The Limits of Obama’s Rhetoric
As a high school teacher, I’m always mildly surprised to discover that my students have no real idea that foreign cultures — other peoples — are so different as to be virtually different species. They’re amazed to learn that untold millions of human beings have never seen a roll of toilet paper, and are dumbstruck to discover that in many nations, women and girls may be killed by their relatives for real or imagined offenses against family honor. Over the years I’ve learned that most American adults know, intellectually, that the peoples of other lands are not like Americans, but their practical understanding of these differences is, like their younger countrymen, weak. Unfortunately, the president of the United States is no better off. Arguably, he is worse.
Hillary Clinton was more prophetic than we imagined. That 3 a.m. phone call has happened again. Perhaps the administration’s first 3 a.m. call came in June of 2009, when the Iranian people rose against their theocratic oppressors. Mr. Obama took bold, decisive action, just as he has done with the crisis in Egypt. Here, from the White House website, is what Mr. Obama said on June 20, 2009:
The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.
As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.
Martin Luther King once said “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” I believe that. The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian peoples’ belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness.
It takes but a moment’s comparison of this rhetoric with that which Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are currently employing on Egypt to understand that it is virtually identical. Mr. Obama is forthright and mighty in “watching,” mourning the loss of innocent lives, decrying violence and injustice, and supporting the “universal rights to assembly and free speech.” He is even more intimidating in “bearing witness.” And bear witness he did, as many were imprisoned, tortured and murdered, and the uprising that might have transformed Iran in favor of greater liberty and democracy was crushed.
There are, without question, differences in the Iranian and Egyptian uprisings. The Iranians are the youngest, most educated, and most pro-American people in the region. Overwhelmingly, they are anxious to depose the inhuman Muslim theocrats who have tortured and murdered them for decades. Almost certainly their success would have been America’s success, an enormous stride toward all of the high values touted in Mr. Obama’s rhetoric. It would have helped to establish real, as opposed to rhetorical, peace in the region. Mr. Obama, like the Palestinians he reflexively supports, seems to miss no opportunity to miss an opportunity — or to insult an ally, or support an enemy.
Egypt, on the other hand, is far more complicated. Hosni Mubarak, while generally supportive of America and American interests, was clearly a dictator, though not nearly as despotic as Saddam Hussein, and a ruler who kept one of the most virulent strains of Islam, led by the Muslim Brotherhood, under control. Because the CIA has never fully recovered from the Clintonian purge of human assets and capabilities, we were blindsided by the uprising and President Mubarak’s swift resignation. CIA Director Leon Panetta admitted that the information he provided at the House Intelligence Committee was not a product of professional skulduggery and analysis but of the lamestream media. Mr. Panetta served merely as a relay or conduit between the media and Congress. Is it any surprise that the CIA has no real idea who is behind the uprising or what their ultimate goals are?
With the Egyptian army in control, Egypt is momentarily stable, but few of the likely outcomes look promising — for America, for Israel, for peace, or for regional stability and Western civilization.
Last night, I was watching the British TV miniseries, “Winston Churchill- The Wilderness Years 1929-1939″. Its portraits of the leadership of Great Britain during that critical decade are devastating.
James Ramsay MacDonald, Stanley Baldwin, and Neville Chamberlain are portrayed as being essentially interchangeable. Regardless of their supposed party affiliations, all three were at heart redistributionist socialists who dreamed of a “One World” ruled on those principles. (But all three disdained Communists, at least publicly.)
MacDonald and Chamberlain, in addition, were internationalists who believed that the League of Nations was a means by which to enact a redrawn map of Europe, which they believed should be run by the “greatest economic power” on the Continent- namely Germany. (I remind you, this was during the collapse of Weimar and the rise of the Nazis.)
By the time Chamberlain took office as PM in May 1937 (after serving in the cabinets of both his predecessors, regardless of which party supposedly held sway in Commons), the policy of the British government had become not merely appeasement of foreign aggressors like Hitler and Mussolini, but a steadfast belief that it was those aggressors’ “destiny” to rule Europe, and that England would become “great” by creating a vast and expensive bureaucracy at home to manage the lives of Englishmen from cradle to grave. A bureaucracy which would spend not one pence on its military, while constantly claiming that it was providing an adequate defense.
Any of this sound familiar?
Obama has been compared to Mussolini, due to his penchant for vast prestige projects, de facto nationalization of industries, and his narcissistic obsession with his own deification. But he also has all the worst attributes of England’s leaders of the 1930s; MacDonald’s yen for absolute control, Baldwin’s lack of interest in the world except insofar as it affected his popularity at home, and Chamberlain’s delusion of “peace at any price”, created by the power of his rhetoric. (Also like Chamberlain, The One believes that he does not need to consider the opinions of the public. And deeply resents the public learning facts which contradict his claims of what he is doing, and how.)
With The One somehow playing all the major supporting roles at once, all that’s needed for a repeat of the Thirties is someone to play Churchill. So far, I haven’t seen a likely candidate.
As for who plays Hitler, that role is already taken. In fact, the biggest problem is the number of actors all trying to play the role at once. From Algiers to Islamabad.
clear ether
eon
Your grasp of history is of the highest level. Your conclusions dead on the mark. Why can’t our leader see this and act accordingly ? ? ?
Well said, and well captured!!
One issue I would like to add: Muslims are encouraged to lie when it advances their cause. Who is to say that Obama is not lying when claiming to be a christian to hide his intentions being a muslim, advancing his causes? After all, observing his actions, they are closer, and in favor solely muslims, and dangerous for everyone else, particularly Jews.
That’s what I think…lie to the infidels and disable their country.
In my opinion, America is the plane, the economy is the tower, taxpayers are crowded in the back frantically dialing their cellphones, and the pilot is….
Oh, never mind.
One need not be a Muslim to lie when convenient. Marxists also embrace this doctrine.
While it’s clear that Obama is not a Christian, the evidence for him being a Muslim is mostly in the mind of unreasonable people.
On the other hand, the evidence for him being a Marxist is overwhelming.
I am not American.
I saw this charade when it first started.
I saw him start his unravelling of America when he was elected.
He lied in every campaign speech.
He has lied in every speech thereafter.
His systematical takedown of America is going ahead full steam.
He has allowed the Dems to hide his deceiptful doings
He is a puppet for George Soros and a foreign country.
This will NOT end 2012,but only in armed conflict.
For God’s sake America ,WAKE UP.
“And so Mr. Obama resorts to rhetoric, but not the rhetoric of the wise, cautious statesman, careful with every word, lest unintended, potentially destructive messages be received. It is the rhetoric of the community organizer, the union boss, the black liberation theologian, the socialist, the man who, when his policies are rejected by the American people, thinks it’s a failure of “messaging,” a failure to be set right by yet another speech with a new “message” — a new word to replace a word to which the public has caught on. The American public, he understands, has not heard nearly enough of his speeches.”
This is all you really need to know about Obama. His fatal flaw is that he’s beginning to believe his own spin from the 2008 election. He really thinks that a speech is a substitute for a foreign policy. He really, honestly, believes that just by giving a speech radical Islamists will stop what they’re doing and simply love him. This guy is nuts and the rest of the world is calling him out on it. The more speeches he makes, the less the rest of the world now listens to him. This is becoming very, very, dangerous because countries like Iran feel that they can do whatever they want with no consequences from Washington, except to have to endure yet another speech. We really, really, need a new president in 2012.
“…the man who, when his policies are rejected by the American people, thinks it’s a failure of “messaging,” a failure to be set right by yet another speech with a new “message”…”
Oh yes. When all of the negatives began to be discussed about Obamacare, and his commentary was to “triangulate” and “pivot,” I knew he was an idiot.
News flash, Mister President: sometimes an idea isn’t rejected because it was expressed poorly; sometimes they’re rejected because they just plain suck.
Mike, you have stumbled upon the story of a man who wishes to tell his own story, he is in the permanent editing mode of an infinite autobiographer. Every word is measured for maximum romance and minimum revelation.
This is a story of a man who is born into a nation that does not satisfy him. He sees its people as bitter, he sees the dominant religions as threatening, he sees the culture as crude and beneath him.
Let’s call this man, Dances With Words.
Dances With Words is assigned a post, but abandons it frequently in search of a “better society”. One that is more pure of heart, more noble, without flaw or blemish.
He sees his own comrades and allies as fatally flawed. He must romanticize everyone who stands against his countrymen and slander his own flag, salt of the earth people, and apologize for their very existence.
He wishes to win over the other culture by bashing his own and offering them gifts of sugar and coffee. The taste of sweet words, often syrupy, saccharine, and cloying in his mind will cling to them in contrast to the clinging of bitter on the tongues of those in his assigned protectorate.
And the coffee is the stimulant, the words which he utters in a cadence and pitch to make them rise up at once in heralded awe and inspiration. It is applied with such frequency and in such heavy doses, that it instead makes everyone jumpy, irritable and distracted.
Dances With Words thereby puts everyone in danger. He attacks his own uniform and all the men in it and puts other nations in mortal danger, making them less safe, less peaceful, less inclined to seek positive relations. They believe his fantasy about how evil his countrymen are, but they do not buy the romantic notions about their own world. They know better and see the fraud for what it is, a cheap self-aggrandizing ploy and runaway narcissistic self-glorification at the expense of his own protectorate. They see it as betrayal…for which they have nothing but contempt.
Dances With Words must abandon everyone at the end, Mike. And the reason is, he never wanted friends in the first place. Only admirers.
And people who bought into his heavily revisionist version of the world of his making, for which truth has always remained a stranger.
Dances With Words is a sad, tragic, lonely creature…because he can never be the man he pretends to be.
Very nice outline. I like your title for Obama: Dances with Words. Heh, that’s perfect.
I also like your comment that Obama doesn’t want friends. Only admirers. I fully agree. I’d add that Obama is incapable of friendship because, as a pathological narcissist, he cannot ever feel himself..or more accurately, Himself, equal to others. He must feel that he controls other people. That’s a basic axiom with Obama. He must feel that he controls others.
So- he’s as such, a pathological liar. Reality has no existence for him, only his words exist. He lives in a virtual reality of his own authorship, where he does indeed ‘dance with words’. Words that are never linked to factual reality, to the real world.
That’s also why he is a socialist, apart from his upbringing. Socialism puts the elite, the Ruler, in control of others and denies these others the freedom and also, the economic power. to make their own decisions.
Neither well trained salesmen nor debaters have to believe their own spiel to convince a prospective customer or members of an audience of the need of what they offer whether a product, service, or just a novel idea for a blank mind. The sole difference is the price paid for blindly believing either .
Thanks goodness your bloke was not in power (much) at the same time as Gordon Brown in the UK. He it was that twisted the language so that we “invested” more than we earned.
At least now in Europe some are starting to wake up from the socialist dream we have been in since WW2 (Merkel, Cameron show glimmers of having spherical fortitude).
Such a pity that when we need the power and authority of the US over the next few years we have a community organiser in charge.
As with most politicians, Obama’s rhetoric has no limits only his view of the facts and truth does.
When will America awaken to the fact,Obama is all talk. Some may hate me for this but it is the absolute truth, he is lost. If people do not see his words are empty by now,America really is lost.
Um, no. That would be to equate Obama with the American people. Not only to the people see that his words are empty, they are actively searching for the ways and means to see the back of him. Even his supporters have doubts but, trapped in an outdated “racism”, believe they must cling to their myths, hoping against hope they can still be proud of him.
Where is a genius like Margaret Thaler Singer when we need a famous one to counter this potent con man, Obama?
An excellent article!
“Americans — and untold millions around the world — may wish that when the phone rang at 3 a.m., Mr. Obama would have rolled over and gone back to asleep.”
Having spent roughly half of my life living and studying abroad, I can concur this being true; except, it applies to all American presidents. The world really wants America to stay in America, not to be the SWAT operator in the world.
Those who reply with WWII, I say WWI. Those who say WWI I say …
Damn, you’re nuttin’ but right. Hitler just wanted America to stay in America, ditto Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Muammar Gadaffi, Whats-is-face Abbas….
I could go on, but you are probably uneducable.
It’s an interesting piece. I still find it amazing that Americans elected Obama and keep Obama. At one point, I honestly believed that his credentials might be challenged and the man removed from the Presidency based on his lack of legal fitness for the office; no longer. Sadly, his ascension and continuing political shelf-life leave me wondering just who were the Presidents before him, and ‘what is America’ (politically). It seems more and more a tissue of lies when it comes to the rise of previous
Presidents and their true identities. It seems more and more that the police state drops its wings down on the US and its citizens in different ways. Both America and Israel have as many – or more – internal enemies as external ones.
Let me raise a number of points.
First, I disagree with your linking Obama to any changes in the ME, either within Iran or within Egypt. He is irrelevant to the ME’s tectonic changes.
Second, I also disagree with your view that ‘stability, even if it includes maintaining repressive dictatorships, has beneficial results’.
Third, I disagree with your lack of curiosity about the causes of Islamic fascism, which leads you to make the claim in support of dictatorships.
Forth, I fully agree with your view of Obama’s narcissism, but wonder about your failure to link that to his end-of-the-situation comments about Iran.
To take the last point – that comment in praise of ‘the Iranian people’s freedom to demonstrate’ was done AFTER the Iranian dictators had regained control of them, killed off, imprisoned and clamped down on their leaders. The attempt to gain freedom in Iran was over. Obama was, as usual with Obama, operating only in his virtual world, the world of rhetoric. That speech wasn’t intended for the Iranian demonstrators or for the Iranian government. It was meant for the Americans who were appalled by Obama’s original refusal to support those demonstrations!
Remember, Obama as a pathological narcissist will always align himself with Those In Power. Because he needs to feel in control of others at all times. He’ll never side with the dissenters, the rebels. Only with Those in Power.
Next, your failure to explore the causes of Islamic fascism means that you consider that it ‘exists’ (within the genetic make-up, the ethnic make-up, the ???) and that the only method of dealing with it is repression. This is similar to binding up the gangreneous leg, ignoring that under the restraints of the bandage, the corruption continues and indeed, spreads.
Terrorism is a result of oppression. When a people are ruled by a dictatorship, a vicious and arbitrary totalitarianism – as was that of Mubarak, as well as that of Saddam Hussein, and of the Iranian regime etc – and they are effectively disallowed participation in the real world…they move into a ‘virtual world’. The magical world of the imagination where they can imagine ‘IF we do such and such, THEN, life will get better’.
The magical world is always homogeneous (we will all behave the same); and, since the people are powerless, they’ll turn to rage when words alone don’t create this world, and to violence to enforce it. Terrorism emerges and explodes within the LACK OF FREEDOM. You don’t seem to understand this.
Therefore, Mubarak’s ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ can be directly linked to his totalitarian rule, his emergency decree under which he has ruled Egypt since he took over, the lack of freedom, the arbitrary arrests and disappearances of people, the deaths…and so on.
What’s going on in the ME? It’s a tectonic shift. The ME has been trapped in an ancient political and economic infrastructure, what is called a ‘tribal political and economic system’. This is two-class: a set of supreme Rulers..and the mass of the people. This is a no-growth structure, based around a maintenance of a basic agriculture, a no-growth population, a no-change economy. But reality has changed.
The population of the ME has exploded since the world wars. Egypt went from 40 to 80 million in four decades. It has moved to urban centres; it has moved to an industrial consumption: cars, electricity, planes, etc. But – it cannot support that increased population with food, and it cannot purchase that industrial lifestyle because it has failed to generate a middle class.
The middle class is a private sector economy, the majority of a nation’s population, engaged in capitalist small to medium businesses. These generate jobs and wealth. The ME statist economies, based around govt run public industries and massive bureaucracies to employ the cronyist privileged – have failed to allow a middle class private sector economy.
These nations have managed to hold on to control by selling natural resources (which these nations couldn’t even develop or run, technologically, on their own but required British and American expertise!!). These are oil, oil..and the Suez Canal. However, these sources of wealth have reached the ‘critical threshold’ when they cannot support the exploding population. The dictators and their cronies, who have gotten very wealthy, have repressed the population from any freedom – and that includes the freedom to have a middle class economy.
The West’s error in providing massive external aid to prop up these dictators, in the pursuit of stability, has resulted in a population repressed to the ‘boiling point’. That has led to Islamic fascism – a movement directed first at the ‘corrupt and impure’ govts and externalized by that dictatorial govt to The Evil West.
Allowing and enabling the ME to undergo this tectonic shift and move into constitutional democracy and a middle class capitalist economy is the ONLY answer to fascism.
Obama? Apart from his leftist socialist sympathies for anti-Americanism, he will always, always, align himself with whoever is In Power. He likes Power, he likes to tell others how wrong they are, how he alone is Wise and Knows what to do. His focus is on Himself.
@ ETAB – You make some interesting points – but I think you have one key concept wrong.
You say “Mubarak’s ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ ” – implying the actions of Mubarak created the environment in which they flourish – and by extension that other actions against the West are the result of similar oppression.
“has resulted in a population repressed to the ‘boiling point’. That has led to Islamic fascism – a movement directed first at the ‘corrupt and impure’ govts and externalized by that dictatorial govt to The Evil West”
In point of fact the MB was founded in 1928 – (wikipedia reference) – and the followers of Islam are commanded to overthrow non-believers. We are about 1400 years into a long war. The Islamic fascists don’t like us because of screwed up domestic political processes and Western interference. They don’t like us because we are not Muslim.
My point is that all of Islamic fascism – and that includes Al Qaeda and the MB – stem from economic repression and unmet economic and social needs and not ideological ideals.
The movement began with the world wars (both of them) transformation of the ME by the West – via the British and American oil wells starting at the turn of the century (1900s). This led to the transformation of these previously non-industrial, local sustenance, no-growth economies – into industrial nations. This also included a basic set of industrial structures, such as roads, cities, electricity, radio, tv – and a sense of the outside world.
BUT – they retained the tribal two-class political infrastructure, which enriched the rulers and ignored the rest of the population. Then, along with this massive input of technological assistance from the West, and enormous wealth to the elite class – which closely guarded entrance to this elite set – came the exponential increase of the population.
The majority of this new population had effectively, little to gain and little power to collaborate in this new oil economy. The problem was/is, that the Rulers rejected/ignored the requirement to enrich this population; they ignored the requirementn for this population to be wealth-producers and saw them as only, as within a two-class model, ‘the masses’ to be kept quiet. The total control over the production and use of wealth, by the Rulers, meant that the majority of this increased population lived at near poverty levels…and also, had no power to change their lives.
Two reactions to repression. The first is dissent – but this was brutally repressed. The second is that retreat into ‘magical thinking’ or an imaginary world where, IF we do this, THEN..everything will be OK. Islamic fascism is magical thinking, assuming that IF we live in the ancient old ways, THEN, everything will be OK.
Of course, a key problem is that the economic mode of ‘the ancient old ways’ (pastoralism, small scale local horticulture) can’t sustain the enormous populations, and that the rest of the world is not pre-industrial but industrial. AND, the other key problem is that in order for this ‘perfect world’ to appear, you have to have everyone participating. And, for some strange reason, the majority don’t want to participate..and so, these movements are all, vicious and violent. Just like the old Ruler class!
Islamic fascism – or any form of magical thinking – is pure rhetoric. It can’t exist within the real world. When it operates in the West, its members live as parasites on the local industrial economy; they don’t contribute economically. In the ME, it cannot enable an economy; indeed, it has no interest in such.
What the ME requires is a middle class capitalist economy, where the majority of the population are engaged in small to medium size private business enterprises. These are wealth creating, producing goods and services for both internal and external sale. The statist socialist economies of the current ME, which rely on oil or the Suez canal simply don’t generate enough wealth to sustain the modern populations.
The rhetoric of the MB and Al Qaeda, and their violence, is in my view, directly linked to the economic state of the people. BUT – these Islamic fascist groups cannot, ever, deal with such econmic realities! They are, like Obama, Dancing With Words. They cannot succeed in the long run because they are words-and-violence. A population cannot live within such modes.
You could not be more dangerously wrong. This is a “only the last hundred years count” point of view. Myopic, at best. Ignorant, in fact.
“Hysteria” had it exactly right with this comment:
They not only “do not like us”, they will kill us if they can, and it has nothing to do with “oppression”, real or imagined.
The problem I have, mark v, with your comment is that it is merely an opinion. You don’t provide an argument.
You simply state that I am wrong and that the Muslims don’t like us ‘because we are not Muslim’. I don’t think this is much of an argument! You ignore the years prior to the development of Islamic fascism. Why? You ignore those Muslim nations that do not care about the non-Muslim nature of others, such as Indonesia. You ignore the economic infrastructure and the population demographics. All you focus on is the ‘ideology’ and I consider that a superficial perspective.
You guys are full of it.
MB was NOT made because of any ‘repression’ or ‘the downtrodden have awakened’ sort of thing. The Arabs have as much chance of living a good life as we have.BUT, their ancestry has been giving in to the ruling class for so long it has become the norm. It would not take much in any of these countries for a regime overthrow to occur.All it takes is balls , and I’m afraid that the Arabs have become mob rulers. If you agree,join in.If not,stay home.They don’t do anything unless they shout and have a crowd behind them.Even childbirth.They could be free if they wanted it bad enough,but it would take a crowd.Look at all the future leaders standing up against Mubarak.(joke) Ther are none except Baradei(iran sponsored).
You can’t have Islamic Fascism without Islam.
The problem with Islamic Fundamentalism is the fundamentals of Islam.
Really? I guess Bill Ayres was terribly oppressed in his upper-class Chicago youth?
Che?
Castro?
Gimme a break, mister simplistic.
We should call you “dances with facts”
You say “Terrorism emerges and explodes within the LACK OF FREEDOM. You don’t seem to understand this”
Apperently YOU dont seem to understand, acts of terrorism are nearly the excusive domain of MUSLIMS…
Muslims who, especially here in the US, enjoy more freedom than any people on earth.
Why would Muslim Americans plot to bomb Christmas celebrations? The westernized standard of living and concept of religious freedom didnt prevent the Times Square Bomber from trying to kill and maim innocent strangers. And a Muslim American DOCTOR, educated and well-off living in freedom in the west, turn his weapon upon fellow soldiers while shouting “Allah Akbar”, you believe, because of his lack of FREEDOM?
You say “Mubarak’s ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ can be directly linked to his totalitarian rule, his emergency decree under which he has ruled Egypt since he took over”
And you are wrong again. They were formed in the 1920′s, many decades before any Mubarak influence in Egypian politics….They were also behind the assasination of Muraraks predecessor, Anwar Sadat for the “crime” of making peace with Israel.
The fact is, Mubaraks “totalitarian rule” was more a byproduct of the Muslim Brotherhoods threats to HIM than the other way around….you confuse the Disease with the Symptom, the Attacker with the Victim, the Cause with the Excuse.
Please, take some time to learn who Mohammed was…
What he said…how he lived….what he demanded of others.
Theirs is a cult of hate, violence and intolerance
He, they, and the acts commited to this very day, all speak for themselves in perfect, consistant Koranic Clarity.
No lefty-social-studies-professoral fantasy of “oppression” or a magical “Muslim middle class” cure-all in the lands of Mohammed can change the facts:
WHO they worship a MONSTER…and they will be a threat to every living thing on this earth, as long as they continue to do so.
Actually, I’m well aware of the ideology of Islam, both within its Qur’an and hadiths. I’ve argued before that Islam emerged in the 7th c as a militant violent reaction by a pastoral economy to an economic depression caused by the expansion of the market economy of the Byzantine world. Islam is less of a religion, taking most of its religious axioms from the judaic, and is primarily a socioeconomic political mode – attempting, violently, to retain an old way of life (pastoral nomadic). That’s not the point here.
I stand by my examination of the causes of Islamic fascism – which are, I maintain, due to the authoritarian refusal of the ME rulers to move from a two-class to a three class economic and political infrastructure and enable an economic middle class. The causes are not ideological, for Islam has existed for centuries within that sustanance, no-growth and silent mode..regardless of that Qur’an and hadiths.
Certainly, the last decade of terrorism is Islamic – because the ME has reached a breaking point where its statist economic mode cannot bring in enough wealth to support its massive population increase.
But terrorism in the decades before was, as I’m sure you can remember, primarily communist (yet another form of magical thinking).
The problem with Muslims living in the West – and this is not all but some – is that our disastrous multicultural policies have isolated them from integration, indeed insisted that they be isolate and encouraged and PAID them to continue their ‘old ways’. This has resulted in both economic and intellectual isolation and a parasitic (welfare) and therefore unrealistic mode of life and thought. Finally we in the West are beginning to reject multiculturalism. A good example is Australia’s Statement of Values, a document required of all visa entrants and potential immigrants where the incomer must agree to accept Australian values of gender equality, rule of law, English language etc, etc.
To only focus on the ideology and ignore the economic and political infrastructure in which it operates is, in my view, a non-factual analysis.
You chastise others for “opinions’ rather than arguments, and produce this Laughable self condradictory nonsense-
“Actually, I’m well aware of the ideology of Islam….I’ve argued before that Islam emerged in the 7th c as a militant violent reaction by a pastoral economy to an economic depression caused by the expansion of the market economy of the Byzantine world.”
So you read the Koran, and think violent Islam its a “reaction” to market forces!?
A “pastoral” economy?
Are you serious?
Islam, my friend, from its very first moments, was a disfunctional mess. A crime, and a sham…. the rantings of a disturbed bandit, pedophile, murderer, liar thief.
The Koran itself a disorganized mess, a perfect symbol of the diseased mind it came from.
Islam was expanded by the sword, and the sword alone. It had, and has, no moral logic, no agreeable or convincing argument to make, no compelling positive human reason to seek it out, or to wish for it to come to you.
It did not then, and does not now “react” to anything but lust for booty, treasure, sex, slavery and power through racial hatred and perpetual anger. It produces NOTHING, it obtained then, as now, its wealth and property through conquest, deceit, and lies.
There is no middle class in the middle east because there is no middle class in ISLAM. The principals that ENABLE a middle class- like hard work, honesty/fairness, respect for private property, contracts, borrowing and interest- are outlawed by Allah. Murder and plunder to His Glory is not conducive to the dream of a cute little little house with white picket fences and 2.5 children. No follower of such a creed can ASPIRE to such middle class concepts, because Mohammed CONDEMNS all who are weak, soft, and unwilling to “KEEEEEL INFIDELLS!” every freaking day.
“The causes are not ideological, for Islam has existed for centuries within that sustanance, no-growth and silent mode..regardless of that Qur’an and hadiths”
Islam existed for centuries with no growth because it is a disfunctional, self destructive cult of masculine ego and violence…sort of like the insecure, low self esteem, male dominated, chip on the shoulder, “dont diss me” or I’ll shoot you mentality of your typical criminal street-gang, but at a “national” level.
Once all the stores have been looted, women raped, and “enemies” killed, theres not much left to do. You cant make it to the “better” neighborhoods because they built alot of walls. Even if you could, you’d never master the skills needed to arrange the pool, lawn, car and home maintenence needs. So you stagnate, (even in a nice neighborhood youve “conquered”) and turn to the vicious cycle of violence, over which gang member is most “thug-like” …and shoot the mechanic because your (stolen) Bentley got scratched…beat the waitress because the cognac tastes like, well, cognac, and you somehow expected something else, and in your humilliated ignorance, you respond in the only way you know…with violence…
Just as sunni and shiites have screamed “INFIDEL” at EACHOTHER over the centuries, right up to today.
The problem with the Middle East is Islam…
The problem with Islam is …ISLAM
I disagree with your statement that terrorism is the result of oppression. To accept that statement as truth, one would have to accept the following statement as truth also: Since the establishment of Islam in the 6th century, Muslims have been oppressed in all parts of the world where they have resided. You must accept the latter statement as truth if you accept the former statement as truth because, since the 6th century, or over the course of about 1400 years, Muslims have been marauding over lands not their own and indiscriminately slaughtering infidels and other Muslims all over Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Remember that this time period includes the long-running Ottoman Empire. Read Dore Gold’s book, “Hatred’s Kingdom,” which details the barbarism of the Wahhabi Muslims in Saudi Arabia. Read Andrew Mango’s book, “Ataturk,” which recounts the death and destruction, at the hands of Muslims, of fellow Muslims and infidels in Greece and the entire Balkan region in the 19th century. Read the history of Northern Africa and Spain to learn of the misery caused by murderous, roving Muslims. Read about the Barbary pirates. So, is this multi-century pogrom the result of oppression?
I have a question for you: If oppression is indeed the cause of terrorism, why is it that we are not trembling in fear at the thought of Haitian suicide-bombers and Haitian men signing up for classes in “How to Fly an Aircraft” at the flight training school in Minnesota (as Zacarias Moussaoui did)? Surely, the Haitian people have been oppressed for decades and have every reason to go on a rampage, but, strangely, we see no Haitians beheading Jews or anyone else. While the government of North Korea is surely a threat to the world, and the North Koreans are certainly oppressed, we don’t see ordinary Koreans strapping on vests laden with explosives, rat poison, and nails and blowing themselves up. You can go around the globe and find other oppressed peoples that are not causing anyone any trouble. So what is it that the Muslims have that the Haitians, North Koreans, and other oppressed peoples don’t have? One word: Islam. Even a cursory look at the Koran will horrify people of reason. It is filled with admonishments to kill Jews and infidels and, as the book progresses, the encouragement to wreak havoc and kill becomes feverish. Islam is the reason for terrorism, not oppression. The drive to establish a world-wide caliphate and subjugate every human to Islam’s totalitarian legal and theological system is the root cause of terrorism.
No, Muslims have not been oppressed in their ancient ME lands – as they practiced their ancient economic modes of pastoralism and horticulture.
The expansionist imperialist agendas of the Islamic nations in the 13th and 15th centuries had absolutely nothing to do with Islam, nothing to do with terrorism, and everything to do with the expansion of these societies into a mediterranean trade economy. Wars over economies are not confined to any nation or ‘religion’ – whether they are the European wars between the French, English, Germans, Spanish, Portuguese or the colonial wars between the same nations.
You are ignoring several key variables and focusing only on ideology. You ignore the dramatic change from a pre-industrial small-scale, no-growth primitive horticultural economy to an industrial economy with a massive population increase. You are ignoring the failure of the rulers to include this massive new population in this new economy. You are ignoring the actual repression of this new population by these rulers and their open acts that prevented this new population from participating in the new economy.
What’s going on in Haiti? It hasn’t reached the ‘tipping point’ because the enormous amount of external aid has sustained the Haitian masses; has provided them with food, shelter, schooling, medical care – all not provided by their own govt. This has ‘softened’ the situation and prevented the explosion that we see in the ME.
The ME explosion, I maintain, was also energized and strengthened by Bush, with his opening up of one ME nation to democracy.
N. Korea is also still restrained – by help from China, which does not want to see waves of people fleeing N.Korea into China.
By the way – and I fully agree with you about the admonitions and tribal hatred of others in the Qur’an and hadiths, but you’ll find such tribal hatreds also expressed within the Judaic halakhah. The difference? They are not repressed but enabled to function within the economy.
You also ignore the longtime terrorism of communist sects in Latin and So. America as well as in the E. European nations.
If you want a few books to read, try Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies’ or Lawrence Wrights ‘The Looming Tower’ which deals with the rise of Islamic fascism or Natan Sharansky’s ‘The Case for Democracy: the power of freedom to overcome tyranny and terror’.
ETAB, thank you for your response. Everything you say is true. The problem of modern-day Islamic fascism is complex and can’t be reduced to a black or white issue. There are many shades of gray and more than a millenium of history that factors into the problem. However, I still maintain that, while oppression can be a contributing cause, the main cause of terrorism is Islam itself. You mention the Judaic halakhah, which contains its own expressions of hatred. The Christian Bible also contains parts that are considered barbaric and hateful. I didn’t explicitly state this in my original response to your comment, but what I thought would be implicit is that the Muslims have failed to move into modernity and insist on interpreting the Koran literally. Modern Jews know that hateful passages in their religious documents cannot determine their current behavior. Likewise, Christians realize that the stories in the Bible are written using allegory and other literary forms and cannot be taken literally. It is only the Muslims who choose to remain intellectually in the Dark Ages. Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and other religious groups are not trying to kill each other and they accept the right of all religions to co-exist in modern times. Muslims ARE trying to kill people of other faiths and will not co-exist with other religions. Their Koran directs them to kill infidels. This is the main reason they terrorize and kill. Almost all the leaders of Islamic jihad have come from very affluent or well-to-do families. They were educated at fine universities and wanted for nothing. Is oppression the reason for their mania, or is it pure hatred as preached by the Koran?
I absolutely agree, infidel. Muslims have failed to move into the modern era. The Judaic and Christian religions, and the economies within which they operate, have most certainly moved on.
Judaism was, at one time, quite tribal. All you have to do is read the halakhah to see what they think of other peoples – and, of arabs! The two peoples, Judaic and Muslim, say almost the same things about each other. For example, an orthodox Jew cannot sell land to an arab…and so on. But Judaism has its reformists and Islam is trying, slowly, to reform (there are Islamic scholars who are trying to move the texts out of being ‘carved in stone’).
But the key problem with Islam is, I think twofold. First, it’s not much as a religion – for it has little to say about the metaphysical and most of that is straight judaic beliefs. It’s primarily, in my view, a socioeconomic and political mode of an ancient primitive tribalism, based around a pastoral economy, that felt threatened by the increasing population base of the byzantine/christian economy. Calling this mode of life a ‘religion’, and ‘straight from god’..and thus, dogma, sealed the ability of Muslims to change…in stone. They have to smash the stone, and that’s not easy.
The leaders of Islamic fascism are indeed, as you point out, from well-to-do families. But note, not from the Ruling Families. They are locked out of power – and they want power. This is important; the tribal class structure of these Islamic nations had no political system, no civil society, no means of enabling anyone outside The Ruling Set from having any say in government.
In part, I’d suggest that the first phase of Islamic fascism, its early origins, were based in attempting to stop the results of the wholesale corruption of the Ruling class, drunk on oil and other revenues, who ignored the fact that, with the exploding population increase in their countries – that wealth wasn’t going to better the lives of those people..who were increasingly impoverished. But the method of dealing with this problem, which I maintain is an economic and political problem – was instead – ideological! Magical!
They felt that IF they could Go Back To The Way It Was..a pure and sacred and non-modern lifestyle…THEN..everything would be fine. This anti-modernization romanticism, ignoring that the population base had moved far beyond the carrying capacity of that old pastoral economic mode..is a ‘virtual reality’. It exists in emotions, in passionate words. And Islam is, as a tribal ideology, based around ‘the group’ and rejects individualism, rejects the use of individual reason, rejects questions, dissent.
Rather similar to the medieval Christian era where the Church forbade individual reason, questions, dissent. The difference is that Christianity is not identical to the church, and is actually supportive of individual reason – and once separated from that mode of church (and this took some bloody battles in the West)..people could modernize.
The Rulers in the Islamic world had no intention of going back from modernization and repressed this growing set of dissidents. And in all these nations, in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq etc..the Rulers repressed these dissidents. Viciously. AND…did little to almost nothing to improve the economic and social wellbeing of the population. BUT – they did suggest to the people that the reason for their problems was not internal but was external: the West.
And Israel and Palestine came to be convenient red herrings for this agenda of diverting anger from the internal problems to the external. I maintain that I-P has nothing to do with Islamic fascism, and also, that the majority of the Islamic world did NOT want an independent democratic Palestine in their midst.
This set the stage for what I’d consider the next phase: the boiling point. The synchronization between economic capacity and population size…had been broken. The statist socialist economy based around oil/Suez simply cannot support the population. The Rulers became more repressive (see the 1970-80s..and see Lawrence Wright’s The Looming Tower for a history of Al Qaeda and the MB)..But this cannot last. Eventually, the infrastructure cracks – and it has.
What is needed, I claim, is an economic mode that enables a middle class economy – totally absent in the ME – made up of private enterprise. This will create wealth for the greater proportion of the population. To enable the devt of a middle class, you need a constitutional democracy, for this class must have the legislative power to enact rules and laws for this economy.
Islam, as an ideology, will have to change; it is completely divorced from the modern reality of the world and cannot retain its isolation. The West, on its part, has to refuse multiculturalism, has to refuse any attempts by immigrants to obtain special treatment, to insert Sharia Law in any form, to refuse to integrate etc. The West has been spineless about this for a generation and is only now, starting to wake up.
Well said ETAB. To whatever extent the Muslim Brotherhood controls Egypt is the exact extent the Egyptian economy and nation will be wrecked.
80 million people selling each other donkeys won’t work
Israel is probably already selling land in the Sinai for permanent development when an Egyptian army whose tanks are pulled by camels fails to liberate Gaza.
Intent separated from reality is just pie in the sky.
Muslim Brotherhood, meet Lehman Brothers.
You ignore the ideology of the communists.
You seem to be what my father would have called, “a man educated beyond his intelligence.”
Either that, or you’re a leftist. Facts don’t bother them much.
I’m ignoring the ideology of the communists? Again, you aren’t providing an argument, just your opinion. What do you mean by ‘the ideology of the communists”? I suggested that they were agents of terrorism. And what’s YOUR view?
No, heh, I’m not a ‘leftist’, a socialist. Quite the opposite. But I’m saying that the demonstrations in Egypt were not due to any Islamist agenda, not due to the MB, but were grassroots demonstrations by an impoverished and repressed people who want freedom.
Islamic fascism can’t answer their needs, for it, like Obama, operates only in virtual reality. Not the real world. It can’t develop a robust economy, it won’t enable the development of a middle class economy which is absolutely necessary within this size of population. It won’t enable constitutional democracy which gives legislative power to this middle class.
All Islamic fascism can do, like Obama, is talk. And, terrorize – and Obama, frankly, has his own tactics of threatening people…such as his threats that ‘If you don’t pass my Stimulus, the economy will collapse’ and ‘If you don’t pass my Health Care Bill, evil doctors will continue to cut off limbs because they are greedy’…
ETAB
you are going off the reservation.
you are trying to connect dots that aren’t connected ..the picture you end up with is invariably incorrect.
islam is a concoction of a deranged thief. PERIOD.
those that follow him today are just as deranged. islam and terrorism is not connected to the economics of the world or born out of a lack of freedom. it is a parasitic beast that gorges on the economies of others.
islam is just a parasite …it produces nothing gives nothing but cruelty and despair
Heh – you have provided your opinion but no argument. You have to consider the facts of demographics and the economy; no nation or people run on ideology alone!
Consider that the ME nations have lived in the same economic mode since the era of Mohamed; primitive pastoralism and horticulture. They weren’t involved in fascism then. The 13th-16th c heyday of the Islamic rulers was based around, not Islam, but the expansion and control of Mediterranean trade as that era opened up to a market economy. [See Fernand Braudel's work on The Mediterranean]. But with that era over, these economies sunk into that local horticulture. Then came oil..That changed it all. You are totally ignoring these ‘dots’; they are facts; they are reality.
You cannot support 80 million people in Egypt on tolls from the Suez Canal. OK? Iran and Saudi Arabia are in economic trouble – even with oil. The economy comes first, always, before any rhetoric and magical words.
Islamic fascism is indeed, in my view, an ideology focused on ‘magical thinking’. It’s utopian and thus divorced from reality. Islamic fascism, by the way, is not the same as Islam. I’m not saying I’m a fan of Islam – I’m not because it is a tribal ideology and rejects individual freedom and reason. But fascism is another aspect – and linking it to Islam, because of a desire for The Pure Era We Had In The Past…is terrorism. Fascism is a utopian agenda to return to a Past Purity.
I think you need more of an argument than just an opinion.
there is no nice solution to the middle east. I see it getting worse and worse. what bothers me most is they are exporting islam around the world.
their problem is there are too many people for their system to accommodate. that is not my fault and probably not yours either. easy picking for radical religion which is the core of islam.
what ever fix you come up with will be impossible to enact. the problem is growing faster then the solution.
I guess I hope you could understand that not all things are capable of a good ending.
I say this because I think you have very good ideas about other topics ..but on egypt I think you are all wrong.
personally I don’t care to live in my own excrement but there in egypt that is pretty much the lot of many and they wish to export that to the entire world.
regards
To ETAB
“Again, you aren’t providing an argument, just your opinion. What do you mean by ‘the ideology of the communists”?
Ummmmmm the 100 million people murdered worldwide to advance the communist ideology isnt something I’d call an OPINION, its more like, I dunno, a FACT?
Gulags, re-education camps, mass murders of the political opposition, wholesale slaughter of towns and villages to press home the threats and enforce the totalitarian rule of the state.
In the face of these events, perpetrated by Communists, for, the advancement of Communism, how dare you suggest any ones revulsion of that system is merely an “opinion” ?
Root 83 – my comment was addressed to mark v, not you. He didn’t provide an ideology of the communists. Neither do you. Revulsion isn’t an explanation of ideology but merely a reaction-to-either the ideology or an action.
The action of murder is not an ideology. I presume you know the difference between the ‘act’ and the ‘reason for carrying out that act’?
Therefore, I’d suggest that you come off from your high patronizing horse of ‘how dare you’ and – how about YOU explaining the ideology of communism.
What matters the supposed ideology, if the means to achieve it are the same?
What matters the “argument” of what motivates them, when the result is the same murder, enslavement, and degredation of all who disagree with them?
The result IS the ideology…because the claims they make to EXCUSE the result never seem to pan out, do they?
All Totalitarian “Ideologies” are the same….they are failures. Communinism, Facism, Islamism, whatever “ism” you choose to call it, the belief is the same…..Bodies, torture, and destruction… with high living among the elite that wormed their way to the inner circle of phycopath running the show, yet ever increasing ruthlessness for the rest as the “system” they claim to have created, fails miserably.
These places are historically, always a disfunctional mess, doomed to fail in delivering on their basic promises, because their promises are BASED ON LIES THEY NEVER INTEDED TO FULFILL.
Hitler is Mohammed, is Mao is Stalin.
Same diseased minds, same results.
Stalin and Hitler were ideological “opposites” you think?
Granted, the Germans seem to be more Technical and Business oriented, than the truly thugish Russians, and would have fostered a larger “inner circle” of the politi-connected and well-off….
BUT WHAT THE FREAK WAS THE DIFFERENCE to their conquered neighbors, to the dissidents, to the rule of law, to the respect for private property, to the religious and intellectual freedom crowd, that just wanted to be left alone, and persue their own lives as THEY saw fit?
Answer: None. They are all crushed under the boot (or sandal) of Supreme life and death rule by the Unchallengeable.
All Systems or Beliefs that excuse and employ murder, torture and coersion against those that disagree with their desires, be it ethnic, religious, territorial, economic, sexual or whatever reason, are born from the same mindset….
Its called “hooray for me, sucks to you when I’m on a roll”
Islam has no different Ideology than Communism, Facism, or NAMBLA-ism.
Child molesters or Communists…both will kill whoever THEY need, in order to have whatever THEY want.
That is their ‘Ideology”…
Stop trying to over-analyize the obvious.
Eon (1), thanks. I will seek out that special and watch it. Sounds like an excellent training film, for those of us who are less than enamored with THE WON and all he entails.
From the onset, many of us have seen the similarities between Obi and Chamberlain et al, which is one reason he wasn’t restrained and gracious enough to tuck the Churchill statue in a cupboard and move on like an adult. Perhaps Churchill’s powerful vision and voice was haunting (taunting? chastising?) Obi across the time-space continuum.
“From the onset, many of us have seen the similarities between Obi and Chamberlain…”
A very good comparison. I keep noting that he is simultaneously a glib-tongued opportunist and spineless when it counts. Very Chamberlain-esque.
He is the exact guy who would say to home invaders, “go ahead and do to – just leave me alone.”
Heh. Sorry, it didn’t like my bracket tags. That should read ““go ahead and do *whatever* to *whomever* – just leave me alone.”
Mike, thanks for the insightful article. The question is not Obama. Admittedly this all started with Carter and his naivete. As an Iranian American who was keenly glued to the television set during the Iran crises, I watched America go down a very slippery slope, and now, I am sorry and afraid to say that history is repeating itself. It is really the same plan. The American flawed foreign policy is at play regardless of who is in charge. George Bush was not any different. Reagan with all tough talk ultimately appeased the mullahs of Iran. Bill Clinton waited 10 minutes in front of a UN restroom waiting for butcher Khatami to come out so that he could talk to him (Khatami knowing what was happening never came out). Obama extended his hand to rapist mullahs. Carter might as well be in charge: America supports a dictator for 30 plus years. Hypocritically, Obama and Hillary talk about freedom and democracy and never meaning it and when the times get tough, they nervously and haphazardly try to manipulate the situation in their favor. American leadership cannot provide a lip service to freedom and democracy and yet wine and dine with dictators such as Mubarak and the Saudi King. America needs to decide whether it is better for her to speak for principle and stand for what is morally or ethically right or seek a short-term stability to keep the oil flowing?
Most Egyptians say they prefer Bush to Obama-proof his words are not working…
Nothing showed more clearly the reaction of Egypt to Obama than his stand-in Ms Amanpour surrounded by Egyptians yelling, telling her- we HATE YOU, and she was flummoxed, (thinking but, but I am on your side) and then again – she implored- WHY? and he said WE HATE AMERICA and we HATE you.
The cognitive dissonance was palpable – confusion written on her face- and Obambi suffers the same clash with REALITY_ he does not acknowledge it, even when it slaps him upside his jug-eared head-
as for Jarret- she is also an “outsider” Like the O, born in IRAN raised in UK- – completley clueless, not only about foreign diplomacies- but USA culture- at a fancy dinner party she asked a general to bring her wine thinking he was her WAITER!!!!
These people are classless and clueless an embarassment to USA, never fail to come down on the wrong side of any issue and then ludly proclaim- it’s your fault for not “getting it”- you know the benevolence they are trying to bestow upon you.
and they think Sarah is a hick and stupid -
I dislike Hillary Clinton with a passion. But, given Obama and his performance to date……if only Hillary were there to answer the 3:00 a.m. wake-up call! If only…..
God save our Republic.
Watching the Churchill docudrama left me decidedly less enamored of The Hill than I was- and I wasn’t very to start with. Namely because of Edward “The Equalizer” Woodward’s spot-on portrayal of Sir Samuel Hoare, who served MacDonald as Secretary of State for Air, Baldwin as Foreign Secretary, and Chamberlain as Home Secretary.
Through all of it he was a man who failed even the basic test of an “honest politician”, i.e. he wouldn’t even stay bought. He would change sides in a heartbeat if it was advantageous for him personally to do so, and his only loyalty was to his own ambition.
Anyone who thinks Britain handled India badly from World War One until independence and partition in 1947 can mainly thank Hoare; the plan was his. In the process, he played so fast and loose with the rules that he got hauled before Commons on charges of falsifying documents (which he did) and was only saved by an invocation of “special privilege”- something we have become familiar with over here under The One.
In the end, when Chamberlain’s refusal to issue an ultimatum to Germany over the invasion of Poland threatened his own position, Hoare turned on Chamberlain and joined the clique demanding that Chamberlain actually do something as opposed to pontificating. Hoare claimed (as always) that he was “acting on principle”- that principle being to throw somebody else “under the bus” before they could do it to him.
Having seen a portrait of Sir Samuel Hoare in action, I think I now understand Hillary much more than I did.
(BTW, I am now reading “The Gathering Storm” by Churchill, to get the story in more detail. He is not complimentary to those involved.)
cheers
eon
I know the limits of Obama’s rhetoric; But, it depends what race you are. It’s like the difference between christian and muslim. And the pagans love him.
Obama, reared in a hybrid East/West cocoon of relative (and culturaly
relative) priviledge fails to understand either. He thought that he
could walk, not on water, but on words and that would be enough. Here
are a few of his sugar coated Cairean delicacies and
anyone with the slightest knowledge of Islam would demolish every
patronising lie in a nano second.
“America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.
Instead, they overlap, and share common principles—principles of
justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
One simple question? If the qualities of ‘justice and progress,
tolerance and dignity’ are so imbued into this politics posing as
religion creed why is the ME now collapsing like a house of cards?
This ideology obsessed amateur in Presidents clothes may or may not be
aware of the oft quoted, ‘events dear boy’ bon mot but that’s precisely
what is going on now. The markers of history have crept up behind his
happy clappy blind spot and America is left rudderless in a sea of
turmoil.
I believe the latest news is of recrimination and a massive split
between Clinton’s State Department and Obama’s inner circle. Which is
to be? Orderly transition or, go now and now means yeaterday? Or is
their only real concern, that of perception?
And Mubarak, until a week or so ago was America’s bestest buddy? Is it
surprising that Saudi is now blinking in a horrible dawning that they
could be next on the abandonment list? Or should that read obamdoned?
Meanwhile Iranians are suffering the results of this insufferable man’s
reverse ferret mentality. Wrong kind of Muslims? Or could it be that
they’re just not the Muslim Brotherhood? Not enough of a hardline
replacement?
The signs are there. Cairo speech. First public broadcast on
El-Arabiya. Removing islamic, terrorist and jihad from official
lexicon. A shrug on Fort Hood. Stuffing the White House with MB
affiliates.
If this is the best the West can muster, and I include Europe in the
role call of inept dhimmidom, what hope is there?
I think we could do with an orderly transition of go now, and that
means yesterday of our very own.
ETAB wrote:
When a person standing outdoors on a clear, sunny day, opines that there is no sun, it is not necessary to offer an argument to refute their position. It is either dishonest or lunatic, but either way, it cannot be taken seriously, and need not be met with an “argument”.
My “argument” is the facts of history. You are either unaware of them, or choose to ignore them.
Whether your profound ignorance is willful or not, it is not reasonable to offer an “argument” to your silly opinions.
The sun remains.
Islam is incompatible with civilization. In order to be a “moderate” Muslim, one has to consciously disavow huge portions of the Koran which are breathtakingly violent in scope. In other words, become an apostate in the eyes of true Muslims. BTW, Osama Bin Laden would utterly destroy any “moderate” Muslim in a theological debate on the Koran, because if nothing else, OSB knows what the Koran demands of its followers.
Where Islam is the majority, Islam allows no dissent. Thus my prediction for Egypt, the MB aside: One Man..One Vote…Once. It’s inevitable.
Oho! A reverse psychology fatwa calling for the murder of the President by those the President has reached out to.
Nicely done. That oughta keep him out of the middle east.
Hey! Look! Over here! President Obama! Apostate! Feets, do yer stuff.
Mr. McDaniel you are brilliant. Not only was Obama born a muslim but he was twice a muslim with his Indonesian step father. There is no equivalent of baptism in Islam, he is a muslim from birth in Islam.
Obama abandoned Islam and turned Christian which is a no-no in Islam.
All we have to do is get the word out there and Obama’s only friends in the middle east are Israel.
President Obama, the apostate President. Obama was baptized by ‘Racy’ Wright in 1988 so he was a muslim til he was 27.
I say start making Obama ‘apostate’ t-shirts and send them to every American or otherwise muslim organization Obama reaches out to. They’ll have to reject Obama or look like they love apostates.
Maybe we can get Obama to convert back to Islam in time for 2012.
Why hasn’t someone written a book called, “President Obama: the Apostate President”. That’d put him in Dutch with his anti-colonialist buddies. I can see it in every book stall in the middle east. Wow. Start the presses.
Dear “James May”:
I don’t normally respond to comments that take liberties with what I’ve written, but because of the potential for a particular kind of misunderstanding, I’ll clarify things. Keep in mind I have little doubt that the overwhelming majority of PJM readers understand what’s going on.
Unlike Mr. Obama, who, when he says “make no mistake,” or “let me make this clear,” I actually do say what I mean and mean what I say. There is no reverse psychology intended or actually present in my essay. I do not advocate violence against Mr. Obama or anyone else. What I’ve written regarding Mr. Obama’s faith and upbringing are matters of fact, public record established by Mr. Obama himself in two autobiographies and various speeches over many years. Likewise, it is indisputable fact that apostates are marked for death by Islam. My bringing to the attention of those who are not familiar with this particular tenant of Islam to make the easily understood point that strictly observant Muslims are unlikely to listen to or heed Mr. Obama is also factual, as is the fact that some Muslims are likely to try to carry out a death sentence for apostasy if given the chance. It is therefore foolish for anyone–and particularly Mr. Obama–to believe that anything he has to say to Muslim will be appreciated or acted upon in a way advantageous to America.
Of course, I’ve no doubt that those who don’t have an apparent political axe to grind will take what I’ve written as it is obviously intended and as the plainly understood meanings of the words would indicate.
Don’t be modest. Cutting off Obama from his outreach by pointing out his apostate status as residing in the same intellectual space as Rushdie is a brilliant stroke.
Too bad you couldn’t have mentioned it on a TV interview in Cairo before that speech plus mentioned the speech was written by a Jewish guy. There would have been no speech.
It’s not too late for some dry and empirical, “Just the facts, ma’am”, billboards.