Terrorism pays
Mohammed Khalid, that effervescent Islamist MP, wants to gift the five erstwhile Guantanamo detainees BD50,000 (~US$132k) as a “for the suffering and torture they were forced to endure in the US prison camp“.
Huh? Oy! Bub! Listen: when we defended their right to a fair trial we didn’t sign up to make them the luminaries of society. Those men chose to go into a war zone to do goodness’ knows what and they might have participated in terrorism and terrorist activities. These things we will never know now because a trial was not forthcoming and the chat they had with the public prosecutor on their arrival home was not published – as it should have as we have a right to know.
Now you just want to cut them a blank cheque from my money? No way smartypants. They do not deserve this magnanimous gesture of yours. If you want to give them money from your own pocket then that’s completely up to you, but don’t lumber the country with yet another bill just to polish your name in your own circles. This is just not on. And if Saudi chooses to give its own citizens money, a car and even pay for their wedding just because they were in Gitmo for a while, that’s completely up to them and it doesn’t concern us, but don’t you bloody well dare to pull that stunt here boyo.
If the parliament really adopts this brainfart it is as if they accept and even condone terrorism. It is tantamount to announcing to the world that terrorism pays! Wasn’t it you and your ilk who fully supported the Law Against Terrorism in parliament? Whatisitwijyouboy? Double standards is your way of life?
Listen, they made their own beds and now they should bloody well lie in them. They are now free and not thanks to your “efforts” but that of the BCHR primarily and their activist US lawyers. You jammed yourself right in the middle for your own political gains and most certainly not theirs.
So get off that high horse of yours and don’t go throwing money hither and thither, your job as an MP is to ensure that that does not happen not aid and abet it for God’s sake. Get a life will ya!
That was a sarcastic remark aimed at extremist islamic MP’s like MK; ie, they’re supposed be good muslims, but turn any extremist action into something that is allowed by islam. Sure, AK47, Parliment members? Its good for all of us, why CANT it be wrong?
Steve; Ever been imprisoned there? Then your guess as to what is happening there is as good as ours!
ammaro.com: “Steve; Ever been imprisoned there? Then your guess as to what is happening there is as good as ours!”
Using your fallacious argument that you can only know anything by direct observation: if my argument in defense of Gitmo is invalid because I haven’t been there, then your argument criticizing Gitmo is invalid as well because you haven’t been there.
However, in the real world I have the eyewitness testimony of the Red Cross, press, politicians, and European prison inspectors that backs up the reality that Gitmo is a model prison. The critics of Gitmo have only propaganda to back their view.
I note that you don’t produce any examples of torture at Gitmo. On the contrary, it is the inmates who routinely attack the guards.
@steve
I love it how you are totally confident that torturing is not used in Guantanamo Bay. You don’t have any proof, yet you insist it’s true.
I don’t think the NY Times is an Arab press.
and guess what was the Pentagon’s response?
They didn’t even deny that they rejected the ICRC’s report.
Sadly the ICRC’s report was never published, it was kept hidden from the public so narrow minded people like yourself believe the government’s crap.
FBI agents have been visiting Guantanamo Bay let us see what they said.
Read all about it here.
And many prisoners who left Guantanamo Bay have reported that they were abused and tortured in many ways, and I would believe their claims not yours even though they can’t provide evidence because they were there, you weren’t.
Let’s see, does this topic relate to any way to Al Qaeda’s methods of dealing with prisoners? No. But since you’re insisting I’ll go off topic for a bit and tell you my opinion. Al Qaeda’s methods of torturing and beheading is totally wrong, I know it’s wrong and nothing will ever change my opinion about that. Many if not all Arab governments recognize Al Qaeda as a terrorist cell and Saudi Arabia arrested many people linked to Al Qaeda because they consider their acitvites as terrorist activities.
Not all Arab Muslims are like Al Qaeda, in fact Al Qaeda doesn’t even represent how Arab Muslims are, so don’t generalize.
Hmm for some reason the links to the articles were filtered out, I’ll post them again here.
http://web.archive.org/web/20041208194345/http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6951969
http://www.icrc.org/Web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/iwpList4/C5667B446C9A4DF7C1256F5C00403967
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/21/opinion/21lewis.html?ex=1188360000&en=aef147d9c716f311&ei=5070
Anon: “I love it how you are totally confident that torturing is not used in Guantanamo Bay. You don’t have any proof, yet you insist it’s true.”
It is impossible to prove a negative. Such illogical demands demonstrate the irrationality of the criticism of Gitmo. It is your burden to prove your case, not mine to somehow prove something doesn’t exist.
Steve: “The fictional torture regime is a typical figment of the wildly bigoted Arab press.”
Anon: “I don’t think the NY Times is an Arab press.”
No, though both are deeply biased and share an anti-American prejudice. Both also feature fiction as fact on their front pages.
NYT: “An ICRC inspection team that spent most of June at Guantanamo Bay reported the use of psychological and sometimes physical coercion on the prisoners, the newspaper said.”
Coercion is not torture. Anon, you might consider that all prisons are inherently coercive. Psychological coercion is a feature of any interrogation, even the soft sell approaches. It’s part of interrogation to reward cooperation with food and privileges and to punish noncooperation by withdrawing that food (meaning snacks like chocolate, etc, not their meals) and privileges. That’s psychologically coercive, but not torture.
Likewise, physical coercion is unavoidable with hard core prisoners like those at Gitmo who attack their guards constantly, even setting up elaborate ambushes with improvised weapons made of fan blades, etc. A tactical team making a hard entry into a cell to control a riot is physical coercive, but it’s not torture.
Your charge of torture here is based on sloppy reading. And really, is it really a surprise that holding terrorists captive may require coercion?
Anon: “Sadly the ICRC’s report was never published, it was kept hidden from the public so narrow minded people like yourself believe the government’s crap.”
May I point out the rather obvious fact that you can not cite the Red Cross’s report because it’s confidential and the examples you cited from this memorandum does not mention torture. You’re stretching “coercion” to make a charge of torture.
Anon: “FBI agents have been visiting Guantanamo Bay let us see what they said.
Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation observed what went on in Guantánamo. One reported on July 29, 2004: “On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves and had been left there for 18, 24 hours or more.””
Sounds like the kind of treatment applied to violent prisoners. It’s probably pretty unpleasant to piss on yourself, but it’s not exactly torture. Such nonviolent restraint is likely to give a terrorist dedicated to killing an American something to think about when considering violence in the future.
Anon: “And many prisoners who left Guantanamo Bay have reported that they were abused and tortured in many ways, and I would believe their claims not yours even though they can’t provide evidence because they were there, you weren’t.”
You must be the last person in the world to know that the Al Qaeda manual says that when taken prisoner you always claim publicly that you have been tortured. I have no doubt you would take the terrorists word for your sympathies lie with them.
Anon: “Let’s see, does this topic relate to any way to Al Qaeda’s methods of dealing with prisoners? No. But since you’re insisting I’ll go off topic for a bit and tell you my opinion. Al Qaeda’s methods of torturing and beheading is totally wrong, I know it’s wrong and nothing will ever change my opinion about that. Many if not all Arab governments recognize Al Qaeda as a terrorist cell and Saudi Arabia arrested many people linked to Al Qaeda because they consider their acitvites as terrorist activities.”
Saudi Arabia supported Al Qaeda when it perpetrated its violence abroad. It covered for Al Qaeda when it perpetrated its initial acts of violence in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis only object to terror in Saudi Arabia. They are for terrorism everywhere else.
Likewise, the Jordanians thought Zarqawi was great until he started bombing weddings in Jordan. They thought Zarqawis headcutting was great when he did it in Iraq.
If you really believed torture of prisoners was wrong, you’d be all over Al Qaeda like white on rice. Instead you chase phony grievances against America because your bias against America trumps reason.
Steve: “Why don’t you hold Arab Muslims to the same standard of civilized behavior as America?”
Anon: “Not all Arab Muslims are like Al Qaeda, in fact Al Qaeda doesn’t even represent how Arab Muslims are, so don’t generalize.”
Osama Bin Laden remains popular in the Arab Muslim world, where his posters adorn the walls of homes, his videos are eagerly watched, and his face adorns T-shirts. And the Muslim world celebrated Bin Laden when he killed Americans by the thousands.
The Arab Muslim world supports Bin Laden. Your contrived attack on Gitmo is an expression of that support.
Please don’t generalize the muslim world. The people you talk of are ignorant ones who are so out of touch with Islam it’s ridiculous. Either that, or they have a strong hate for American policies that have probably caused much harm to them and their families (by supporting Israel, attcking Iraq, etc), that they would rather side with the enemy.
The large majority of arabs and muslims are against Al Qaeda, and condone their actions. Unfortunately, no matter how much we try to say that to people like yourself, you won’t accept it because you seem to have such a strong belief that if you are arab or muslim, you are automatically a terrorist at heart. For your information, I have lived in the US, I have lived in London, I have lived in Kuwait, UAE, and Bahrain; I have friends from all over, and i’ve seen how people are. This is what I base my arguments on. What do you base yours on?
he means DO NOT condone of course, before you not giving him the benefit of the doubt. And I second Ammar’s point of view here.
thanks mahmood;
Anon,
You seem to have tried to hijack the issue here. I can’t help it but feel that you have tried to make the culprits the victims but I think you have failed!
You have over looked the fact that these people (or at least most of them) went to Afghanistan to plot the murder of innocent Americans, Brits, Spaniards and countless others who were going about their daily lives.
Mahmood has raised a fair question; Terrorism pays?
No you would not answer it. That is not the issue for you. It is the welfare of those cold bloodied murderers and would be ones that seem to matter most to you. You have tried to find something to tarnish the reputation of Guantanamo Bay. It seems you have done a good search over the net in a desparate attempt to come up with something to support your views. It is a maximum security jail after all. It is not a 5 star hotel is it?
There is no question. People should be treated humanly in as much as possible and that should apply even to people on death row. But if we were to take your argument a step further then jailing people is inhumane is it not? Is it also not inhumane to execute people who are guilty of murder? Where will it end? Murderers walking about freely in our streets? Would that make you happy?
Look Anon you are trying to find faults here and there within the US and how she treats her most dangerous prisoners. God knows how much time you spent trying to find out the odd report that is critical of GB. Who told you the US is a virtuous country? I have not heard an American say they are have you? Has there ever been a virtuous society in all of human history?
People make mistakes and so do nations. I would not be surprised if Steve the American admits here that America is not perfect afterall. But can you name me a more perfect, or if you like it, a less imperfect country?
The US should be commanded for the restraint she has shown in the face of extreme adversary and in dealing with an enemy so inhuman it would boost about beheading people and take joy and pride in filming their painful death.
The murder and beheading of an innocent man like Paul Johnson Jr trying to fork out an honest living in a far away land was a shameful and barbaric act. You of course, will condemn it too and I will take your words that you are against Alqaaida at face value. I believe you. However, you seem to have spent more time complaining at the treatment of those who helped, planned or actively supported such a horrendous crime than on their victims. So much fairness and humanity from you! Do not blame me if I suspect that it is all crocodile teas that you are shedding?
One last thing so you do not misunderstand me;
I disagree with you Steve on one count at least. I think your generalization about the Arab and Muslim world is extreme, unfair and has no resemblence to the facts on the ground. I am part of this world and I can tell you that you as an American would probably be safer in the streets of Bahrain and Dubai than in the streets of New York or LA.
sad to see kids standing there w/ such hate on their faces…. and for what?!
ammaro.com: “Please don’t generalize the muslim world. The people you talk of are ignorant ones who are so out of touch with Islam it’s ridiculous. Either that, or they have a strong hate for American policies that have probably caused much harm to them and their families (by supporting Israel, attcking Iraq, etc), that they would rather side with the enemy.”
Ammaro, there was a poster in this forum about a year ago who was one of the lucky ones who escaped from the World Trade Center on Sep 11. While fleeing, he happenned upon a mosque where the Muslim members were on the street celebrating the sight of the burning building. I have learned since that there was a similar celebration at a mosque across the bay in New Jersey when the Muslims there beheld New York City on fire.
Now New York is host to many people of many religions, but only the Muslims had the obscene first reaction of celebrating the deaths of their neighbors. Since these celebrations occurred at mosques, it leads me to believe that these are Muslims who are very much in touch with Islam.
You would have greater success in convincing me that Muslims hate America due to its foreign policy if Muslims reacted positively to American foreign policy which benefits them. They don’t. When America defended Muslims in the Balkans, it was met with indifference. When we defended Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, we received no praise in the Muslim world. Our foreign policy toward Saudi Arabia has been angelic, making them stupendously rich and lifting them into the modern world of roads and air conditioning, and they hate us the most. They were outraged that American troops defended them against Saddam.
The Arab Muslim reaction to all things American is negative. Bernard Lewis, Middle Eastern history professor from Princeton, says that the ultimate complaint against America and the West by Muslims is religious, that Muslims are outraged that non-Muslims are the dominant power in the world. In the end, Muslim hatred for America in the West is simple bigotry, drummed into their heads by the mosque, schools, and media with their mothers milk.
ammaro.com: “The large majority of arabs and muslims are against Al Qaeda, and [do not] condone their actions. Unfortunately, no matter how much we try to say that to people like yourself, you won’t accept it because you seem to have such a strong belief that if you are arab or muslim, you are automatically a terrorist at heart. For your information, I have lived in the US, I have lived in London, I have lived in Kuwait, UAE, and Bahrain; I have friends from all over, and i’ve seen how people are. This is what I base my arguments on. What do you base yours on?
My sense is that the majority of Muslims are sympathetic to the goals of the terrorists, ie to overturn all non-Muslim governments and replace them with Sharia states, and sympathize with their violent means to varying degrees. That is borne out by polls in England where large minorites of British Muslims support suicide bombing.
Lesser things are quite striking in their illustration of a Muslim world that thrives on hate. For example, I read an account of a British professor who went for a stroll in a local Muslim neighborhood to be met with angry glares. He was wearing a shirt with the insignia of his alma mater which included a cross. Many, many of these accounts paint a dark picture of Muslim tolerance for non-Muslims.
Beyond that, I base my opinion of Muslim support for terror on the continual execution or uncovering of Muslim terror plots in the West. I was in the crowd listening during the Muslim demonstration across from the White House last summer in support for Hezbollah in its war against Israel. I heard Muslims denounce America and blame it for the war in the most venomous terms in front of a crowd of five thousand Muslims shouting Allah Akbar. I heard what they said to each other in the crowd, calling the US military murderers, among other slanders, before being hushed by their friends lest infidels hear.
A year before that, a Muslim lawyer here tried to organize a demonstration of Muslims against Islamic terror. Only fifty people showed. All the Muslims mosques and organizations talked him down if not openly condemning him. When only fifty people show up to rally against Islamic terror but five thousand Muslims drive in from out of town to support the death lovers of Hezbollah, that tells me that Muslims support terror over peace by about a hundred to one.
The way to convince people like me that Islam is a religion of peace and Muslims bear non-Muslims good will is for Muslims to stop killing for their religion, for Muslims to give up their many wars around the world with their non-Muslim neighbors, for Islam to give up its bloody imperialistic aggression.
Abdulkarim: “Who told you the US is a virtuous country? I have not heard an American say they are have you? Has there ever been a virtuous society in all of human history?”
I am an American and I’m telling you that America is a virtuous country. For example, look at the generous way we treated the conquered nations of Germany and Japan after WWII. Both countries had tried to enslave their neighbors. We did not imitate them but rather restored their individual liberty, their economies, their countries until each became an economic superpower. Where else in history has a conqueror been so virtuous in its treatment of a vanquished enemy?
Likewise, we have been virtuous in our treatment of Saudi Arabia. When we found oil under the Saudis feet, we did not invade them or make them our colony or territory. We made them our business partners and arranged things so that they would profit vastly with little effort on their part. That, too, demonstrates a virtuous America.
Abdulkarim: “People make mistakes and so do nations. I would not be surprised if Steve the American admits here that America is not perfect afterall. But can you name me a more perfect, or if you like it, a less imperfect country?”
America is not perfect. There you have it, said by Steve the American. The difference between America and the rest of the world is that when imperfections are recognized, we fix them.
What rubbish. Had that been the case you wouldn’t have elected that baboon back into office again. I bet if he decided to change the Constitution to allow limitless terms because he had a dream and an epiphany from God, you would all run clapping and screaming that it’s a bloody good idea!
Fix them my big toe.
Steve you need to wake up from your purple dreams.
So, Mahmood, you don’t like Bush, which is hardly a surprise, but your criticism is not exactly rational, is it? I’m reading a biography of Lincoln every day at lunch and I am struck by how similar the abuse of Lincoln is to the abuse of Bush. They called Lincoln the original gorilla, an orangatan, a butcher, a simpleton, incompetent, etc. From my perspective, Bush is a very good president because he took the Muslims’ war of terror to the Muslims. If the Muslims want war with us, I’d rather fight it in their home than mine.
However, I wasn’t talking about Bush when I said America fixes its problems but rather about the mechanisms in our Constitution which allow for ammendment of bad laws, such as slavery and prohibition, and allows for reaction to changes in circumstances. This is better than most countries which stumble along without any laws the government is bound to respect and rely on the whim of each strong man who takes power. In such cases, you are not distilling the lessons learned into law as a foundation for the future. It’s better than the Muslim countries who take the Koran as their constitution and therefore are locked into an inflexible position that can not respond well to change.
No argument there, from me at least and I have highlighted this particular view on countless occasions.
I will not be able to comment on the similarities or otherwise between your two presidents as I don’t know much about the former to make an informed opinion other than the snippets which I know he has done good for not only your country but the whole world.
The latter though leaves a lot to be desired, least of which is the lack of intellect and the affirmation that you don’t need to be smart to run a country; in fact, it is best not to be so as then the real movers and shakers and king makers have an unadultrated chance to run him as they like and offer him as a scapegoat when convenient. That has backfired in their faces several times (the crusades and more recently Vietnam remarks and countless others I suspect).
The thing you are missing; however, is that you (America) does have a responsibility to the rest of the world in NOT promoting violence and force to resolve political disputes. That it disregards this responsibility with gusto and do so in my doorstep is something that neither I nor the rest of those who live here will be quiet about.
As for your assertion that you are better served in fighting your fights in our neighbourhood rather than yours might be a temporary illusion as I am convinced that – just like cornered rats – terrorists will get creative in at least attempting to wreak havoc in yours sooner than you think possible, and eventuality I pray does not happen, but people like you – again unfortunately – are at the forefront of inviting such catastrophes to your doorsteps by your abject refusal to understand and your consistent bankrupt generalisations.
I’m not going to argue with you Steve. Based in the US, it’s really tough to have an unbiased decision. You’re bombed everyday with tv shows, programs, movies, people, politics and so on, showing that muslims, or arabs, are the bad people. truth is, when i was there, there were moments where i felt scared when i saw someone in a turban and beard. its a psychological issue and my knowledge of psychology isn’t of a professional level, so i wont go into that.
I’m not going to argue with you that there have been a lot of “muslims” who have killed, blown up buildings and people, rejoiced when people were killed. But again, this isn’t the majority of them. You might believe they are as the sample of muslims you have managed to see isn’t representative of the whole. And these aren’t real muslims; these are people who take the holy quraan, interpret it with twisted logic to their own benefit, and then play it out for the harm of others. And since they label themselves muslim, and they stand out, you believe that a majority, if not all, muslims are like that.
Our youth wear Tommy Hilfiger jeans, they listen to hip-hop and heavy metal, they drive chevy’s and fords, eat at Chilis and Mcdonalds. You tell us we hate the Americans? We hate the american policies. We despise most of them, infact, especially with regard to our region, but we don’t hate america or americans. I have a large number of american friends, both from when I lived in the US, and even here in Bahrain. They like the place. Hell, I know one American who loves this country and its people so much, he doesn’t want to move back.
Islam is a religion of peace. Arabs have no interest in bombing or killing americans, britons, or any other people for that matter. Hell, we visit your countries every summer, we really don’t need the headache of being looked at like the bad people!
Steve, i’m not asking you to accept what I say blindly; you have your own views from things that you’ve seen around you. I urge you to meet some muslims, some arabs, visit a few countries, visit a few forums. Avoid the extremists, who make up a small percentage, and are NOT muslims, no matter what they say.
Stevi! Stevi! Stevi!
I do not agree with everything you said but you speak words of true wisdom I tell you! I mean it!
The Arabs and the Muslims have to realize that all humans are children of God. Not only them. They must not judge people by their faiths but by their conducts and contributions to humanity at large. They must stop looking at people as either true believers or infidels. Only then will other people like Steve be able to accept them as peaceful people.
Coming back to our own exchanges Steve, I initially asked Anon “Who told you the US is a completely virtuous country?” I removed the word “completely” just before I posted it. I would have left had I known that you would respond the way you did. I wanted to bounce the ball back into Anon’s court.
If you look back at some of my earlier contributions in Mahmood’s Den you will find that I have expressed exactly the same views as yours on Germany and Japan. I have even drawn resemblance as to what the greatest power of the ancient world (Rome) did to her defeated enemies (e.g. Carthage) and compared that to what the greatest power of the modern world (the US) did to her defeated enemies (Japan and Germany). Japan became the second richest country on earth and Germany the third. As for Carthage, well it has yet to recover 2000 years on!! On this count America is truly a virtuous country.
As for Mahmood’s views on George Bush well they are definitely wrong. First of all he is basically saying that the American people are so stupid and would elect any body into office even a baboon. Well what can I say except to say that it is such a naïve thought. In my opinion, George “Wonderful” Bush is a truly wonderful man and I myself shall always be grateful for him for saving the Iraqi people from their mass graves and to his father too before him for saving the Kuwaitis from a similar fate.
It is really pity that people like Mahmood do not appreciate the sacrifice that the American people have made in defeating (or stopping) the Genghis Khans of the modern world; Hitler, Tajo, Stalin, Milosevic and Saddam.
As for the crusade thing well that is another naivety from Mahmood. Mahmood should know better than most that the word “crusade” has no religious or historical implications in every day usage in English. It is just that the Arabs and Muslims made a mountain of a molehill (just like what they did over the cartoon thing in Denmark).
As for ammaro.com one word of advice if I may; please please does not speak on behalf of others. No body has appointed you to do that and you certainly have no right to do so.
“The Arabs and the Muslims have to realize that all humans are children of God. Not only them. They must not judge people by their faiths but by their conducts and contributions to humanity at large. They must stop looking at people as either true believers or infidels. Only then will other people like Steve be able to accept them as peaceful people.”
The Arabs and Muslims have to do that, huh?
Are you retarded?
Surly you jest, Abdulkarim. Do you honestly think anyone around here gives a rat’s ass about Steve acceptance of them? Like you, Steve’s bias and generalizations against the Arab/Muslim world has lost him all credibility. Too bad cause he’s a bright boy with many valid points to make on America’s behalf that just won’t be taken seriously. I do hope you speak only for yourself when you say crap like this.
I do agree Mahmood has the Bush thing wrong; the American public knew exactly what they were doing when they elected W to another term. It was the lesser of two evils, and people wrongly believed Bush would act in America’s best interest. Unfortunately he dropped the ball on a lot of stuff, and I rank him right up there with Jimmy Carter as one of the worse presidents in recent times. It was worth it not to have to look at Al Gore’s face every day for four years.
Well MDC I only spoke for myself. Nowehere did I say I spoke on behalf of somebody else. However, I may be retarded and jest but unless you prove it then I shall take it that I am not!
You have said that what I said was a lot of crap. Well, why do you not be more specific and counter argue each and every point that I or Steve have said? I for one would certinly welcome a healthy debate but please be more scientific. Who knows you may lead me into the true path!
Abdulkarim,
Fun and games, huh? Spoken like a true troll.
Debate you! Would there be some purpose in that? I’m going to tell you the same thing I’ve told others; if I have a question or an opinion, I’ll express it. I have no need to convince you or anyone else of anything and visit the Den for my satisfaction and nothing more. You act like a bigoted asshole; I’m going to call you on it every time.
Mahmood: “The latter though leaves a lot to be desired, least of which is the lack of intellect and the affirmation that you don’t need to be smart to run a country; in fact, it is best not to be so as then the real movers and shakers and king makers have an unadultrated chance to run him as they like and offer him as a scapegoat when convenient.”
Mahmood, I disagree. Certainly Bush is far smarter than his first opponent, Gore, and, in my opinion, roughly equivalent in intellect to Kerry. He is far superior to both in character.
Bush stumbled through his undergraduate years as a C student, not unlike myself, before he got his act together to graduate from Harvard Business School and then go on to Air Force flight school and fly fighters. That requires superior intellect. Dumb fighter pilots die.
Both Gore and Kerry were likewise C students. Gore was dragging the bottom of his classes his first couple years. Gore then went on to flunk out of two different grad schools, law and divinity. In divinity school, he got an F in five out of the eight classes he took. Divinity school sounds pretty easy to me. It would take some sort of superhuman effort to pile up that many failing grades in it. Now the liberals consider him some kinda Brainiac. What a joke.
I think you’re buying into silly liberal propaganda if you contend that he’s a pawn of his subordinates or back office powers.
Mahmood: “That has backfired in their faces several times (the crusades and more recently Vietnam remarks and countless others I suspect).”
As another poster mentioned, the word “crusade” has no religious meaning to Americans other than the antique origin of the word. It’s kind of like saying that since Americans call today Wednesday, we are worshipping the Wodin, the paramount Norse god. When the Muslim world reacted to the word “crusade”, most Americans rolled their eyes at the contrived grievance, just like we reacted to Muslim outrage over Danish cartoons and blasphemous ice cream cones in Scotland and the Apple Mecca in New York. Give us a friggin’ break.
Bush is entirely correct in comparing the disastrous decision to abandon our Vietnamese allies and the wrongheaded and immoral effort to do the same to our Iraqi allies.
Mahmood: “The thing you are missing; however, is that you (America) does have a responsibility to the rest of the world in NOT promoting violence and force to resolve political disputes. That it disregards this responsibility with gusto and do so in my doorstep is something that neither I nor the rest of those who live here will be quiet about.”
Mahmood, was it America who threw the World Trade Center at those jumbo jets full of peace-loving Muslims on Sep 11? When Muslims slaughter thousands of Americans you can bet we will react strongly to such a murderous provocation and take the jihad back to its staging area in Afghanistan.
Likewise, it was not America who invaded Kuwait out of the blue and even after being soundly beaten and driven out, refused to abide by the surrender agreements. Saddam attempted to assassinate Bush the Elder with a car bomb in Kuwait. He placed bounties on our military people for their death or capture. He fired hundreds of SAMs at our aircraft patrolling the UN no-fly zone. And there is the troubling meetings of Iraqi agents with the Sep 11 skyjackers.
Did all these provocations fall in the memory hole, Mahmood?
Mahmood, if you want to stop all this talk about violence, walk directly to the nearest mosque and stop all this preaching about jihad to take over the world for Allah. Most of the wars in the world right now are carried out by Muslims attacking their neighbors, not by America wanting to get in a fight.
The difference between America and its jihadi opponents in the Middle East is that we fight only so that the locals can establish their own government strong enough so that we can leave. The jihadis fight to conquer and occupy in order to build an empire.
Mahmood: “As for your assertion that you are better served in fighting your fights in our neighbourhood rather than yours might be a temporary illusion as I am convinced that – just like cornered rats – terrorists will get creative in at least attempting to wreak havoc in yours sooner than you think possible, and eventuality I pray does not happen, but people like you – again unfortunately – are at the forefront of inviting such catastrophes to your doorsteps by your abject refusal to understand and your consistent bankrupt generalisations.”
We disagree again, Mahmood. These wars are not fights we want. Had there been no Sep 11, we would not be in Afghanistan nor Iraq. That would have been fine with me. I’ve seen all the young guys on prosthetic legs at Walter Reed I ever want to see. I’d much rather see them chasing girls than learning how to walk again.
The way to fight terrorists is to take their jihad to their homes, to reciprocate their violence with interest, until they see no profit in war and devote themselves to peace, like the Japanese. You don’t win a war against terror by sitting it out at home, wondering where they will attack you next. Offense is the best defense.
That said, continual warfare is not the future for which I hope. I’d much prefer a future where no US troops are deployed to the Middle East, where Arab countries give up their enthusiasm for the export of violent Islam and devote themselves to building up their countries and human capital. Instead of wasting lives and cash on war, I’d like to seem them invest it in universities, real ones, and hospitals and the hundred little things that make modern urban life sweet. I’d like to see us sell goods and services to the Muslim world and buy your stuff in return and everyone gets rich and happy.
However, Islam in its current virulent form is a giant obstacle to that good future.
What mdc wrote: “Do you honestly think anyone around here gives a rat’s ass about Steve acceptance of them? Like you, Steve’s bias and generalizations against the Arab/Muslim world has lost him all credibility. Too bad cause he’s a bright boy with many valid points to make on America’s behalf that just won’t be taken seriously. I do hope you speak only for yourself when you say crap like this.”
What Steve reads: “blah blah blah blah he’s a bright boy with many valid points to make on America’s behalf blah blah blah blah.”
I will take the compliment and run, mdc, thank you very much.
“I will take the compliment and run, mdc, thank you very much.”
You’re welcome, Steve; I may not be the president of your fan club, but I am a fan none the less.
mdc: “You’re welcome, Steve; I may not be the president of your fan club, but I am a fan none the less.”
OK, now I know I can’t possibly be in the real Mahmood’s Den. Somehow that wily Mahmood has tricked me into some parallel Mahmood’s Den universe full of postbots that respond to me with text generated by a fiendishly complex algorithm. I should have caught on that Ibn wasn’t a human poster.
That clever, clever Mahmood has cooked all this up to distract me from the Real Mahmood’s Den which he has hidden from me in some obscure corner of the Internet. I should have known Mahmood would never let me back into his real den. This is some kind of holodeck den.
I’m just letting you know, Mr. Alyousif, your mad scheme is unravelling. I’m on to you.
Abdulkarim:
likewise Abdulkarim.
Steve:
Then how about refusing to supply arms and other toys for $20 billion? Would you like to petition your congress to stop the sale? And while you’re at it, do the same for the $30 billion you’re giving to Israel. Cancel both and we’ll (all of us) be much better.
As to the other points you raised, let’s agree to disagree for now.
Steve:
Then the the tens of thousands Afghanis and Iraqis killed by your forces should be enough to your eye-for-an-eye approach, shouldn’t they? Or would you like to top that figure some to achieve a ratio that would be satisfactory to you?
ammaro.com: “I’m not going to argue with you Steve.”
A resolution made to be broken.
ammaro.com: “Based in the US, it’s really tough to have an unbiased decision. You’re bombed everyday with tv shows, programs, movies, people, politics and so on, showing that muslims, or arabs, are the bad people.”
Actually, the media here tend to whitewash the connection between terror, Islam, and Muslims. The liberals who monopolize the media hold a politically correct line and are terrified lest they be accused of racism. So they spin the news of terror plots in an odd and hilarious way that deletes the references to Muslims and Islam.
When a terror plot makes the news, it’s pretty common for the media to leave out the names or to bury them at the end of the story. It’s become a running joke when the media does this, prompting bloggers to place bets as to how many of the plotters are named Mohammed. The media never names their religion, although it becomes pretty obvious when the members of their mosque testify that the plotters are good Muslims who wouldn’t harm a fly. There was a pretty funny skit on TV where the newscasters try their best to figure out the religion of a group of terrorists. One newscaster suggests Muslims after considering other religions but the other says, “Naw, that’s the religion of peace.” Big laughs.
Some stories are hard to spin, like the Muslim kids who were plotting to shoot up a bunch of buildings in Canada and cut off the head of the prime minister. Then the Internet chatter of their wives was made public where they were demanding their husbands wage jihad and be martyrs. Still the media reported with a straight face the Candadian police commander saying there appeared to be no common ethnic nor religious denominator among the plotters other than they were all youths.
The bottom line is that Muslims are getting a bad reputation because they are committed to doing evil to non-Muslims around the world. I just read about some tiny non-Muslim tribe in some remote and inaccessible corner of Pakistan who are under attack by their Muslim neighbors. Even though they live on land nobody wants, the Muslims make attacks on them because they can’t stand to share the world with infidels.
ammaro.com: “truth is, when i was there, there were moments where i felt scared when i saw someone in a turban and beard. its a psychological issue and my knowledge of psychology isn’t of a professional level, so i wont go into that.”
The only guys in turbans I see are Sikhs. When I see a Sikh, my first thought is that he probably can tell me where a good Indian restaurant is nearby.
ammaro.com: “I’m not going to argue with you that there have been a lot of “muslims” who have killed, blown up buildings and people, rejoiced when people were killed. But again, this isn’t the majority of them. You might believe they are as the sample of muslims you have managed to see isn’t representative of the whole.”
I see the Muslim world as something like a wedding cake. At the very top, you have a few terrorists who are willing to kill for Islam. Under them is a group of Muslims who directly support them with money, food, shelter, papers, whatever. They rest upon a larger group of Muslims who give them only slight support through contributions to phony Muslim charities or through their mosque. That group of Muslims rests upon the larger Muslim community which is unwilling to do violence or directly support it, but is indifferent to the violence done if it benefits them.
I see the majority of Muslims as something like the Poles and Germans during the Nazi occupation. One morning, their Jewish neighbors were gone and the Nazis handed out their businesses and homes. Now those German and Polish civilians were too mild-mannered to gas Jews en masse or shoot them down in a trench, but they didn’t mind them being gone and getting their possessions. They didn’t question it or care about their neighbors fate.
Likewise, most Muslims wouldn’t pick up a gun and shoot an infidel in the head but they are indifferent to terrorists doing it if it advances Islam. There is no groundswell of Muslims who oppose Islamic terrorism.
ammaro.com: “And these aren’t real muslims; these are people who take the holy quraan, interpret it with twisted logic to their own benefit, and then play it out for the harm of others. And since they label themselves muslim, and they stand out, you believe that a majority, if not all, muslims are like that.”
The terrorists aren’t doing anything Mohammed didn’t do. Skyjacking jumbo jets is the modern equivalent of Mohammed raiding infidel camel caravans. Beheading infidels in snuff videos is simply following Mohammed’s example when he spent a day beheading the Quraish. Assassinating critics of Islam like Van Gogh is no different than Mohammed assassinating poets who criticized him. You don’t need to twist any logic to make the connection that the terrorists are emulating Mohammed, the Perfect Muslim.
However, if you want to reinterpret the Koran so that it’s all sunshine and roses and Muslims swear off their jihad against the world, I’m willing to play along if it stops the killing. I recommend you get a big eraser to rub out all those surahs and hadith where Allah tells you to convert, subjugate, or kill the infidels.
ammaro.com: “Islam is a religion of peace.”
This is a sick joke when Muslims are bombing people into bloody chunks from New York to Bali. Where ever Muslims go, they make war on their neighbors.
ammaro.com: “Arabs have no interest in bombing or killing americans, britons, or any other people for that matter.”
Why do they keep doing it, then? Every airport in the world must maintain elaborate defenses against Arabs seeking to plant bombs on airplanes. Even our shoes must be inspected lest Muslims smuggle a bomb on board in them. Some airports are now installing sniffer machines to detect explosives on your person because of the Muslim jihad on the world. We can no longer carry more than three ounces of shampoo or shaving cream nor carry drinks bought outside the airport because Muslims are devising ways to smuggle bombs in them.
Muslims have showed quite a bit of interest in blowing up trains in Madrid, London, and Mumbai.
ammaro.com: “Hell, we visit your countries every summer, we really don’t need the headache of being looked at like the bad people!”
If Arab Muslims built hospitals instead of terror cells, universities instead of bombs, they would be looked upon as good, rather than bad.
Amaro, when I was a kid, I would walk five miles to the local airport. I could walk right out to the planes on the tarmac and take pictures of them. Sometimes, the pilots would pass me, recognize The Look, and take me to the cockpit. I could walk out unchallenged to some corporate aircraft on some parts of the tarmac. The light planes were completely accessible.
Those days are gone. Security bars your access to the jets to stop Muslims smuggling weapons on board. You can’t even wait in front of the airport in your car to pick people up, lest a Muslim drive a car bomb there. Even on the Metro, the loudspeaker constantly reminds you to beware unattended packages, lest Muslims planted bombs in them, as they have done elsewhere. For years after Sep 11, the buses full of school kids visiting the nations capital just disappeared. Nobody wanted their child killed in the latest terror attack by Arab Muslims. The tourists are just now getting back to their Sep 10 levels in DC.
In this way, Arab Muslims have degraded the quality of our lives. If Arab Muslims made things better and safer and friendlier everywhere they went, people would be glad to see them. They haven’t. If there wasn’t an Arab Muslim terror plot uncovered every month, you wouldn’t get sour looks when Americans see you boarding an airplane with them.
If Arab Muslims made things better where ever they went, Americans would be jumping over each other to find ways to get more Arab Muslims to come to America. As it is, we’re trying to find ways to restrict the number of Arab Muslims until they give up their war against us.
ammaro.com: “Steve, i’m not asking you to accept what I say blindly; you have your own views from things that you’ve seen around you. I urge you to meet some muslims, some arabs, visit a few countries, visit a few forums.”
Excellent advice. I think I’ll take it soon.
Great, im glad we got that sorted out. im sorry for lying; me, mahmood, and all the others here are terrorists. Not directly, but yes, we want you all blown up. Thanks for clearing that up.
“The difference between America and the rest of the world is that when imperfections are recognized, we fix them.”
Steve the American, I have been sitting here for weeks lazily reading things here and there and now I have to stick an apple in your mouth.
Are you nuts? That why we have done such an outstanding job fixing: New Orleans, making a mucky mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, immigration, Bushes great idea to cut taxes for the rich in 2001, our obsession with SUV’s and our refusal to raise the tax on gasoline, our love affair with hand guns, our refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty etc.
Oh and DON’T accuse me of being a liberal, one of my favorite presidents was Ronald Reagan. Just because I hate GW Bush the idiot, doesn’t mean I am a liberal.
I am proud of a lot of things that American stands for, but we DO NOT smarten up overnight!!!
You are a smart young man, that is apparent to me, but when are you going to get off of your high horse and recognize that America is far from perfect? When you decide to do that, you will be a deeper, wiser, more credible person.
Perhaps you would have more insight if you came and lived in Bahrain for a while, maybe someone here could help you find a job?
underthepalmtree: “Are you nuts? That why we have done such an outstanding job fixing: New Orleans, making a mucky mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, immigration, Bushes great idea to cut taxes for the rich in 2001, our obsession with SUV’s and our refusal to raise the tax on gasoline, our love affair with hand guns, our refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty etc.”
That’s quite a paragraph of propaganda there. Let’s dissect it.
America can not stop a hurricane from tearing up a city. However, the military did a very good job of managing the Katrina crisis. The civilian government, not so much. New Orleans is a city built below water level, sitting next to a a lake and river which both lie above it. That’s an inherently unfixable situation.
Our mission in Afghanistan was to clear out Al Qaeda and the Taliban and deny it to them as a future base to launch attacks on the US. Mission accomplished. If you follow events in Afghanistan, you will find that intercepted Taliban communications say that they’re are losing. Currently, the Taliban lose 100 for every GI they kill. Those are bad odds for the Taliban.
We’re slowly winning in Iraq, despite the media to the contrary. The Sunnis have turned on Al Qaeda. Our GIs are actually patrolling with former Sunni insurgents against Al Qaeda.
I’ll grant you immigration is a mess, but Bush is right to resist building a Maginot Line down south against immigrants. It won’t work. The Great Wall of China did not stop the Mongols from invading.
Bush’s tax cuts brought in more tax revenue. Those who oppose it are economically illiterate, which includes most liberals. Liberals don’t understand that there is a point of diminishing returns as you increase the tax rate, a point which Congress always pushes past.
The only obsession with SUVs is the insane lefty hatred for them which is based on ignorance. SUVs are not boiling the Earth, as the unhinged lefties claim.
A tax on gas is a tax on freedom which restricts our liberty to come and go as we please. High gas tax is one of the reasons the European economy is so sluggish.
The right to bear arms was included in the Constitution for good reasons by our founding fathers, reasons too numerous to name here. I might point out that handguns save thousands of lives every year and stop many crimes in progress, usually without a shot fired.
The Kyoto Treaty is based on junk science and deserves to be rejected.
For a Reagan Republican, you certainly believe in a lot of very liberal issues.
What’s interesting here is that you believe that your opinions on these issues are absolutely correct and beyond argument, that anyone who deviates from them is absolutely wrong. You’re castigating me here for not agreeing with them. This self-righteousness of yours is typical of liberals and the mark of rigid ideological orthodoxy which makes the Left intellectually sterile.
underthepalmtree: “You are a smart young man, that is apparent to me, but when are you going to get off of your high horse and recognize that America is far from perfect? When you decide to do that, you will be a deeper, wiser, more credible person.”
I’m not that young. If you have been reading this thread, you would have read above where I said America is not perfect. Therefore, that point is moot.
I am deeply unimpressed by your argument that I will be a much deeper, wiser, more credible person if I only agree with you. It’s the argument of a demogogue.
Are you living in a bubble?
Ammaro,
I take it then you have no substantial rebuttal to my point. Your comment is the type I have come to expect from somebody who has not done his homework but takes his positions from whatever seems popular at the time.
Yes, if you tax gas you are taxing the movement of everything in the economy, which makes it more expensive and slows down the market and kills businesses on the fringe of profitability. Here in America, the laziest dufus can hop in his car and drive across country to where the work is or where better opportunities beckon. Not so in Europe, where ridiculous gas taxes force people into little clown cars that can barely carry their groceries home.
Mahmood: “Then how about refusing to supply arms and other toys for $20 billion? Would you like to petition your congress to stop the sale? And while you’re at it, do the same for the $30 billion you’re giving to Israel. Cancel both and we’ll (all of us) be much better.”
We agree that on the face of it, selling twenty billion bucks worth of arms to the Saudis sounds like a bad idea. However, the problem is mitigated by the Saudi incompetence to use any of the high tech gear they buy. The House of Saud appears to have little interest in developing a competent military that might become their rivals. When the Saudi rulers refuse to allow anyone become more competent than them, they are setting the bar very, very low.
The Saudis see their military as a necessary evil, station them far away from the center of power, and organize them so as to hobble them. They are basically a heavily armed militia. The Saudis remind me of kids I played tennis with in high school who thought that buying the most expensive racquet would make them a great player. It appears that all those jets and tanks the Saudis are buying are used as scarecrows.
Oddly enough, the sale of weapons to the Saudis and Israelis serve the same purpose of deterring Iran. There is a tacit recognition of the Israelis as de facto allies in confronting this threat. The Saudis didn’t pitch their usual fit about weapon sales to Israel this time around. Their Muslim brothers in Iran are far more likely to attack them than the Jews.
Of course, the reason we supply Israel with weapons is to stop their Arab neighbors from perpetrating a second Holocaust. If the Arab Muslims want peace with Israel, they must give up their murderous bigotry toward the Jews. The Arabs should be imitating the Jews success rather than dedicating themselves to a long term religious war of extinction.
Steve, I don’t really come to this blog to debate with the same FOX news people that I can meet of the street, so I won’t go through point by point. But I just have to know….do you really believe that the net effect of handguns in America is to save lives?????????
No no Steve. Remember that we are incompetent fools who can’t organise a piss-up in a brewery. Even then, that particular speciality – creating and perpetuating a Holocaust – is that of Europeans, not us Arabs and Muslims.
So let’s get back to the original question: would you write your congressman a letter of objection of selling the Ayrabs weapons which they may use to subjugate their own people with, and they will?
Using those weapons to fight a war with Israel will never happen and thus a non-issue.
Mahmood;
For the record, I’ve written, though my complaint covered oppressive countries in general.
Tyrannies tend to oppress their people with beatings, torture, guns, and so forth, not with tanks and jet-fighters. Saddam preferred acid baths and appendage removal with saws. Pretty low tech and cheap methods of subjugation.
underthepalmtree: “Steve, I don’t really come to this blog to debate with the same FOX news people that I can meet of the street, so I won’t go through point by point. But I just have to know….do you really believe that the net effect of handguns in America is to save lives?????????”
UPT, that’s one difference between us. I believe in free speech and debate to resolve differences. The kind of people who object to dissent from the liberal orthodoxy from sources like Fox News don’t believe in debate nor free speech. They believe in maintaining a monopoly on speech.
Yes, handguns save far more lives by an order of magnitude than they destroy. Lott estimates that there are two million handgun defenses every year in America, almost all of which are accomplished by merely brandishing the weapon in the view of criminals, something in the neighorhood of 95+%. Undoubtedly, some percentage of those crimes would have progressed to bodily harm or death without a handgun to ward off the perpetrator at the onset of the crime.
Beyond the dry recital of such statistics, I have brandished a handgun to stop a crime in progress in Texas which may have saved two women from harm. Criminals want defenseless victims as their prey, not armed citizens.
Steve: “…the reason we supply Israel with weapons is to stop their Arab neighbors from perpetrating a second Holocaust”
Mahmood: “No no Steve. Remember that we are incompetent fools who can’t organise a piss-up in a brewery. Even then, that particular speciality – creating and perpetuating a Holocaust – is that of Europeans, not us Arabs and Muslims.”
That’s quite a striking visual you’ve dropped on my desk, Mahmood. If I were a drinking man, I believe I’d swear it off.
While I must agree that Muslims would not be so organized in their slaughter of Israelis as the Nazis were of the Jews, still they retain a fearful enthusiasm for such slaughter, urged on by furious sermons in their mosques.
Mahmood: “So let’s get back to the original question: would you write your congressman a letter of objection of selling the Ayrabs weapons which they may use to subjugate their own people with, and they will?”
No, Mahmood. I agree with you in spirit, but disagree that stopping this sale of arms will improve the situation. The first problem is that the Saudis will still buy weapons even if they don’t buy from us. The Russians will be happy to sell them all the MiGs and tanks and artillery they want. That would make it a pointless gesture.
The Saudis will be no more able to use the Russky weapons effectively than the American weapons, so if confronted with a crisis they will outsource their defense again. If not the US, they’ll use Russia. The US has been scrupulously careful to respect Saudi culture and sovereignty. The Russians have no such history of scrupulousness, but are rather quite unscrupulous. Their history has been to subvert such governments and replace them with hand puppet governments that report to Moscow.
Selling these weapons to the Saudis maintains American influence which exerts some minimal moderating force. For example, the US persuaded the Saudis to outlaw slavery. I doubt the Soviets would have cared.
In lieu of trust, the best guarantee for stability in a region is a moderate amount of arms. Being underarmed invites attack. Being overarmed prompts one to believe one could win a war. If everyone is moderately armed, it guards against easy conquest and makes the probability of victory ambiguous. Predators want a sure kill. They attack the wounded and weak.
You make a good point in that these weapons will be used to subjugate the Saudis. While it’s difficult to use an F-15 against an internal rebellion, these weapons indirectly subjugate the Saudi people by propping up the Saudi princes, a nasty crew.
Now, Steve’s Approved Solution would be for the non-Wahhabi Arabians to rise up and hang all the Wahhabi clerics from lampposts and chase the useless princes out of the country into Europe, where they can eke out their days driving cabs for a living. Sadly, this appealing vision seems unlikely.
The other scenario is for Saudi Arabia to change by degrees. As the technological revolution progresses, ordinary Saudis will be able to compare their lives to others and find it wanting. Saudis live sad, pathetic, empty, little half lives compared to Westerners. The popular pressure for progress will build until a crack develops in the Saudi egg of government; maybe when the last of the Sudairi Seven drops dead. Then, perhaps, there will be a little macro-evolutionary spurt towards an environment not ruled by Wahhabi religious maniacs.
However, without the weapons to maintain its sovereignty, a predator nation, like Iran, could scramble the peninsula into an anarchy worse than the present authoritarian theocracy. Then again, maybe the Saudi oil will run out and render all this moot.
Mahmood: “Using those weapons to fight a war with Israel will never happen and thus a non-issue.”
You have more confidence in Arab pacifism than I do. It’s true that a history of defeat has made Arabs wary of war with Israel, but if Israel was wounded, maybe by two or three nukes from Iran, it’s likely all the knives would come out to carve Israel up. I doubt Israel’s Arab neighbors would want their militaries to stand fast when they had the chance to live out the wicked vision of the Koran where even the rocks and trees beckon the Muslims to kill Jews. After all, that’s the key to the Muslim Hour of Ressurection, right?
Maybe less wealthy tyrannies will resort to the methods you outline, and they do of course, we on the other hand are flush with cash and are in a hurry. Jets and bombs do do the nasty much quicker and ultimately cheaper!
Thanks for registering your opposition by writing your officials. Please encourage others to as well.
It wouldn’t. You will have made a stand and made your position known that you do not support oppression. Ultimately, others will do the same too. But if you take the premise as you have that if they don’t buy from you they will buy from someone else so I might as well do it, then where is your integrity?
Oh yes, another chestnut. Like your influence on persuading the Saudis not to let their citizens fly into your buildings you mean? Or the thousands who are fighting your forces (with your own weapons!) in every spot on Earth not just Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan?
Oh come come, why not just shoot them through the head with a high-powered M16 that you sold to them in the first place?
Pah, they’re moving more into Eastern Europe now and apparently rather enjoying the new climes!
Steve, you poor misguided man.
According to the CDC, (Center for Disease Control) more than 4,300 young people (under 24) were murdered by firearms in 2004; another 2,163 took their own lives using guns.
I am sure that their parents would be quite comforted to hear how you saved two women from “harm” with your handgun.
I will pray for you Steve, that no one that you love comes to harm in the crossfire.
However, I am not going to spend one more minute of my time arguing with someone that is SO out of touch with reality.
Everyone else…..please do not believe that “Steve the American” represents the views of most of my thoughtful countrymen.
1
http://www.cdc/gov/ncipc/osp/charts.htm
sorry…..
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/osp/charts.htm
UnderthePalmTree;
Most handgun murders involve drug dealers and gang members settling scores. They are hardly innocent victims. You should not waste tears on them, like their useless parents. Given that there are 300 million privately owned firearms in the United States, a gun murder rate of 4300 a year shows a remarkably restrained population.
If you don’t travel with shady company, your odds of dying from a bullet are pretty much zero.
underthepalmtree,
“Everyone else…..please do not believe that “Steve the American” represents the views of most of my thoughtful countrymen.”
While any death from firearms (or any other violent means) is tragic, perhaps you should spend more time on polls about Americans views about guns and gun control before you paint Steve as some rogue off the wall gun nut. No doubt in my mind that Steve and other Americans have given as much thought and time to gun control as you have; your attempt to paint him and anyone else who agrees with him as somehow less of an American is arrogant, offensive and just plain stupid.
I dunno UnderThePalmTree, but gun control seems to me to be more than a little tangential to this thread, yet you (to my reading) present it as your center piece for chastising SteveTheAmerican with , “[Y]ou poor misguided man,” demonstrating that he’s “so out of touch with reality” and advising everyone not to believe that “represents the views of most of my thoughtful countrymen.” As a “thoughtful countrymen,” allow me to register my disagreement with your gun control views (I know that you haven’t laid them out, but I’m willing to bet that mine are sufficiently different to merit your condemnation, both as to my lack of thoughtfulness and lack of common sense). I would also ask you to reflect on the fact that no one took it upon themselves to caution the world that not all Americans are unable to see a difference between girls engaging in erotic 18+ “dancing” and those engaged in prostitution.
What I can’t figure out is why Steve persistently returns to a theme that all Muslims have terrorism in their hearts or some such thing. When pressed, he will soften it a bit, such as, “larger Muslim community which is unwilling to do violence or directly support it, but is indifferent to the violence done if it benefits them,” but he never really lets go of the notion that Muslims generally are the problem. (My own personal belief is that the majority of people in every community are indifferent to violence if it doesn’t affect them, percieved benefit has little to do with indifference.) MDC said it best.
AGA: “What I can’t figure out is why Steve persistently returns to a theme that all Muslims have terrorism in their hearts or some such thing. When pressed, he will soften it a bit, such as, “larger Muslim community which is unwilling to do violence or directly support it, but is indifferent to the violence done if it benefits them,” but he never really lets go of the notion that Muslims generally are the problem.”
I think Muslims and Islam are the problem in general because of stories like this.
A fuller response later.
Just so we’re clear, specifically, I am wondering why you don’t develop a term or name for that “type” of Muslim or belief system as exemplified by ul Haq that differentiates that type from the majority or “larger Muslim community which is unwilling to do violence or directly support it . . ..”
Because he’s Steve and doing what you suggest would damage his brand, which is essentially the mirror image of ul Haq and his lot.