The Inbox [1.13.09] Judd sez

Judd sez:

“One of my deepest held problems with our friends on the left is what, in my view, is the naive assumption that, really, we aren’t all that different.  They believe that everyone is, like them (and I use this term very very loosely) a “reasonable person” with similar values.  I reject this out of hand and that forms part of the basis for how I view the world, particularly people whose life experiences are significantly different than mine.

In some circles, I’ve just admitted to being a racist xenophobe.  It counterbalances my view that people who would pillory me with the aforementioned slur are themselves clueless morons.

A year or two ago Sally Field was on stage at the Emmys and said that “if mothers ruled the world there would be no goddamn wars in the first place.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20824064/

As this news story points out (and I know it’s from MSNBC so it should be taken with a grain of salt) her remarks drew praise from the left, including the man who, but for a few hundred confused Floridians, would have been the President of the United States.

“This is how they see the world.  Mothers love their children and would never want any mother’s child to die and so if mothers had all the power we could all spend our days singing kumbaya and doing trust falls.

I think their whole premise is, well, really stupid.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48178

The exchange beneath the image of this mother holding the two pictures of her sons is one of the most telling I’ve come across. “

……

The above article, in my oppinion is a must read. It begins like this:

“In an insightful television interview, a Palestinian legislative candidate told why her Islamic faith required her to sacrifice three of her sons to terrorist operations and why she believes there are no prohibitions against killing civilians until the Jews are completely banished from Israel.”

And it ends with this interview:

“Farhat: “The word ‘peace’ does not mean the kind of peace we are experiencing. This peace is, in fact, surrender and a shameful disgrace. Peace means the liberation of all of Palestine, from the [Jordan] to the [Mediterranean] Sea. When this is accomplished – if they want peace, we will be ready. They may live under the banner of the Islamic state. That is the future of Palestine that we are striving towards.”

The conversation concluded, with Farhat declaring herself “proud and honored to be a terrorist for the sake of Allah”:

Interviewer: Some say this kind of reasoning is the obstacle to peace, because the Israelis will never agree to be banished. … Farhat: Let them refuse. We do not expect them to accept this. These people are occupiers, and we want to banish them from our land.

[...]

Interviewer: Umm Nidal, who sits here in front of me, is classified as a terrorist throughout the world. Not just a terrorist, but also as a producer of terrorists. …

Farhat: They can classify as much as they like. I am proud and honored to be a terrorist for the sake of Allah. ‘Prepare for them whatever force and steeds of war you can, in order to strike terror in the hearts of the enemy of Allah and of your own.’ I am happy to implement this Quranic verse myself, and to be a terrorist for the sake of Allah.

[...]

Interviewer: You have 10 sons.

Farhat: Yes, Allah be praised.

Interviewer: If another is killed …

Farhat: There are many young men. …

Interviewer: Will your heart be filled with unbearable sorrow?

Farhat: No, no. Allah be praised, I am preparing myself. I will sacrifice them all. If my duty requires me to sacrifice them all, I will not refuse – even if it costs me a hundred sons.”

Yikes. While it cannot be said that this mother doesn’t/didn’t love her sons, her idea of a mother’s love is indeed drastically different from what many hold as true about the concept.

I’ve heard a lot of buzzing about radical islamics, but as of the start of this post, hadn’t actually looked into radical Islam versus non-radical Islam views on the events in the middle, and on one another – that is, I haven’t probed beyond what the journalists and a limitted section of the blogosphere have put before me. So I set out to do some research of my own. Here’s what I found. It isn’t much, but I am at work (and thus have only a few minutes of play time between experiments):

Islamic Extremists: Who are they?

After searching a couple tens of pages with various key words, I picked up on a repeated reference to the Muslim Brotherhood. Upon looking it up (I used professor Wikipedia  so take it as you will), here’s what I found:

The Muslim Brotherhood is stated to be a Sunni movement and is currently considered the largest and most influential organization, and is known for abiding by a very strict interpretation of the Quran. The Muslim Brotherhood, or MB, is not itself a politcal party, but rather a movement, and an organization of Islamic factions whose credo is:

“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Though it is not a political party, members of the MB are known to have started political movements such as Hamas. Hamas is said to be staffed with followers of the MB, but sources are wary to directly link Hamas to the MB. If I had to guess, it would be because the MB must remain a clear movement and not a political party in order to continue promoting its charter. The MB movement has been banned in several Arab states.

MB officials have decried the use of violent means to achieve their goals, however, because many  members of the MB are often described as oppressed and  dangerously violent (I’m gonna go ahead a spitball a guess that many is really more like a fuck-ton considering how prolific this movement is amongst the more violently embroiled regions of the Middle East. It’s not a very logical connection, but I’m just sayin’), the MB’s officially stated anti-terror position is quite controversion. Even moreso,  it has caused disputes within the movement, with more radical, violent members at times breaking away to form other groups such as the Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Group) and Al Takfir Wal Hijra (Excommunication and Migration).

Quite frankly, I have a hard time accepting that the Muslim Brotherhood condemns the use of violence to achieve its goals. As stated above, the group’s credo commits them to Jihad and dying for Allah. To be fair, this could be interpreted in a more or less extreme manner, with the more extreme  being the possition of Umm Nidal, in the article from Judd. Though I don’t see how encouraging martyrdom via suicide bombings can in anyway be construed as a non-violent means of Jihad or dying for Allah, but what the hell do I know.

Non-Islamic-Extremists: Who are they?

Not all Muslims interpret Jihad as a holy war or view large scale acts of violence against those they consider adversaries as Jihad, and nor do they promote martyredom as Umm Nidal and like-minded Muslims are doing. Examples of these Muslim subsections are the Twelver, Ismaili, and Zaidi Muslims. These are recognized branches of Shia Islam. If this is old hat, I apologize. All three branches define Jihad as a two-fold struggle: the internal and external struggle, or greater and lesser struggle, respectively. The internal struggle is recognized by Shia Muslims as the greater struggle, while the external struggle, the war to fight against those objects which remove one from the divine presence – is considered a lesser struggle. Whether this compells one to commit acts of violence is debateable. The Shia groups are more outspoken about being pacifists, and make the distinction between Jihad and holy war.

So why are the Sunni factions the most popular and largest Islamic groups? In part, this appears (to me) to be due to the Muslim Brotherhood. Giving to the community is mandated by all of the Islamic factions, Sunni and Shia, however, the MB demands extra portions of it’s members income. This income is also used to create charities for the Muslim poor, which in turn draws in more members. There’s nothing wrong with charity, but the violence displayed by the organization’s corrupt (that’s me be optimistic) members is a compelling force, especially because the MB is a vigorously non-pluralist group. That, essentially, makes it a veritable cult.

Lunchbreak 1.12.09: Tom* strikes gold, again.

*Long post warning*

Tom*, from the Inbox post on Jan. 6 , gets another slam dunk, responding to another friend’s – I’ll call him Bob*, postings about the conflict in Gaza. The topic of the verbal battle was THIS ARTICLE, posted in the NYT, which starts out by saying:

“NEARLY everything you’ve been led to believe about Gaza is wrong”

Yes, the rest of this op-ed, which is written by a Professor of Arab studies at Colombia U (who recently penned a book titled “Sowing Crisis: The Cold War and American Dominance in the Middle East”), has a similar aroma to it. Read it yourself, it is brief.

Tom*’s response, in it’s entirety, was this:

“Dude, seriously? Here’s an interesting clip to watch:

Now while I don’t believe this video to be representative of every inhabitant of Gaza, I do think it’s typical of their “government,” the propaganda they spew, and the sick demented mentality that’s so characteristic of radical Islam today. And the fact of the matter is that this is the leadership they collectively elected and endorse.”

(Tom*, you really should have a blog. Or run for office. Something.)

To which Bob* replied:

“Your video demonstrates how some Palestinian’s minds have become poisoned with blind, murderous hate after being deprived of liberty and the ability to pursue happiness for their entire existence, and after seeing thousands of their brothers and sisters killed by the IDF. Likewise, many Israeli’s have become completely numb to the death and suffering of the Palestinians and support or participate in the war crimes of the IDF. “

Very interesting, huh? It get’s better. Bob* continues his reply with this:

“The NY Times article that I linked to (and that you responded to) simply states facts, just facts. These are the facts that most people in the U.S. aren’t even aware of, so when they hear our mainsteam media reports on the conflict, it sounds reasonable that Israeli would retaliate against rocket fire that violates their territory and threatens civilians. What’s missing from those reports is the entire context of the conflict, which must include the FACT that Israeli has been illegally occupying Gaza and the West Bank since 1967, and the FACT that the occupation has created a hell on earth for Palestinians. People also aren’t aware that Israel intentionally provoked the increased rocketing in the last month of 2008 by conducting a military operation in Gaza. “

This ticked me off, and apparently it got to Tom* as well, as you will soon see. If you read the article to which Bob* is referring, you should be quick to point out that it is an Op-Ed;  it is a slightly factual and highly opinionated piece of writing. The facts are half-facts; they are one person’s oppinions about events, and presented only from that person’s perspective.

Before I go on, I want to mention that I like and respect Bob* as a person. I’ve known Bob* since I was 13, in fact, he is and has always been one of the nicest people I know. Bob* is quite intelligent, however, he is not making a very good objective argument for his beliefs.

What saddened/angered me was seeing Bob make state that “people also aren’t aware that Israel intentionally provoked the increased rocketing in the last month of 2008 by conducting a military operation in Gaza.” When I read that, it struck me as so tinged with personal bias that I looked up whether it was, in fact, true. I mean, intentionally provoked the attack? Who does that? It turned out that there was some truth to the statement, but to say that Israel intentionally provoked Hamas rocketing is very misleading. What happened was that Israel broke the cease-fire by sending a military operation after a Hamas target in Gaza. But did they intentionally provoke an attack? No.

Anyways, here is Tom*’s very well written response to Bob*. I wish I could write like this:

“I think we’ll ultimately have to agree to disagree on this one though. I would argue that the video clip I linked you to isn’t an isolated or unique attitude of a select few. The same sentiments are consistently echoed throughout the entire region. Radial Islam is, in my opinion, a plague, an epidemic that continues to spread throughout the Middle East and Southwest Asia. The Muslims in Gaza are in a very unique situation, but the way we’re seeing them respond to it mirrors almost exactly the same violent tactics we’re seeing in other conflicts in the region. I want to avoid painting this specific topic with a broad brush, but it’s undeniable that many issues in the region are linked. Suffice it to say that the poor, resourceless and uneducated people in the Gaza strip developed neither the ability and skill to build sophisticated weapons, nor the knowledge to employ them effectively all by themselves. Look at the Gaza strip…it’s tiny. Where exactly do you think the endless flow of rockets, weapons, and explosives as well as the know-how to use them is coming from? We know that foreign governments and factions supply them, fund them, and train them. Foreign fighters also join them in large numbers throughout the region because they view Jihad and the expelling of “non-believer’s” from Muslim lands as their ultimate duty in life. This belief is pervasive in today’s Muslim world, and there’re a lot more people that subscribe to it than you would think. We as American’s completely underestimate how much influence their religion plays into every facet of their lives. It bothers me when people use the word “terrorist” interchangeably with “Islamic extremist” because their religious fanaticism is to me, their single defining characteristic. They’re all extremist, the difference is whether it’s manifested violently or not and the ever-increasing trend today is, unfortunately, towards hostility and bloodshed.

The article you posted says “Negotiation is a much more effective way to deal with rockets and other forms of violence.” Give me a break. Negotiate with these people? They can’t even negotiate amongst themselves to resolve the most simple and fundamental issues crucial to their own progress, namely who (Hamas or Fatah) will actually lead their people. Speaking of which, the ideology that each embraces is particularly telling, and I can sympathize with those who concentrate on nationalism, but NOT those who favor the building of an Islamic theocracy. There was once another radical group (starts with a “T” and ends with a “aliban”) who focused on the creation of an Islamic theocracy and instituted the strictest interpretation of Sharia law ever seen in the Muslim world throughout their land. You can’t tell me they were acting in the best interest of their citizens or anyone else on the globe for that matter.

You say the “martyrs” in the video were “poisoned with blind, murderous hate after being deprived of liberty and the ability to pursue happiness for their entire existence.” I disagree completely and here’s why: Fundamentally, their hatred is rooted in a territorial dispute…and not because they just want more substantial land to roam around and live in. It’s because they believe the physical dirt Israel’s on is “Muslim holy land.” Do you really think they’ll ever be content or satisfied with Jewish people, “pigs and apes” as they call them, occupying the lands they believe were expressly intended for them by God himself? No way. Again, it’s a struggle founded in religious belief…..these people aren’t seeking life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness like you and I. In fact, they could care less about all three. But an acknowledgment of Israel and an end to their epic struggle to regain those lands contradicts everything they believe in.

Your link to the “Combatants For Peace” was interesting and I applaud their efforts. However, I also commend the efforts of organizations like Green Peace and the NAACP but can those organizations claim triumph over global warming or racism in our country? I admit that you have to start somewhere and I agree that peace is technically possible, but there is every indication that it’s extremely unlikely in the near term. What percentage of American’s drive SUV’s versus those that join Green Peace? I don’t know, but I would venture to guess a similar ratio exists amongst Palestinians (or Israelis) who are members of this particular group.

Let’s say for the sake of argument that I’m wrong, that the people in Gaza truly hope to just coexist peacefully and go about their lives without Israeli occupation or control. If this was the case, in my opinion, they would need nothing more than to hold their leadership accountable. Look at our country. The finger is automatically and relentlessly pointed at our leadership for every single failure or deficiency imaginable. Doubt and political skepticism are engrained in our culture, oftentimes to our detriment. I’m surprised the folks in Carolina aren’t blaming George Bush himself for losing the game last night. Not in Palestine though. And why not? The US, the EU, and Israel all recognize and label Hamas as a terrorist organization. As you’ve probably noticed, terrorists aren’t too popular on the world stage these days. The solution is simple: stop shooting rockets, and stop throwing stones. Abandon or overthrow the hapless and corrupt Hamas government. Elect strong leadership whose objectives and goals are founded in what’s best for their people’s survival and progress rather that what’s best for their own wallet or their insane fanatical religious beliefs of world domination. Look what we in America are going to accomplish in just 8 days. It didn’t happen overnight of course, and neither will this. But just picture it….a bunch of Palestinian’s yelling “Yes We Can! (in Arabic of course) from the roof tops of Gaza city. The outcome of our country under new administration is yet to be seen, but the sheer optimism of “Change” and “Hope” have already transformed our nation and the big O hasn’t spent a single day in office yet.

But somehow I’m doubtful it will ever happen for a place like the Gaza strip….their culture is too drastically different than ours and their unwillingness to call “Uncle” even after the death toll soars past 800 is a direct indicator of their leaderships undying agenda. Bummer.”

The Inbox: Tom* sez

* name has been changed

Tom* is a friend from highschool, currently oversees in the airforce, flying an A-10. Tom* chimed in with a response to the post below, regarding the new Gaza war.

Welcome to my blog, Tom*

Tom* sez:

” Here’s my 2 cents:
“Palestine” elected a terrorist, anti-Semitic organization into power. Israel has a reputation for not taking shit (and rightfully so)…. did anyone not see this coming? Over the years, Israel has been attempting to extend their hand in good faith……pulling back from territories, removing settlements…and still they keep getting attacked. Israel, for all its rights or wrongs, retains the inherent right to self defense; and if they’re getting attacked by rockets (a move that breaks an existing peace agreement,) then they have the right to defend. And that’s what we’re seeing here. Both Hamas and Hezbollah have, unfortunately, a good tactic. They receive enormous amounts of money from Iran and other radical Islamic factions, a portion of which they use as handouts to their population to win hearts and minds. They fire, as we know, from within their densest towns and cities knowing full well they are indirectly using the civilian populace as a shield. This sets the stage for the epic Catch 22 Israel finds itself in time and time again: do nothing and let your country be attacked, or respond and look like a ruthless, heartless war machine. And why, when they of course opt to attack, does that end up being their image? …Because there’s a civilian death toll and because the media that reports the “news” is fundamentally flawed and biased. News stations are not non-profit institutions trying to adhere to strict measures of journalistic objectivity. They’re in business, period. They package information into a format that will make you watch their channel so they can sell advertising. According to the latest headlines, you’d think Israelis spring up from the ground fully grown, rifles in hand.

One concept American media consistently screws up is, as you called it, Israel’s tendency to “overreact.” What’s overlooked is that their massive campaign, their “disproportional retribution” isn’t a mistake or a cruel and pointless attempt to just slaughter innocent people. It’s a strategy. It’s their strategy. The type of military campaign Hamas is experiencing is the hallmark of the IDF, as witnessed time and time again throughout their short but intense history of conflict. The linked article above bashes Israel, saying “The strategic concept is to terrorize the civilian population by unremitting attacks from the air, sowing death and destruction.” …..Yes, ……exactly. Again, Israel’s use of firepower is purposefully “excessive,” but not without warrant. This is an enemy that doesn’t take to subtle hints or suggestion. They’re an enemy that doesn’t know how to negotiate rationally or want to coexist peacefully. This isn’t the first time one nation has forced an enemy’s hand at a high cost of civilian lives and collateral damage. Americans above all, being the only nation ever to employ nuclear weapons on another, should understand this.

In fact, our lack of force, our obsessive concern with collateral damage, and our terribly slanted media are all partially causal in our recent shortcomings and failures in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. Fundamental to a grasp of this conflict is an understanding of the unique differences between conventional warfare and a counter-insurgency. This enemy doesn’t have the conventional military power to confront its foes head on, so they use hit-and-run, harassment, and terrorism to elicit heavy-handed responses knowing that if the occupier becomes too aggressive in trying to maintain security, they will lose the support of the population and the radicals will have then won a small victory despite losing the actual shooting conflict. Our enemies are clever, sneaky, conniving little bastards whose goal is simply to create chaos and discredit their government. They know a victory for them comes from propaganda, not bullets. And again, the media plays right into it.

The article then talks about the seeds of hate being sewn among Palestinians, particularly their youth. But does it matter? The hate and malice of their population will surely be passed from generation to generation regardless of this war. Some people call that hopeless, I call it being realistic. I’ve fought this enemy. A poor, totally uneducated, religiously motivated enemy with nothing to lose. And what I learned is this: You can’t kill off their desire to be radicals, you can only hope to kill off their ability to be radicals, at least for the near term.”