Why I always preferred Batman. ANYone could grow up to become Batman, if you were just willng to put the time and effort into educating yourself, and working out, and have enough nerve to go out there and DO it. (And have really really rich dead parents who didn’t get in the way.)

(open quote)

Unfortunately, a careful study of his statements shows that Obama was actually accepting the Arab view that Israel is a foreign – and therefore unjustifiable – intruder in the Arab world. Indeed, far from attacking their rejection of Israel, Obama legitimized it.

The basic Arab argument against Israel is that the only reason Israel was established was to sooth the guilty consciences of Europeans who were embarrassed about the Holocaust. By their telling, the Jews have no legal, historic or moral rights to the Land of Israel.

This argument is completely false. The international community recognized the legal, historic and moral rights of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel long before anyone had ever heard of Adolf Hitler. In 1922, the League of Nations mandated the “reconstitution” – not the creation – of the Jewish commonwealth in the Land of Israel in its historic borders on both sides of the Jordan River.

But in his self-described exercise in truth telling, Obama ignored this basic truth in favor of the Arab lie. He gave credence to this lie by stating wrongly that “the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history.”

He then explicitly tied Israel’s establishment to the Holocaust by moving to a self-serving history lesson about the genocide of European Jewry.

Even worse than his willful blindness to the historic, legal and moral justifications for Israel’s rebirth, was Obama’s characterization of Israel itself. Obama blithely, falsely and obnoxiously compared Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to white American slave owners’ treatment of their black slaves. He similarly cast Palestinian terrorists in the same morally pure category as slaves. Perhaps most repulsively, Obama elevated Palestinian terrorism to the moral heights of slave rebellions and the US civil rights movement by referring to it by its Arab euphemism, “resistance.”

(close quote)
–that’s just a snip, folks –

Relativism does not apply to some universal truths. However, regarding the events of the day – any day – it is absolutely true. Consider as an example a traffic accident involving several cars with some complexity. The various witnesses and drivers will each have their own perspective on the subject, and tell what may appear to be different stories. They have already – consciously or not – assumed what others were thinking and trying to do during the accident. None of renditions will be the absolute truth, and none can be said to be all wrong. That is why inspectors ask all the witnesses.

The same can be said about political conflicts and wars. Everyone, whether directly involved or observing, will have their own take on events depending on what they see, what they knew (or thought they knew) about the issue and what interests they have at stake.

The issue of superiority summarizes to a large extent the Israeli-Palestinian/Moslem conflict. Both believe themselves God’s chosen people. Both believe God is on their side and anyone opposed is wrong. Neither is willing to accept to be equal to the other in any way. But, peaceful coexistence requires at the very least admitting the others have an equal right to exist. That has not yet happened. So, the war continues.

There have been a lot of questions posed regarding how many Moslems are really fundamentalists, and why do the others not speak out or act against them? It also appears that there is a true disbelief that there are any Moslems who are not seeking to kill us all.

I have been around long enough, and seen enough, to know that I do not have all the answers, no matter how much I try. What I always try to do, however, is find context for events that allows for a more accurate perspective.

No one has specific statistics about the percentage of Moslems that are radicalized. But, even a small percentage (assumed at 10-20%) still translates into a very large number and a serious problem. The percentages, as well as the potency of the movements, certainly vary from country to country. We also know the numbers have been growing almost everywhere. The more sever the problems, the more radical people get.

Please put away the guns before you read. I AM NOT COMPARING RELIGIONS OR BELIEFS. I am only addressing basic human traits, which tend to be the same wherever people are born.

This is not a defense of anyone. It is just some context and perspective to help better understand what is happening.

I will not use the word “Moderate” as it still implies a level of potency, which makes them fundamentalists of a lesser degree. There are many of those, but they are not the ones we are talking about here.

Think about all the people around you. There are many who simply do not believe in God, even though they were born into Christian or Jewish families and where taught all the religious dogma. They are simply too doubting to believe in anything they cannot prove.

There are also those – the vast majority – whose religious involvement is limited to praying to God for a better life and seeking comfort that there is a supreme being watching over them. They try to be good people, helpful, generous, etc. But, they do not hang on every word of the Bible. Most have not even read the whole Bible. They do not carry their religion on their sleeve and try to convince all others of their beliefs and reject those who disagree with them. They leave people’s relationship with God to each individual.

This is simple human nature, and applies to all people, of all religions and nations, including the Moslems. People generally focus on their own lives and struggle to improve their lot mostly through legal and moral means. And, when you boil religions to their basics, it all comes down to one moral standard – Do unto others as you wish others to do unto you.

Taqiyeh is only applicable when Moslems are in an environment where they are outnumbered and not able to win. It is there that they are commanded to try to blend in and accept other people’s rules until the time comes when they are able to take over. So when you see Moslems in places where they do not need Taqiyeh, you know that there positions are true. If they can be fundamentalist and it is even better for them, then speaking against it is not for show.

There are instances and places where Moslems have stood up and fought fundamentalists. But, they are limited due to two very simple facts.

The first is that almost all Moslems live in authoritarian societies, where free speech is not permitted and will get you killed. Their options are limited to the fundamentalists or a cruel potentate who rules by fiat and has the support of the world community. Not a good choice.

The second was best articulated by good friend of mine, an international lawyer and 40 year veteran of human rights and a Moslem himself. He had written a lot about the role of religion in Moslem countries and gotten himself into trouble for it. This the way he put it and I paraphrase.

“You and I can debate any issue, disagree present facts to prove our point. One of us may convince the other, or we may agree to disagree. We can even discuss the meaning of verses in the Bible or Koran and present our own interpretations of them. However, if one of us raises a holy book – be that a Koran, Bible or any other – and with absolute conviction that all in it is exact and subject to interpretation and says this is what God said, the conversation is over. Who are we to debate with God and disagree with him? How can we even conduct this conversation since the person in front of us has absolved himself from any authority to discuss the issue? He can only point to God’s words. Since it is God’s word, we will have to take it up with HIM. In the mean time, unless God clearly takes our side in a visible manner, we considered apostates and heretics who stand against God’s will, and subject to eternal damnation.”

Sure an educated person with extensive knowledge of the Koran may be able to point at another part of the book to make his point. But, how many of those are there? Most do not even know were to begin. And, if they do, there are many parts of the Koran that call for war, killing and eradicating the infidels, etc. Temporal context is not specified in the Koran, so it cannot be argued, unless we are willing to take it up with God himself and return a convincing answer. I do not know anyone who has that kind of pull with God, yet.

Thus, most will remain silent to remain alive. Dhimmism is not limited to non-Moslems. Many Moslems live under the similar rules. Fundamentalists have killed much more Moslems than they have killed others.

In those instances where they have a chance of success they do act. A good example is the war between the Lebanese Army and the Sunni Fundamentalists in the Palestinian camp in North Lebanon. The area around the Camp is predominantly Sunni Moslem, and the fundamentalists declared their war on behalf of these people, proclaiming their aim to establish an Islamic state and defend them against an “infidel state” (meaning no Sharia). The Sunnis where on the front lines, shoulder to shoulder with the rest of Lebanese to defeat them. More Sunni soldiers died in that war than any other sect – more than half.

The few Lebanese who were among the fundamentalists were denied burial in their towns. Yes, Sunnis refused to “defile the soil of their towns with the blood of these vile monsters” (their words not mine).

The most common statement heard from Sunnis then was “We do not want to become another Kundahar”. They enjoy their freedom and modernity and wanted to keep them.

Will we see more? Hopefully, but that is a subject for another time.

Cadmus

Never has there been such a confluence of events that allow the Muslim world a chance to prove that they can be allowed to join the West and the rest in modernity and “tolerance”. Perhaps, parsing away the subtle details of Obama’s speech, that is the “sense of life” of the whole rhetorical excercise. Make a few compromises, behave yourself in public, and everybody can get along. Sort of.

Jump aboard the train now, because this may be your last chance. When will there be another US President that is this obsequious to the Muslim interest?

If, as has been said, that the Arab/Muslim world never misses an opportunity to miss and opportunity, and that this falls with a thud in the next few years, much of what Obama has said will be discredited by that harshest of judges, reality.
To wish Obama failure (really) is to accept that there might be really terrible slaughter in the world in the years to come. Please let that bitter cup pass us all by.

But the fundamental premise, if I read his words correctly, is false, whatever nice rhetorical turns parts of the speech make. It is what Obama and his class of intellectual peers do best; create false rationalizations to explain the imperfections of men and their societies.

And perhaps that is necessary, as much of the political part of the Muslim world lives in world of self-delusion.

The world is littered with the husks of nations who have warred against Israel.

Onesimus

Pure nihilism that is linked to a cultural death wish and which insists that the truth gets defined by the one with the power.

So, in the current climate, whatever Hussein says goes, and what he seems to have said in this speech is, “C’mon in, jihadists. This is your country, too, and it’s time to start the takeover, just like started in Europe a decade or so ago.”

Why can’t the underlying message be that pure and simple, despite all the slight of hand?

Which means, we will continue to slide until we regain our self-confidence, and this will necessarily involve the bigotry of admitting and proclaiming that we ARE better than the rest, that American exceptionalism, with its emphasis on natural law, Judeo-Christian morality, the primacy of the family and the individual, and the explicit rejection of all that is associated with the post-modern left is indeed the way to go. Without that, none of us will get along. In fact, these recent events escalate the risk, even the likelihood, of a global conflagration which will be out of our control and which we must prepare to weather.

I don’t trust Obama on this issue at all. Events will show what he really plans to do. But he has left enough slack in his rhetoric to do anything from throwing Israel under the bus to doing nothing.

The moment is “now” to “press” for an agreement. But it will require “patience”. So anything from a strong finger-wagging to reducing military and intelligence cooperation with Israel are kept in reserve. Then there was the classic “redoubling” of efforts. If the inital effort was one penny earned, we could retire the national debt with all the “redoubled” pennies.

If we can’t rescue the English language from Obama, then let’s wallow together. We can speak of an “urgent need” to “create the conditions” “eventually” for a peaceful Palestinian state, acknowledging that “everyone has made mistakes” but placing security against terrorism first “is a fact”.

Well, you just outlined the argument that inevitably follows when someone makes that distinction. I agree with you, to me these friends hold cognitively dissonant ideas. They are liberal, so that is not a shock. But they are also not idiots, they are smart people who have been taught that such dissonance is socially acceptable, even desirable. So, I engage them in debate and discussion in the hopes that at some point they will have an epiphany. These are the little things of which Wretchard speaks – working the people around you to get them to think differently than what the conventional wisdom feeds them. I have moved a couple of people incrementally on some issues. It is a very slow and painful process, but what other choice is there? How do you undo 30. 40, 50 years of social programming? Stalin’s solution was Siberia – I’m not ready to recommend that….yet.

I don’t get your point. Obama has been nothing but ingratiating towards other nations, quite frankly it’s disgusting. US foreign policy should not be about “restoring our image”, what everybody else thinks isn’t very important. What matters is our interests, which are not served by obsequious toadying to Europeans and Muslims.