. It wields enormous power over all aspects of government. The case of Ahmed confirms that parts of the ISI directly supported and financed al-Qaida, and it has long been established that the ISI has acted as go-between in intelligence operations on behalf of the CIA.

Senator Bob Graham, chairman of the Senate select committee on intelligence, has said: "I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted, not just in financing ... by a sovereign foreign government." In that context, Horst Ehmke, former coordinator of the West German secret services, observed: "Terrorists could not have carried out such an operation with four hijacked planes without the support of a secret service."

Just a history lesson and a heads-up so people know who they are rooting for,a military dictatorship, infiltrated by the cia, that paid 100,000 to the man responsible for killing 3000+ people on 9-11

Lots of really poor people, nuclear weapons and also terrorists right in the government (head of ISI)....