REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Film protests: What explains the anger?

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:42
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5636
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, September 15, 2012 4:44 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

More than three years ago, President Barack Obama famously told a Cairo audience that "we meet at a time of great tension between the United States and Muslims around the world".

His speech, titled A New Beginning, sought to transcend the acrimony of the Bush era.

This week, as violent protests rage across the Middle East and beyond, the president might ask himself: What went wrong?

The truth is that there is no single explanation.

One answer is that last year's wave of political uprisings, the so-called Arab Spring, is responsible.

After all, protests began in Egypt, which last year became the most populous Arab democracy, and spread to Libya, which became the largest by area.

The Arab Spring did indeed invigorate a range of Islamist movements and weakened the law enforcement capabilities of the affected states.

However, this cannot explain why some of this week's most serious violence took place in Sudan, and other protests in places normally calm, as Qatar.

Additionally, such violence long pre-dates the Arab Spring and frequently took place under dictators, the most prominent examples occurring in the Middle East in 2006 after a Danish newspaper's publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

The second argument is that we are witnessing profound anti-Americanism, dormant for much of last year, fused with religious extremism - with the controversial Innocence of Muslims film merely a trigger.

According to a June 2012 Pew survey, just 15% of those in Muslim countries held a favourable opinion of the United States, compared to 25% in 2009.

Polls indicate that anti-Americanism stems from a variety of grievances, including US policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, American wars in the Middle East, and US backing for friendly dictators.

The irony is that, whereas Barack Obama is sometimes pilloried by critics in the West for naively supporting the revolutions, most Arabs see his actions as too late and too little.

Although Arab ideas about freedom of expression are fundamentally divergent from Western ones - 84% of Egyptians want the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion - there are big generational gaps.

Those under 35 - the generation widely held up as the engine of the Arab Spring - are far less likely to pray several times a day, attend the mosque regularly, or read the Koran daily. They are being catalysed less by religion, and more by politics.

Furthermore, anti-Americanism is not universal.

Despite the widespread xenophobia evident in Egypt, 35% of Egyptians actually want Egypt-US relations to remain as strong as they were before the revolution, and a surprisingly high 20% want them to get even better. Sixty percent of Tunisians say that they like American ideas about democracy.

A Gallup poll this year showed that 54% of Libyans approve of American leadership, near the highest approval ever seen in the region.

Indeed, Libya has seen a series of protests supportive of the US, and against the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.

Even where it is widespread, anti-Americanism is simply not a sufficient explanation for outbreaks of violence.

In many cases, protests might have had little energy had local religious and political entrepreneurs, eager to bolster their following and create disorder, not exploited them.

In Khartoum, for instance, local buses were laid on to transport prayer-goers to protest sites.

In Libya, to speak of a protest is misleading. The assault in which US Ambassador Chris Stevens died was probably a co-ordinated, complex undertaking by an organised militant group, perhaps in concert with al-Qaeda's North African affiliate. It represents broader Libyan opinion no more than Anders Breivik did that of Norway.

This wave of violence will have longer-term repercussions.

The US has no legal mechanism to censor the provocative film. American freedom of expression cannot be a subject of compromise for any administration. This means that such triggers for protest will recur, as there is no shortage of provocateurs.

Above all, however, many Americans will rightly or wrongly see this week's protests as indicative of the failure of engagement, not a sign that more is needed.

There will be new pressures for the US to disengage from the Middle East, revert to fortress-style embassies, and accelerate the refocusing of American attention to Asia.

Some will argue that Mr Obama's efforts to temper anti-Americanism were exercises in naivety; others that he went nowhere near far enough.

Either way, the irony is that just as fragile post-revolutionary governments are most in need of assistance to build institutions, small sections of their populations are making that task much harder.


I've heard a lot of talk that some of the fuss over that stupid "movie" is because the Middle East isn't familiar with the concept of free speech and that it will take time for them to become accustomed to it (if it ever flourishes at all there). There's some validity to that; although the Libya mess, in my opinion, was a cover for military action, all the other violence in so many countries can't be similarly blamed. So there has to be something bigger behind it. Could the problems with the world economy be contributing? Could it be somewhat a result of our historical interference in the region? Is enough of it "local problems" to explain what's happening? It seems like such massive violence in so many places at once, there must be some common reason...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 5:47 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Well, I have some suspicions about that whole mess, but in regards to the notion of violence and rage...

That comes from not having a sense of humor about it.
In mine own beliefs, the diesms are not infallible, are flawed, and prone to double-dealing (which is obviously, blatantly true even in systems where they are pretended to be!) and one is ENCOURAGED to mock them because taking it all too seriously results in violence and needless slaughter, most especially when your belief system favors the Asura rather than the Deva, as the former don't even hold a pretense of benevolence, nor in many cases do the deisms of voodoun, for another example.

As an Outsider-Theory Maltheist, I also believe that not only are the "gods" inimical to Man in the error of his creation, they also feed on misery and suffering - thus taking them too seriously gives them power and influence by which they warp the perceptions of the weak and gullible into of course causing more misery and suffering.

Laughing in their faces, metaphorically, is the noblest act of Mankind, for it is our very ability, and willingness, to commit Heresy that is our primary virtue, and the sole root of every ounce of progress as a species we've ever made, for Dogma has never not once advanced our improvement of conditions here, our understanding of the universe, or the betterment of our own lives - never not once, if anything, the opposite.

Annnnd that's as far as I can go on this without technially proselytizing, which is explicitly forbidden.
(As in dogma-level forbidden, which is a deliberate in-joke and irony)

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 7:07 AM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:

...US policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, American wars in the Middle East, and US backing for friendly dictators.

That should cover it, I'd say. And YouTube. The power of the internet is immense, and just getting started, particularly in the Arab world. We fucking run their people over in our humvees. We target children from our gunships. We are the most powerful nation on Earth and we treat them like animals. We've killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE (very conservative estimate) over there in just the last ten years and we're still at it.

I'll never understand America's eternal conundrum, "WHY DON'T THEY LOVE US???" WE'VE KILLED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF THEIR PEOPLE. All those people we've killed HAVE LIVING RELATIVES. And now, thanks to the internet, they can all communicate with each other and watch YouTube videos of us slaughtering them and laughing about it. I love my country, but our military domination of the globe is, right now, the gravest evil facing the human race. And, just to be clear, I include the citizens of the United States in the human race. Our adiction to military supremacy is absolutely destroying our nation.



HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 8:42 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


What explains the protests... religious fervour, ignorance and naivete about Western free speech traditions, a belief that their religion should get special treatment...

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 9:35 AM

WHOZIT


Yes, it's all because of this film. I'm not going to bother putting up the photo of the dead Ambassador, I'm sure he'd blame the film too.

High gas prices, problem, Big oil

High unemployment, problem, Bush and Republian Congress

Forenign policy disaster, problem, Really bad movie.

It'll never be Barry's fault....NEVER!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 10:28 AM

HKCAVALIER


The problem's a little bigger than one man, Whoz. Just a little.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 12:23 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


A bit of what everyone has said, but a lot about modern media capacity. You used to be able to mock far off nations, religions etc etc because they were exactly that...far off. Now everything has the capacity to be broadcast around the world very quickly. Your audience isn't just the small sub group you were possibly aiming at, but everyone. And not everyone shares the same sense of humour when it comes to their sacred cows.

I can think of a number of instances where things got a wider audience than intended. There was a tv show here where people got up and made foos of themselves in a mock talent contest, 'Red Faces' and a group of men did a foolish blackface routine and caused an outcry amongst African americans, when the segment was taken out of context and broadcast on news channels in the US. Of course the biggest difference being that they didn't burn down the Australian embassy in protest.

I think these instances expose the capacity of media to manipulate to get a reaction, and that is exactly what has happened in the Muslim world. It's definitely been used for a purpose, by people who have an ulterior motive. And then that rage is kind of infectious. And I guess what also happens is that is also manipulated by western media who fuel that rage also for their agenda (ie painting all muslims as extremists).

We really are experiencing an uncomfortable collision of different cultures, thanks to modern media.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 15, 2012 4:24 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Facebook was used to rally the protesters who gathered in Sydney's CBD to demonstrate against an anti-Islam film but the rally was hijacked by "extremists", says Muslim community.

About 300 people demonstrated in Sydney's CBD yesterday, the latest in a spate of protests at US embassies and consulates in the Middle East, Africa, Britain and elsewhere over a film that ridicules Prophet Mohammed.

The film, Innocence of Muslims, has been condemned by governments across the world, including the White House.

Eight people were arrested and six police officers were injured during the demonstration, which turned violent before police managed to disperse the crowd.
Advertisement

Protester Abdullah Sary said the protest had mainly been organised through social media sites, such as Facebook.

Another protester, who didn't want to be named, said it had also been discussed in several mosques, but declined to say which ones.

Facebook has also generated heated post-demonstration debate.

A Facebook site, "Violent protesters don't represent us", proposing a counter-protest to the Saturday demonstration has already attracted 75 likes.

Writer Randa Abdel-Fattah feared the Sydney protest would tarnish the Muslim community.

"Unfortunately when a fraction behaves badly, every Muslim stands accused. Let's not let the extremists and unthinking people on all sides control the political and religious discourse," she said.

Ms Abdel-Fattah said Facebook updates from friends at the protest depicted a demonstration that had started peacefully until a minority of extremists hijacked it.

"The first victim of these protests is Islam. That's the irony. The angry, ranting man and woman on the street is dishonouring the example set to us by Prophet Mohammed."

Sydney woman Asme Fahmi said she felt her worst fears had come true while walking in the city yesterday.

"I am sick of these ill informed, reactionary people hijacking Islam. This reaction is an insult to the Prophet Mohammed and they just played into the hands of the filmmakers," she said.

However Ms Fahmi said she understood heavy-handed police tactics were used in the protest.

"The majority of hard working, good, honest Muslims are now going to suffer as a result of the actions of a few."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/sydney-protest-org
anised-over-social-media-20120916-25zye.html#ixzz26ayTVhkq


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 4:08 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Anyone who supports the religious rightwing here.... for example, those who were REALLY concerned that the Democratic platform neglected to mention "god"... can hardly claim to be an objective observer. From my vantage point, one religion is like another, and all are equally deserving of either mockery or respect, whether the object of veneration is Harvey the six foot rabbit, the son of god, god's chosen prophet, a slew of warring supernatural powers, a Reese's peanut butter cup or Ayn Rand. All. The. Same. (Show otherwise.) In other words, I'm with Frem!

But just as it is here and everywhere, religion is a TOOL. Religion in the Mideast (just as here) is a vehicle for those who want to gain power... religious leaders are often also associated with corruption. The real problem in Egypt, in Iran, in Tunisia and elsewhere is corruption, combined with high bread prices thanks to commodity (wheat) costs, thanks to crop failtures, thanks to global warming. (But that's another story) The religious leaders at the top of the heap truly do not want to lose their vaunted status. And Democracy is not the solution if ideas are not able to be freely discussed. Facing the point of a sword for having the wrong opinion is a true disincentive for disagreement. Altho in my personal opinion, if you have to FORCE someone to agree with you, you have truly lost in the marketplace of ideas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 6:23 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I agree,
Quote:

But just as it is here and everywhere, religion is a TOOL
Also that none who were used by that tool to get riled up about "god" in a platform are only different from what's happening elsewhere becasue they live in supposedly "civilized" countries. But to me, religion is just a small part of it. The fact that religion has been part of government in Islamic countries for so very long and they've been so brainwashed by the mulahs into accepting that religion is "all" certainly plays it's part, but it's more than that.

Yes, the internet has played its part, as have many other things, and people have been manipulated, AND our own actions have come back to bite us in the ass. In my opinion, a lot of it has to do with cultural differences and the fact that the Middle East, having been run by dictators, kings, shahs and so forth practically since the beginning of time, have no concept of the idea of free speech, that painful as it is to let things like that exist, it's a basic principle for some countries (even tho' THOSE, like us, have their own forms of censorship and propaganda). Given the movie was made in America, by an American (and so obviously so!), it's only natural they would feel America was responsible, and our not censoring it and punishing the people behind it would obviously seem like complicity. I don't think we're capable of grasping what life would be like under a system which allowed no dissent and clamped down HARD on those who dared, any more than they're capable of grasping what it's like to have to allow such things, difficult as that is. Hopefully, if things really do change over there, someday they will understand, but I doubt it will be in my lifetime, if ever.

Had an interesting thought; Raptor and his buddies keep saying we "apologized", when in actual fact the "movie" was "condemned". I'd like to ask: does that mean they DON'T condemn the "movie"? I'd also be interested in hearing what they think SHOULD have been done by an embassy which is tuned into the country it's in when they hear about and sense the unrest around them and want to do something to hopefully ease the tension. Do they think we should have sent in massive military force, just stayed silent, or come out with some kind of message threatening the populace if any action were taken? I can't quite figure that out.

Fifty years ago, when I was in Afghanistan, there was no such thing as even the concept of protest or dissent. I'm not sure how they would have understood it, or if they would have at all, if we'd tried to explain the concept to them. It was not only unheard of, it was never conceived. Now countries like that understand the idea of having their voices heard, but they still don't fully understand it and, since the only thing approximating it in their history is violent takeover, I don't find it particularly surprising that they would interpret it that way. After all, many of OUR protests turn violent, and we DO supposedly understand the concept. How would we react if it was new to us, if we expected violence if we stood up for what we believed, if we had a history of factions, being totally controlled, turnover in power only being achieved by violence, secret police, etc., etc.?

I believe they have plenty of reason to hate us; after all, we either propped up or stood behind the very people who had oppressed them for centuries. We invaded, bombed the hell out of some of their countries, they saw and understood the corruption they saw around them committed by us in the name of "nation building", the paid mercenaries not held accountable for their actions, and so much more. THAT is familiar to them. They saw the violence we've used against individuals, detention, torture, the overwhelming use of our strength to, in our way, oppress them as much as those who'd held power over them for so long. Why WOULDN'T they hate us?

What news we get of what we're doing and have been doing over there keeps us from knowing the entire story, and even if we did, even if we understood it and were able to put it in context, a faction of OUR country believes they "deserve" it. I think they have every reason to distrust and hate us, and given the power of free speech for the first time in history, it's easy to see how it has erupted in so many places.

What I DID find hopeful in the beginnings of the "Arab Spring" was that so many HAD grasped the concept of peaceful demonstration. It's sad to see that the results have, more than not, ended up in chaos, not knowing who to trust, and it must be confusing to see our unwillingness to get involved in their efforts to free themselves. If it were me, it would look for all the world like "they'll spend tons of money and take all kinds of action to support those who oppressed us; now that we're standing up, they're unwilling to help us." I would have a hard time not hating such powers myself; I'm not surprised they do.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 11:48 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I found this, in relation to the new "societies" created by the Arab Spring:
Quote:

The fall of dictatorships does not guarantee the creation of free societies. There is often a period in which we witness the legacy of tyranny. The Arab uprisings have overthrown tyrants in Egypt and Libya, but the populations and lawmakers have yet to grasp that democracy is not only about free elections but creating free societies.

Arab societies are on a journey. They can easily take the wrong turn. The attacks on the American embassies in Libya, Egypt and Yemen are examples of the ongoing presence of intolerant, tyrannical actors in Arab societies.

These are people who were born and raised in dictatorships. They are accustomed to thinking that a government controls its citizens -- that a film or documentary cannot be produced without government approval. For decades, this has been the reality of their lives, and they strongly believe that the Western world and its citizens have a similarly controlling relationship between individuals and government.

In light of this assumption, they hold the U.S. government responsible for the tacky and distasteful film produced by a right-wing Muslimphobe.

Little wonder, then, that Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy has called for the prosecution by the U.S government of the filmmakers, and Egypt's top cleric, Mufti Ali Goma, has called on the United Nations to forbid denigration of faiths. Morsy studied in the United States and Ali Goma regularly visits the West on the interfaith circuit, yet both men don't yet grasp that religious freedom and the freedom of expression are inextricably linked in America.

It is hard for younger Arabs not born into freedom to understand how individual liberty works in real life.

The freedom to proselytize also guarantees the right to apostatize. Heresy and blasphemy are essential parts of free and democratic societies. Arab activists cannot seek to emulate the West's political and social achievements by looking at the United States and Europe today, but must observe and learn from the religious battles of 17th-century Europe, the smashing of the tyranny of the Roman Catholic Church, the ending of burning witches and the forbidding of hanging heretics.

It is this history of unbolting the doors of dissent that led to the conditions in which John Locke and John Stuart Mill could write and think freely and then influence Thomas Jefferson and the other U.S. Founding Fathers. There are no shortcuts to freedom, except to learn from the mistakes of the West in the past.

The Arab uprisings are not over yet. They are still unfolding and shaping the future. This culture of shouting and killing those with whom Muslims disagree must end. When the Prophet Mohammed's companions shouted "Allahu Akbar," (meaning "God is Greatest," a popular slogan for those yelling outside embassies today) the prophet reprimanded them saying "Our Lord is not deaf."

The millions of protestors last year in Arab capitals that chanted "hurriyah, karamah, adala ijtima'iyya" or "freedom, dignity and social justice" cannot allow for the emotions of bigots to derail their revolution.

Freedom is not only about majority rule, but ensuring that women, religious minorities and intellectual dissenters are able to flourish without fear. http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/14/opinion/husain-arab-spring-democracy/ind
ex.html?iid=article_sidebar


For me, "there it is". That represents some of my original assumptions. They are new to us, have a lot to learn, and it's hard to UNlearn what you've lived under all your life. I wish them well!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 11:59 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Hmmm...found this, too:
Quote:

Terry Jones, a Christian pastor based in Florida who has a long history of making incendiary statements about Islam, is promoting "Innocence of Muslims."
.....
Politicians and the media in the Muslim world have also played an important, though perhaps unintended, role in stirring up violence in the wake of a number of these perceived attacks on Islam.

A YouTube video of "Innocence of Muslims" that provoked the Libyan mob to attack the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was initially published in July, but it was not until versions of it dubbed in Arabic appeared online and were broadcast by religious Egyptian news channel al-Nas that protests sprouted in Egypt.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/13/opinion/bergen-embassy-incitement/index.
html?iid=article_sidebar


So apparently it went unnoticed for a while, unti Jones promoted it and a religious Egyptian news channel aired it. Interesting...

I still think there is n o tie between the filmmaker and al Qaeda. But boy, if someone in al Qaeda spotted it, dubbed it into Arabic and stuck in into the news, THAT would make for a good cover under which to carry out a military assault...Don'cha think?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 1:08 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


God help us all if we can't denigrate religion. ;)

It is very easy - on both sides - to make cultural assumptions. I think the article you posted, Niki, nearly names it.

Not only are many westerners blithely unaware of different cultural attitudes to authority, but those who live in other cultures are also unaware of the west's capacity and tolerance for dissent. Not only do they not understand it, they do not aspire to it. It's why concepts like democracy fail so miserably in many parts of the world. You cannot just start calling elections and feel that it is a victory for freedom, and in many cases, it just opens the door to increased corruption, despotism and anarchy (in the negative sense, Frem).

On the other hand, sometimes any excuse for a riot, a la Sydney. What a disgrace that was, small children holding placards calling for people to behead. It's just dumb and it makes life so much harder for decent, moderate Muslims who disagree with the violence even when they are terribly offended by the film.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 1:45 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

WHERE do I start? Perhaps with the viral image that will come to define this episode: a child who'd be three or four hoisting a sign triumphantly above his head blaring ''Behead all those who insult the Prophet'' while a woman, presumably his mother, thinks this is cute enough to capture on her smartphone. Alternatively, I could begin with the observation that the trailer for the anti-Islamic film that ostensibly started this all, Innocence of Muslims, is now a blockbuster, with YouTube hits in the millions thanks largely to the protesters around the world who think nobody should see it.

This is the behaviour of a drunkenly humiliated people: swinging wildly with the hope of landing a blow, any blow, somewhere, anywhere.

No. Let's start with the fact that so few of the protesters who descended on Sydney's CBD this weekend seem actually to have seen the film that so gravely offends them. When asked by journalists, they bluntly admit this, one even adding that she refuses to watch something so offensive. It's almost impressive how cyclical this stupidity is. But it's also instructive. In fact, this is the key to making sense of something so gobsmackingly senseless. The protesters - at least the ones quoted in news reports - know nothing except how offended they are.

That, you see, is all that matters. This isn't about a film. It's about an excuse. We know because we've seen it all before, like when Pakistani protesters vandalised American fast food outlets and burnt effigies of President George W. Bush in response to the Danish cartoons.
Advertisement

We know because so much of the weekend's ranting was nakedly gratuitous: ''Our dead are in paradise, your dead are in hell''. Pardon? Which dead? Weren't we talking about a movie?

This is the behaviour of a drunkenly humiliated people: swinging wildly with the hope of landing a blow, any blow, somewhere, anywhere. There's nothing strategic or calculated about this. It doesn't matter that they are the film's most effective publicists. It doesn't matter that they protest using offensive slogans and signs, while protesting against people's right to offend. It doesn't matter that they object to insulting people on the basis of their religion, while declaring that Christians have no morals. This is baffling only until you realise these protesters are not truly protesting to make a point. The protest is the point.

It feels good. It feels powerful. This is why people yell pointlessly or punch walls when frustrated. It's not instrumental. It doesn't achieve anything directly. But it is catharsis. Outrage and aggression is an intoxicating prospect for the powerless.

Accordingly, it is not an option to leave an insult unanswered because that is a sign of weakness, rather than transcendence.

The irony is that it grants an extraordinary level of power to those doing the offending. It puts them constantly at the centre of your world. That's why, when Gallup polled 35 Muslim majority countries, it found that of all the gripes the Muslim world has against the West, among the most pervasive is the West's ''disrespect for Islam''.

And it is this disrespect that is the overarching grievance that subsumes others. Everything, global and local, can be thrown into this vortex: Swiss minaret bans, French niqab bans, military invasions, drone strikes, racist stereotyping, anti-immigrant politics, and yes, even films so ridiculously bad that, left to their own devices, they would simply lampoon themselves.

This is what gives Innocence of Muslims meaning: not its content, but its context. It's a symbol of contempt, which is why protests against it so quickly turn into an orgy of anti-Americanism. So, ''Obama, Obama, we love Osama'' they scream, mainly because it's the most offensive rhyme they can muster. Osama, too, is a symbol; the most repugnant one in their arsenal. How better to prove you exist than to say something outrageous?

That the Obama administration immediately condemned the film in the strongest terms doesn't register. Nor that the White House took the extraordinary (and ultimately unsuccessful) step of asking Google to pull the video. This is invisible to an audience of humiliated souls waiting desperately to be offended and conflate every grievance. Indeed, they need the offence. It gives them the chance to assert themselves so they can feel whole, righteous even. It's a shortcut to self-worth.

The trouble is that in our digital world, there is always something to oblige. Anyone can Google their prejudices, and there is always enraging news to share with others. Entire online communities gather around the sharing of offensive material and subsequent communal venting. Soon you have a subculture: a sub-community whose very cohesion is based almost exclusively on shared grievance. Then you have an identity that has nothing to say about itself; an identity that holds an entirely impoverished position: that to be defiantly angry is to be.

Frankly, Muslims should find that prospect nothing short of catastrophic. It renders Islamic identity entirely hollow. All pride, all opposition, no substance. ''Like the Incredible Hulk,'' observes Abdal Hakim Murad, a prominent British Islamic scholar, ''ineffectual until provoked.''

Sometimes you need a scandal to demonstrate an underlying disease. And that's the good news here. The vast bulk of Saturday's protesters were peaceful, and Muslim community organisations are lining up to condemn the outbreak of violence. But now a more serious conversation is necessary. One that's not about how we should be speaking out to defend our prophet and ourselves. One that's more about whether we can speak about anything else.



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/the-incredible-muslim-hulk-p
roves-to-be-no-friend-of-islam-either-20120916-260e8.html#ixzz26gAuIkFD


Waheed Aly is an Australian Muslim academic and media personality

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 16, 2012 2:25 PM

JONGSSTRAW



When have Muslims not been angry? Unrest in the Middle East?....when has there been 'rest'? They don't need and have never needed a frikkin' movie to rile up their empty medieval brains. Annual incomes of under $6,000, and un-employement of 25-50% make for a lot of angry bitter people. I guess when you have nothing in a material sense, you become very jealous of the West's affluence amd freedoms, and then you react like a frightened zombie becoming over-protective and violent at any perceived swipe at the only thing you do have, your religion. The imams whip them up into a flag burning and murderous frenzy saying America is the reason for their misery, while the Muslim Brotherhood government plots with their Al Qaida pals on how to spend the $1.5 billion they get from America every year.










Hmmm, better than Reuben's.
..One more.
Ben!
..My last one.
Okay.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 17, 2012 4:09 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Thanx, Magons, I found that a very interesting article, and it makes sense on many levels.

Yeah, JS, they're "jealous" of us, that's what it is. Right. Where have I heard that before, I wonder...?

It's sooo easy to judge others when you know nothing about them, and such a shame. But that you should walk in their shoes for a while...but that we should ALL walk in each others shoes for a time, how different the world might be.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 17, 2012 4:53 AM

CAVETROLL


http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image
,29553
/

Quote:


WASHINGTON—Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened, sources reported Thursday. The image of the Hebrew prophet Moses high-fiving Jesus Christ as both are having their erect penises vigorously masturbated by Ganesha, all while the Hindu deity anally penetrates Buddha with his fist, reportedly went online at 6:45 p.m. EDT, after which not a single bomb threat was made against the organization responsible, nor did the person who created the cartoon go home fearing for his life in any way. Though some members of the Jewish, Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist faiths were reportedly offended by the image, sources confirmed that upon seeing it, they simply shook their heads, rolled their eyes, and continued on with their day.




Kwindbago, hot air and angry electrons

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 17, 2012 6:57 AM

BYTEMITE


You know, we only call Middle-Eastern attitudes "medieval" because "18th to early 20th century attitudes" makes us sound less amazing.

They're only about a century behind the west in terms of "forcing women to cover their heads" and "punishing rape victims as adulterers" and "religious violence," and that might be because they've been bombed repeatedly over the last century.

Also, cave troll, did you really need to post cartoon religious porn on here? Come on. We're going to prove how easily offended Muslims are... By trying to offend each other?

...Please continue.

........,.-.~.~.~.-.,
....,.'...............'.,
..,..,-,-........,--,-....,
.,../..`-'|...../...`-'|...,
,...'-----'.....'------'....,
,...........................,
,..--------------------,....,
,...'..................,....,
.,..`......._._.......,....,
..,..`....,.....`...,'....,
....,..`.'_._._._.'....,.'
......'.-.,._._._.,.-.'

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 17, 2012 7:38 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Meanwhile, Mitt Romney apologizes to the entire Muslim world for American behavior...

And if you think Americans - especially conservatives - are somehow far ahead of Islam when it comes to social values, you obviously weren't at the Value Voters Summit over the weekend.

Quote:

WASHINGTON, DC — Literature being handed out at the Values Voter Summit on Friday attacks women for being “immodest” and extolled them to “go home and put some clothes on!”
In flyers and brochures on display at Values Voters, the social conservative conference where Republican Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan spoke, an organization called Modesty Matters criticized women for dressing “immodestly” at church, and blamed women for causing men to stare lustfully at them.
Women must “embrace MODESTY in dress and behavior,” one of the handouts read. Women dressed immodestly in church are “an insult to a holy God,” another said.
Other excerpts:
- From the “Modesty: It’s nothing to be ashamed of” pamphlet:“Since men are particularly visual, immodesty in church can trigger lustful thoughts.”
“My men’s bible study group talks frequently about controlling our lust, thoughts, and eyes. Yes the problem and responsibility are ours, but is it really reasonable for the women of the church to make it THIS difficult for us?”
- From the “True Woman Manifesto”: “All women, whether married of single, are to model femininity in their various relationships, by exhibiting a distinctive modesty, responsiveness, and gentleness of spirit.”
The Family Research Council provided Modesty Matters with a table at the conference to distribute these pamphlets.
Republicans have repeatedly voted to cut funding for contraception, outlaw abortions, and defund Planned Parenthood. Now another far-right groups are eyeing a new battleground: the wardrobe.



http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/09/14/851401/values-voters-wome
n
/



Of course, that's also the same convention at which Mitt and Lyin' Ryan were scheduled to speak with a self-proclaimed "terrorist".

And where Rick "Google" Santorum called the attendees stupid:

Quote:

"We will never have the media on our side, ever, in this country. We will never have the elite, smart people on our side."


Saying that conservatives will never have smart people on their side might be the only honest thing he's ever said.







"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 17, 2012 9:38 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Also, cave troll, did you really need to post cartoon religious porn on here? Come on. We're going to prove how easily offended Muslims are... By trying to offend each other?


While I am all for mocking the hell out of religion (pun oh so intended), I think one could do a better job than resorting to the lowest humor possible, but then what does one expect from folk whos primary beef with Islam seems to be that they can get away with oppressing women more effectively ?

That said, this so needs a wish-i-could-unsee-that graphic, so this one just for you Byte.



-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 7:00 AM

CATPIRATE


N Deuce,
You can't figure out evil it just is. The film is a ruse. 9/11 attacks Black September. Our intel should be on high alert. The administration failed. Our state department is a mouth piece for the UN. Now the Afghans usually don't attack during Ramadan or in the winter months. Now our media is so anti american or west that they hide the reality of what is going on. Arab spring isn't about change for democracy but just replacing a tyrant for a theocracy. Major outlets of news around the world are just different spins.

Look at the Arab spring how many women reporters were raped. On camera no less does this sound normal to you. These are lefty libs who go over to put the spin for their news outlets and get tortured for it. Women should not be over there for anything. Why did the UK Guardian never report on the french independent reporter who was raped to death.

Sweeden in the last 5 years has had 83 rapes all committed by immigrant muslim men. Why is this? Because the Koran allows non muslims to be treated less than animals. Until we admit the religon of piece is a book of evil. We will be plaqued with this culture in every country they come to.

It is sad when you have to go to websites like stormfront and bestgore.com to get some answers. I don't trust CNN or FOX.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 7:31 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Well said, Byte...and what Mike posted pretty much backs it up!

Mike, that sickens me--I suppose it shouldn't surprise me, but it does sicken me.

As does the troll's offering...which again, doesn't surprise me. Doesn't particularly offend me, given the source, but does sicken me.

The point he's trying to make is also immaterial. Other religions have had hundreds of years to get accustomed to their gods being ridiculed, made fun of in many ways, etc. Muslims have not, simple as that. You don't change a civilization overnight, or even over a couple of generations. It's changing, little by little, but there is NO comparison to other religions where depictions of the god aren't blasphemy (except probably to some right-wing "Christians"!).

stormfront and bestgore.com, eh? Well, that pretty much disqualifies you from any rational discussion. There are other sources than CNN and FauxNews from which to get at least RELATIVELY impartial news, but buddy, those ain't them!!!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 7:37 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I think this best answers the initial question of what explains the anger:
Quote:

The recent protests across the Middle East have revived a debate about blasphemy in Islam – how it is defined, and how devout Muslims should respond.

While some Muslims cite the Quran or hadiths – sayings or actions attributed to the prophet Muhammad – as justification for violent retribution, Muslim scholars and analysts alike say there is no clear mandate in Islamic theology for such a response.

Instead, they say, the recent violence reflects societies roiled by power struggles and competing ideologies, in which Muslims are used as pawns for political gain.

"The punishment for blasphemy and even the definition for blasphemy is not in the Quran. There are some hadiths that address it, but it's ambiguous," says Nina Shea, director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom in Washington. "So it's very vague and … it's manipulated by those who want to raise a mob and wield power within a society."

In this case, the offending material appears to be an amateurish 14-minute YouTube clip that portrays Muhammad as a bumbling philanderer and child molester who makes up his religion on the fly and incites his followers to unrestrained violence.

The movie clearly was meant to incite a response.

"Sadly, we had idiots on our side take the bait – hook, line, and sinker," says Arsalan Iftikhar, a Muslim commentator and author of "Islamic Pacifism: Global Muslims in the Post-Osama Era."

"Of course there are going to be a lot of [non-Muslim] right-wingers who are saying Islam is a religion of violence," he adds. He attributes the violence to decades of dictatorial rule with little freedom of speech.

Mustafa Abu Sway, a professor of philosophy and Islamic studies at Al Quds University in Jerusalem, says that in Islam it is not up to individual Muslims to seek retribution.

"Their role is to send out the correct information about the life and teachings of the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him," he says.

Nor is it correct according to Islam to take action against any individual for the trespasses of their fellow citizens, says Professor Abu Sway. "Muslims should not blame innocent people and make them pay for the actions of others," he says.

A statement from the Quran, quoted in a 2011 article in the Review of Religions, says, "Let not a people's enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice."

But in some instances, hadiths have been used to justify murder as a punishment for blasphemy, the article continues. One such hadith quotes the prophet Muhammad as saying, "Kill the person who abuses the Prophet and whip the one who abuses his companions."

In Islam, the primary authority is considered to be the Quran, which Muslims believe the prophet Muhammad received from Allah. But hadiths also carry weight in Islamic jurisprudence, and translations and interpretations of both sources can vary widely.

New laws are needed to prevent materials such as the offending YouTube clip from being disseminated, says Abu Sway of Al Quds University.

"It's a moral imperative for Muslims and non-Muslims alike to enact laws that would prevent such actions," he says.

But Ms. Shea, coauthor of the book "Silenced: How Apostasy & Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedom Worldwide," argues that trying to protect all citizens' religious sentiments from offense negates freedom of speech.

Such restrictions also often fail to deliver on promises that they will bring social harmony, she adds, and instead create resentments that people "didn't even know they had."

"It just feeds the sense of outrage," she says. "The societies are constantly roiled by extremists." http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2012/0918/Anti-Muslim-video
-What-Muslim-teachings-say-about-retribution-for-blasphemy




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 7:40 AM

BYTEMITE


Catpirate, I'm friends with some Muslims who fled here from Iraq when Saddam Hussein took power. They haven't ever once tried to rape me or treated me like a non-human animal. -_-#

It's the principle of small sample sizes and newsmedia sensationalism. You only hear about the extreme people behaving badly, not the regular people who are fairly normal. Painting all of them with the same brush is really a misconception.

Denounce and hate the jerkasses that stone women and the jackals and hyenas who stirred up the protests/riots in the middle east with misinformation, I'm fine with that, but if you take it to the religion in general it basically just becomes an instance of dueling religions, "mine is better than yours" playground taunts, not a rational argument.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 7:53 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Why am I not a bit surprised that someone with "pirate" in his username trusts the info he gets from Stormfront?



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 8:46 AM

FREMDFIRMA



I resent that implication Mikey - Pirates are Anarchists, Stormfront is Fascists.
Say hi to Wulfenwhiner for me if you happen to stop over there, though, preferably with a brick.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 8:58 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:

I resent that implication Mikey - Pirates are Anarchists, Stormfront is Fascists.
Say hi to Wulfenwhiner for me if you happen to stop over there, though, preferably with a brick.

-F




You misunderstood, then. The reference to "pirate" in the username is a nod to PN, of course.

Besides, do you think I'd diss real pirates the day before Talk Like A Pirate Day?





"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 18, 2012 4:30 PM

CATPIRATE


Bytemite, Good for you. I am just glad your not racist because you don't want people thinking that. A liberal woman deserved what she got, right. And I am a bastard for pointing that out. Way back in 80 in a NY subway I remember that Black and Italian woman standing next to me to be safe from those Puerto Rican boys. Who knew those girls were bigots.

Hey Kwicko why are you dismissing me your gay hero Anderson Cooper was beaten and raped. What you didn't know that. I stayed out of Egypt on my way home from the Persian Gulf. Religon, Politics, or Economics if your a westerner it is just an excuse. You see if there is a ralley you can rape people. Because your muslim they are infidels.



Monte Cassino, it's not a cultural thing just happens in war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 22, 2012 11:55 AM

AGENTROUKA


Something I just heard on Al Jazeera International struck me as interesting. (Haven't found it online yet, sorry.)

The Egyptian tv station that ran clips of the film and really drew attention to it, al-Nas*, might have implied that it was much more official and government-sanctioned that it was, and that it was supposed to be broadcast in connection with the 9/11 anniversary.

Certainly explains that particular rage a little better.

If it's true, of course. But it appears these sorts of new highly religious/conservative media might have their own agenda, unrelated to neutral facts.

A report on that in general: http://www.aljazeera.com/video/middleeast/2012/09/2012918212550140834.
html



*The name means "Mankind" or The People's Channel, it appears, but googling it I found a perhaps ironic namesake:
Quote:

Surat Al-Nas, or Mankind, is the 114th and last sura, or chapter, of the Qur'an, the Muslim holy book.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nas

Quote:

English Translation by Yusuf Ali:.

Say: I seek refuge with the Lord and Cherisher of Mankind,
The King (or Ruler) of Mankind,
The Allah (for judge) of Mankind,
From the mischief of the Whisperer (of Evil), who withdraws (after his whisper),
(The same) who whispers into the hearts of Mankind,

Among Jinns and among men.



Seeking refuge from harmful propaganda, eh?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 22, 2012 3:00 PM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The problem's a little bigger than one man, Whoz. Just a little.
.


Actually it is all about one man. As much as we'd love to blame Bush for being aggressive and Obama for being weak, the fault lays squarely with one man, Mohammed.

He created a people so full of fear and loathing that they simply cannot find peace in the modern world.

H

Hero...must be right on all of this. ALL of the rest of us are wrong. Chrisisall, 2012

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 22, 2012 4:16 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
He created a people so full of fear and loathing that they simply cannot find peace in the modern world.


You're a Creationist, Hero?
Never would have thought....

Chrisisall, wearing a frilly Mal thing on his head, and ready to shoot unarmed, full-body armoured Creationists

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 22, 2012 4:55 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Until we admit the religon of piece is a book of evil. We will be plaqued with this culture in every country they come to.

I'll ask you what I asked Auraptor: what's your solution? Describe it to me. Keep in mind that Muslim communities are already living in almost every Western country.

Let's say we do decide Islam is a 'book of evil'. Then what? Outlaw it? Deport all adherents? Make them all wear a patch in their clothing that identifies them as dangerous Muslims?

I look forward to your non-fascist-sounding solution. I'm still waiting on Auraptor's.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 22, 2012 9:13 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
He created a people so full of fear and loathing that they simply cannot find peace in the modern world.


Well there's proof Zero is illiterate.
Same could be said of Jesus.

Might be worth the trouble, if you're gonna judge the words and deeds of a person posthumously, to actually know what they were, mighten it ?

The words Compact of Medina mean anything to you ?
Fer cryin out loud it was one of the first recorded acts of Religious TOLERANCE codified into Law, and twas Mohammed that wrote it, just so ya know.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:44 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Put simply:

It is systematic.
It is historic and manipulative.
It's years of abuse, avarice and control with little regard for the people of that region, so long as 'we' get ours.
The Obama Administration has little to do with what has transpired in the Middle East over the last several days. This is the product of over 50 years of exploitation.
The video is but a smokescreen that is being used by factions within those countries to incite a violent response for their own agendas.

Sadam, Khadafi and the Shah of Iran, to name a few. Cruel dictators who ruled with an iron fist. All backed, at one time or another by the US, and all ousted by the US (the exception being the Shah of Iran, he was given asylum here in the US). Do you think that the people might remember their lives under the rule of these men?

The Arab Spring was long overdue and US intelligence was well aware of that fact.

"The truth is that there is no single explanation." is absolutely correct Niki. The killing of the ambassador was planned, the video was merely the match that lit the flame, or more correctly stated, just the excuse needed to light the powder keg. As with the Arab Spring of last year, and with the help of the internet, the so-called uprisings have more to it than meets the eye.

Bottom line: Those that were in power in that region, want to regain and keep that power.

Do all the people of those countries hate us? Probably not. It all depends on how they were treated and affected, and by whom.


SGG


"We won't get fooled again" - The Who

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:58 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Hi guys,


"I've heard a lot of talk that some of the fuss over that stupid "movie" is because the Middle East isn't familiar with the concept of free speech and that it will take time for them to become accustomed to it (if it ever flourishes at all there). There's some validity to that; although the Libya mess, in my opinion, was a cover for military action, all the other violence in so many countries can't be similarly blamed. So there has to be something bigger behind it. Could the problems with the world economy be contributing? Could it be somewhat a result of our historical interference in the region? Is enough of it "local problems" to explain what's happening? It seems like such massive violence in so many places at once, there must be some common reason..."

I failed to touch upon the "freedom of speech" issue surrounding the video. Yes, it's been said that the people of the region are not familiar or understand our basic freedoms, in particular the freedom of speech. The Middle East region countries are more accustomed to government-controlled infrastructures and media. They apparently are under the impression that the Obama Administration condones the video's message, and I would venture to say that the factions behind the uprisings exploit that fact as well.

SGG


"Oh what a tangled web we weave"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 23, 2012 5:22 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:


I failed to touch upon the "freedom of speech" issue surrounding the video. Yes, it's been said that the people of the region are not familiar or understand our basic freedoms, in particular the freedom of speech. The Middle East region countries are more accustomed to government-controlled infrastructures and media. They apparently are under the impression that the Obama Administration condones the video's message, and I would venture to say that the factions behind the uprisings exploit that fact as well.

SGG



Obama, Bush, Clinton.. doesn't matter to those zealots. They've no concept of what freedom means, how to handle it, and are basically being led around by the nose from their so called religious 'leaders' who'll use anything to demagogue and vilify those who " stand against Islam ", or who dare to live life out from under the yoke of religious totalitarianism.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 23, 2012 3:24 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Put simply:

It is systematic.
It is historic and manipulative.
It's years of abuse, avarice and control with little regard for the people of that region, so long as 'we' get ours.
The Obama Administration has little to do with what has transpired in the Middle East over the last several days. This is the product of over 50 years of exploitation.
The video is but a smokescreen that is being used by factions within those countries to incite a violent response for their own agendas.

Sadam, Khadafi and the Shah of Iran, to name a few. Cruel dictators who ruled with an iron fist. All backed, at one time or another by the US, and all ousted by the US (the exception being the Shah of Iran, he was given asylum here in the US). Do you think that the people might remember their lives under the rule of these men?

The Arab Spring was long overdue and US intelligence was well aware of that fact.

"The truth is that there is no single explanation." is absolutely correct Niki. The killing of the ambassador was planned, the video was merely the match that lit the flame, or more correctly stated, just the excuse needed to light the powder keg. As with the Arab Spring of last year, and with the help of the internet, the so-called uprisings have more to it than meets the eye.

Bottom line: Those that were in power in that region, want to regain and keep that power.

Do all the people of those countries hate us? Probably not. It all depends on how they were treated and affected, and by whom.


SGG




In mad agreement with your post here.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 24, 2012 7:41 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Shiny, you pretty much nailed it, in my opinion.

Makes me sick to my stomach to read those who are so bigoted and ignorant they condemn Islam--and Mohammed, of all people!--the way they do. That's the way far too many stupid, ignorant Americans think, and it's nauseating. Islam IS a religion of peace; so is Christianity. Mohammed DID preach peace and tolerance...actually, according to the Bible, more than Jesus did. Both religions have been used as an excuse for violence and hideous actions. Be they pope, priest or mullah, both religions have been utilized by their "leaders" to lead their followers around by their noses.

We can get into the argument again about which religion has been more violent, historically, currently or whatever. The fact is both have been used in the same way.

Some of the differences are that we've had it real easy--from Europe to America, we've had plenty, we've had arable land, and historically we've been free of oppression MUCH longer. When life has little meaning because staying alive is so damned hard, violence is a predictable result. I've posted over and over what life was like in Afghanistan a mere FIFTY years ago; that those facts have failed to permeate the brains of those who'd rather hate than understand is obvious, but stupid. Ignorance can't be used as an excuse when people have been TOLD (but failed to comprehend) how different a society is from what we live with, CHOOSING to hate blindly and without reservation is not the sign of ignorance, but rather of a cretinous, half-witted, moronic mentality.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 24, 2012 7:55 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


You're right Niki- there are far too many who refuse to learn and accept other cultures & customs. Then base their hatred on hearsay, propaganda and boldface lies.

Granted you see people burning buildings and throwing stones but they've been lied to as well. Plus it's been reported that many within these countries want democracy. But we must understand that they have been used to their old ways for thousands of years.

In some parts they still stone people.


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, September 24, 2012 8:11 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


You are right, to a point Mr. Auraptor. These are the fanaticals within their countries that are either religious zealots or extreme radicals who are stirring up trouble. But they are the exception rather than the rule, much like we have here.

We have nuts of all kinds.

sgg

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 12:19 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!



Quote:

But they are the exception rather than the rule, much like we have here.



The closest thing we have to their kind of nuts are the inbred Phelps clan, from Kansas. And as vile and inhuman as they are, they don't burn , vandalize or kill anyone. Then there are snake handlers, who are generally only a threat to themselves. And maybe a few snakes. But no, we don't have anywhere near the crazy as they do over in Islam land. ( Which sadly, is not confined to any 1 geographical region )




" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 4:12 AM

BYTEMITE


Hmph. We have soldiers who carve biblical messages into their rifles, and pastors who burn religious books in outrage, and people who send death threats to "satanists" like J.K. Rowling or the Wizards of the Coast People. We have people who dress up like Spanish church officials and perform various rites and rituals up to and including burning or killing black people.

I find arguments about cultural superiority very ho hum. Wasn't that long ago that even Americans had less than stellar attitudes about justice for rape victims - and as a side note, in 2008, Egypt had the lowest rape rate in the world.

You might be able to argue that our governments have been less awful, and that probably accounts for a number of misunderstandings. But in terms of injustice and violence and intolerance and people who fly off the damn handle at any little thing, they're everywhere, not just in the Middle East.

That whole suicide bomber business IS bad though, I'll give you that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 6:56 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Just to offer some perspective, something I heard last night on The Daily Show. Islam is some 1400 years old. When Christianity was 1400 years old, we had the Inquisition, the Crusades, killing of "heretics", burning "witches" alive, and on and on. So if we want to make any comparisons between Christianity and Islam, we should start there. It's a different world now from when Christianity was only 1400 years old, but it's NOT that different in many Middle Eastern countries.

So maybe the comparison should start there about violence.

Of course that doesn't include Judiasm, which is 3800 years old...I don't know if we know much about them at 1400 years, but they certainly haven't been very violent in any history I've read. "Rabbinic Judaism", which is what is practiced today, is about 2000 years old, so I guess you could look back 600 or so years to find out what their "violence spectrum" was.

And buddhism is 2550 years old, tho' I believe it had its violent period in the early days as well.

At any rate, Christianity and Islam are youngsters in comparison, and each has had its violent period and its violent radicals. And in neither case do the violent radicals represent the entire religion. I would be willing to bet Islam won't continue to have as much violence for another 600 years...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 12:41 PM

BYTEMITE


I don't think we can blame the differences in religions on age, especially considering the amount of communication flowing between nations nowadays. But we might be able to blame it on how the Middle East has been constantly fought over and how the inhabitants have been bombed into the stone ages a few times.

On the plus side, that level of flow of communication is only 20 years old, and has already started to accelerate positive social changes in those countries. Perhaps it won't be more than a few decades before everyone is on a more even keel all on their own effort.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, September 27, 2012 2:08 PM

OONJERAH



Explaining Our Anger.

After WWII, the USA could hardly be, nor appear to be isolationist,
as in the years following WWI.

Mine is a simple view, maybe a child's view, understanding of US
foreign policy coming out of that era:

Keep the Power.

Don't help anyone but our immediate cronies (UK).

Keep the Third World countries barefoot and pregnant.

And Above All, written in stone,
Don't Ever Be Vulnerable; Don't Ever Be Taken By Surprise.

Over the decades, we/USA became a monster; the seeds of this
germinated on 7 December 1941. A day that lives in infamy.

While this may seem off topic, it does relate to how we treat
the countries that we can rape and pillage. And it looks as if
We are willing to do the same to ourselves. Can it be sustained?


=========================
I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. ~Charles R Swindoll

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:42 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Australia: Authorities will take no action against jihad preacher who praised stabbing of bishop

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2024/06/australia-authorities-will-take-no-
action-against-jihad-preacher-who-praised-stabbing-of-bishop


Muslim-Majority Maldives Set to BAN Jews From Visiting

https://gellerreport.com/2024/06/muslim-majority-maldives-set-to-ban-j
ews-from-visiting.html
/

Pakistan: Christian attacked by Muslim mob over claims of Qur’an desecration dies

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2024/06/pakistan-christian-attacked-by-musl
im-mob-over-claims-of-quran-desecration-dies

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL