All Hank, all the time.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
But do you think that is a reasoned statement? Are the two type attacks "equal"? in your mind? An attack to kill Hezbollah fighters that inadvertantly (or maybe with knowledge of the liklihood) kills women and children is the equivalent of walking onto a train with bombs to kill dozens of civilians, is the equivalent of shooting rockets at towns in Israel, is the equivalent of walking into a JCC in Seatlle and gunning down people?

Did the July 2005 bombers pick a train with some British soldiers in it Ty? how could you not be disgusted with these guys trying to equate the two?

I am really depressed because I sort of saw the future last week- armed guards at a kids sporting event.

With percetages like Slave cites isn't it realistic that 1 % would be willing to blow up innocent people? You bitch about what Bush has or has not done re. planes, but i see that as almost irrelevant. We all agree a homocide bomber could walk onto the NYC or DC subway today- 100% chance of getting to a crowded platform. How do we stop that?

Shouldn't these "leaders" be doing everything they can do to make clear that there is no justification for the 1% crazy, and doing everything they can do to root them out? Does it make sense for "leaders" to publish a statement that implies they sort of understand why some people might blow some other people up?

I said "sounds in equality" because I didn't want to make a stronger statement about equivalence. I should have anticipated that you or someone else here would have put other words in my mouth anyway.

It's odd to me that these folks essentially said, attacks on civilians are wrong wherever they occur, and for this they are attacked for not condemning terrorism strongly enough. WTF?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
A start

1) Immediately cease the ludicrous "random" searches at all transportation hubs and begin profiling.

2) Immediately withdraw visas and expel all Islamic foreign students. Those 11 Egyptians - who came to study in Montana???? - that just decided to disappear into thin air was kept rather quiet, no?

3) Same as 2, but for these hate-mongering Imams and Hezzbollah supporters, such as those in Dearborn, MI.

Wouldn't internment camps be better? That way we could keep an eye on them. Plus think about how many jobs would be created.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
2) Immediately withdraw visas and expel all Islamic foreign students. Those 11 Egyptians - who came to study in Montana???? - that just decided to disappear into thin air was kept rather quiet, no?

If this post disappears, it wasn't me.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Treat them like kids. Use reverse psychology. Ignore the fuckers. The hyper-religious are childlike. The more you tell them they're wrong, the more they'll fight you. Do what the Indians did last month... a day after a massive terrorist bombing, they went back to work. We should stop hand wringing and crying about everything and develop a stiff upper lip. Tell them candidly, "You're going to get a few us now and again. We know we'll have more 9/11s, but our way of life will continue, and spread. You can join us or tilt at windmills. Whatever you like..."

Saying we're "pushing Democracy" is the wrong message. The better message would be "You can't stop it. Your kids will be westernized. Look at China and India."

Ahh, the stiff upper lip defense. Good show, Old Bean. Maybe we could start by dropping tins of pork and beans over Lebanon? Handing out iPods in Bloomsbury?

Carry on.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If this post disappears, it wasn't me.

It was the Egyptians, right? Sneaky little bastards.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I said "sounds in equality" because I didn't want to make a stronger statement about equivalence. I should have anticipated that you or someone else here would have put other words in my mouth anyway.

It's odd to me that these folks essentially said, attacks on civilians are wrong wherever they occur, and for this they are attacked for not condemning terrorism strongly enough. WTF?

Do you agree that a pattern is maybe starting to emerge that these attacks seem to often be by young Islamic men? Can we start with a yes on that?

If we get to a yes above, can you see why "leaders" saying that what the UK government is doing might lead to more attacks could be seen by the nut cases as somehow justifying the next attack?

And Sebby, in the UK these are the "children." These are men born there. McDonalds/disney didn't Westernize them-

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Yes, except for me, because I am not gullible to think that anything we do vis a vis governments in the Middle East will change the hearts and minds of those bent on slaughtering innocent Westerners

Palestine is their fucking pretext to legitimacy. It is a clash of civilizations. Thats why so many moderate Muslims can't criticize their own. They can't admit it, but deeply, perhaps subconsciously, they realize that if "Radical Islam" loses this "war," their faith loses a portion of its identity.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Do you agree that a pattern is maybe starting to emerge that these attacks seem to often be by young Islamic men? Can we start with a yes on that?

I believe that is the premise of the open letter we are discussing. Can we start with an agreement that we are both on the third planet orbiting the Sun?

If we get to a yes above, can you see why "leaders" saying that what the UK government is doing might lead to more attacks could be seen by the nut cases as somehow justifying the next attack?

No -- and that is the crux of it. If I say that youths should fasten their seatbelts to avoid fatalities in traffic accidents, it does not mean that I approve of traffic accidents.

Actually, yes: At this point one should reasonably foresee that saying much of anything at all about terrorism will be taken by the nut cases on your side of the political spectrum as somehow justifying attacks on America. Sad but true. Consider it a benchmark of the poverty of conservative ideas.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Yes, except for me, because I am not gullible to think that anything we do vis a vis governments in the Middle East will change the hearts and minds of those bent on slaughtering innocent Westerners

Then why do you post, and apparently applaud, lengthy statements from the British press that appear intent on doing exactly that?



I liked the Lord Stevens quote and the Guardian quote. But they are doing just what you say is impossible, foolish, delusional, etc -- they are trying to convince Muslims to stand against terrorists and extremists.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Palestine is their fucking pretext to legitimacy. It is a clash of civilizations. Thats why so many moderate Muslims can't criticize their own. They can't admit it, but deeply, perhaps subconsciously, they realize that if "Radical Islam" loses this "war," their faith loses a portion of its identity.

Not to disagree with what you say, but another reason why so many moderate Muslims can't criticize their own is that they live under oppressive, undemocratic regimes, often supported by the United States, where they may be punished for criticizing their own. In countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, it's much safer to attack Israel or the West.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I believe that is the premise of the open letter we are discussing. Can we start with an agreement that we are both on the third planet orbiting the Sun?

WATER. when I do that sort "request for agreement" the point is to show how out to lunch you are.

No -- and that is the crux of it. If I say that youths should fasten their seatbelts to avoid fatalities in traffic accidents, it does not mean that I approve of traffic accidents.

No. the better analogy would be "if you were to criticize drunk driving accidents by youths, but note that there would be fewer if only the Governement would enforce drinking laws, it does not mean you approve of accidents." but we don't need an analogy. All across the west yesterday people in airports had additional burdens because of crazy Islamic men. anyone who can be perceived as leaders of those men cannot be making a statement that implies at all the actions of these men was understandable.

The steps slave mentions will happen with more attacks- I really can't do much to stop the attacks, but maybe these "leaders" can?

Actually, yes: At this point one should reasonably foresee that saying much of anything at all about terrorism will be taken by the nut cases on your side of the political spectrum as somehow justifying attacks on America. Sad but true. Consider it a benchmark of the poverty of conservative ideas.

Fuck you.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Not to disagree with what you say, but another reason why so many moderate Muslims can't criticize their own is that they live under oppressive, undemocratic regimes, often supported by the United States, where they may be punished for criticizing their own. In countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, it's much safer to attack Israel or the West.

There are many Muslims who do not have this excuse -- in places from the US to Turkey to the Philippines, and even in parts of the Arab Middle East -- and sadly few have stood up to criticize their own.

Even the Sunni authoritarian governments, who should have no love for Shiite extremists, are barely heard to criticize Hezbollah, or Shiite violence against Muslim civilians in Iraq.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
All across the west yesterday people in airports had additional burdens because of crazy Islamic men. anyone who can be perceived as leaders of those men cannot be making a statement that implies at all the actions of these men was understandable.

I'm at a loss to understand how Members of Parliament "can be perceived as leaders of . . . crazy Islamic men."

Fuck you.

Why don't you go fuck yourself? I'm sick and tired of hearing that your political party has a fucking monopoly on this war against terrorism, as if the rest of us don't get it. Your song and dance is lame, and reflects a serious lack of anything serious to say.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
There are many Muslims who do not have this excuse -- in places from the US to Turkey to the Philippines, and even in parts of the Arab Middle East -- and sadly few have stood up to criticize their own.

Even the Sunni authoritarian governments, who should have no love for Shiite extremists, are barely heard to criticize Hezbollah, or Shiite violence against Muslim civilians in Iraq.

(a) I said I didn't disagree.

(b) This game of "you aren't condemning your bedfellows strongly enough" is so tired. It's tired no matter who's the target. It's about as tired as the "you're being hypocritical" game, a related species.

(c) CAIR -- to take one Muslim group recently attacked on this board for being too close to terrorists, or full of felons, or something -- put out a press release about the UK bombing plots. It starts with a condemnation of acts of terrorism. I don't recall seeing it reported anywhere. If they say the right things, who cares?

(d) If those British MPs had put out an open letter condemning Islamist terrorism in the strongest possible terms, is there any chance at all that anyone who reads this board would have heard about it? I doubt it. (I'm not blaming any of us. We get our news from media. Controversy sells.)

[SlaveNoMore]

taxwonk
Wouldn't internment camps be better? That way we could keep an eye on them. Plus think about how many jobs would be created.

You laugh. Just wait.