Brass Tacks

[SAYIT]

We can quibble about Abbas's refusal to seek a change in Palestinian law which allows for "honor" murders but the real issue is the victims.
According to Robert Fisk (Robert Fisk: The crimewave that shames the world - Robert Fisk - Commentators - The Independent) upwards of 20,000 women are murdered for family "honor" EACH YEAR.
Various sources including the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the Twentieth Century Atlas and The Polynational War Memorial say fewer than 20,000 Palestinians have been killed in the conflict - killied, Sherri, not murdered - SINCE 1948.
So Sherri whines incessantly about the conflict's Palestinian casualties and when presented with evidence of "honor" murders by her Muslim brethren and Abbas's refusal to seek changes in Palestinian law which enables them, she not only refuses to condemn Abbas but actually tries to defend him! You not only are not Christian as you claim, Sherri, you aren't even human.

All wars in the 20th century - the Polynational War Memorial
Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Abbas Reneges on Promise to Reform "Honor Killing" Laws | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

 

[georgephillip]

"A 10-month investigation by The Independent in Jordan, Pakistan, Egypt, Gaza and the West Bank has unearthed terrifying details of murder most foul. Men are also killed for "honour" and, despite its identification by journalists as a largely Muslim practice, Christian and Hindu communities have stooped to the same crimes.

"Indeed, the 'honour' (or ird) of families, communities and tribes transcends religion and human mercy. But voluntary women's groups, human rights organisations, Amnesty International and news archives suggest that the slaughter of the innocent for 'dishonouring' their families is increasing by the year."

Would not the solution to this problem involve withdrawing US support for rich Arab dictators and generals?

Robert Fisk: The crimewave that shames the world - Robert Fisk - Commentators - The Independent

 

[toastman]

"A 10-month investigation by The Independent in Jordan, Pakistan, Egypt, Gaza and the West Bank has unearthed terrifying details of murder most foul. Men are also killed for "honour" and, despite its identification by journalists as a largely Muslim practice, Christian and Hindu communities have stooped to the same crimes.

"Indeed, the 'honour' (or ird) of families, communities and tribes transcends religion and human mercy. But voluntary women's groups, human rights organisations, Amnesty International and news archives suggest that the slaughter of the innocent for 'dishonouring' their families is increasing by the year."

Would not the solution to this problem involve withdrawing US support for rich Arab dictators and generals?

Robert Fisk: The crimewave that shames the world - Robert Fisk - Commentators - The Independent

I think people need to stand up for the cause. Speak up ! They are afraid however, because the abusers use fear to intimidate.

I fail to see how withdrawing U.S support would help the situation, can you further elaborate ?

 

[georgephillip]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

 

[irosie91]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

Arabism (aka THE BAATHISTS OF THE MIDDLEAST) --is NATIONAL SOCIALIST FASCISM hence its tight alliance with Adolf abu ali Hitler

Nasser was a BAATHIST Saddam was a BAATHIST and Papa assad was
and Baby ASSAD IS----a BAATHIST The US often makes mistakes as to
WHOM TO TRUST when it comes to islamic places We made friends with TALIBAN
too in order to oppose the soviets. we made friends with fascist Saddam in order
to oppose fascist Iran who can be trusted in muslim lands----
....??? nobody In the middle east it is a choice between deadly
ARABISM and deadly ISLAMICISM ------there is just nothing else

 

[Hossfly]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

Perhaps Georgie Boy can get in touch with Chompsky and ask him why females are even honor killed here in America. Surely he (and Georgie of course) have read about them.

"Honor killing" under growing scrutiny in the U.S. - Crimesider - CBS News

 

[irosie91]

chomsky is very good at playing with words------he is a kind of super duper smart
AVNERI Avneri is a run of the mill hard core communist

 

[SAYIT]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

The US did not create Islamic fundamentalism and our support for the Saudis is a function of their ability to deliver stability in the oil market ... something that benefits the entire world, but that's a subject for another thread. Arab/Muslim states have for many decades swung from religious liberalism to fundamentalism. The choice of which will exist tomorrow is up to the Arabs to decide. Our aid to those countries is tied to our interests in the region and has little impact on how they live their lives.
Mark Lilla, professor of the humanities at Columbia University, authored a brilliant essay adapted from his book “The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics and the Modern West” which directly addresses your points. I highly recommend it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?ref=magazine

 

[georgephillip]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

Arabism (aka THE BAATHISTS OF THE MIDDLEAST) --is NATIONAL SOCIALIST FASCISM hence its tight alliance with Adolf abu ali Hitler

Nasser was a BAATHIST Saddam was a BAATHIST and Papa assad was
and Baby ASSAD IS----a BAATHIST The US often makes mistakes as to
WHOM TO TRUST when it comes to islamic places We made friends with TALIBAN
too in order to oppose the soviets. we made friends with fascist Saddam in order
to oppose fascist Iran who can be trusted in muslim lands----
....??? nobody In the middle east it is a choice between deadly
ARABISM and deadly ISLAMICISM ------there is just nothing else

Sure there is:

Pax Semitica by Uri Avnery

Stop being so negative.

 

[irosie91]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

Arabism (aka THE BAATHISTS OF THE MIDDLEAST) --is NATIONAL SOCIALIST FASCISM hence its tight alliance with Adolf abu ali Hitler

Nasser was a BAATHIST Saddam was a BAATHIST and Papa assad was
and Baby ASSAD IS----a BAATHIST The US often makes mistakes as to
WHOM TO TRUST when it comes to islamic places We made friends with TALIBAN
too in order to oppose the soviets. we made friends with fascist Saddam in order
to oppose fascist Iran who can be trusted in muslim lands----
....??? nobody In the middle east it is a choice between deadly
ARABISM and deadly ISLAMICISM ------there is just nothing else

Sure there is:

Pax Semitica by Uri Avnery

Stop being so negative.

Uri Avneri is a one trick pony ---he sings a single song for his supper----that
of a hard core communist Somewhere in his youth he read KARL MARX
and it is all he knows. I will read it later----the man is THAT BORING

 

[georgephillip]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

The US did not create Islamic fundamentalism and our support for the Saudis is a function of their ability to deliver stability in the oil market ... something that benefits the entire world, but that's a subject for another thread. Arab/Muslim states have for many decades swung from religious liberalism to fundamentalism. The choice of which will exist tomorrow is up to the Arabs to decide. Our aid to those countries is tied to our interests in the region and has little impact on how they live their lives.
Mark Lilla, professor of the humanities at Columbia University, authored a brilliant essay adapted from his book “The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics and the Modern West” which directly addresses your points. I highly recommend it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?ref=magazine

Millions of Muslims have immigrated to western (imperialist) nations without a clue about how to live under laws that aren't divinely inspired. When US drones kill hundreds of innocent Muslims every year, their choices largely revolve around revenge and worse.

Your (excellent) link:

"Similarly, we must somehow find a way to accept the fact that, given the immigration policies Western nations have pursued over the last half-century, they now are hosts to millions of Muslims who have great difficulty fitting into societies that do not recognize any political claims based on their divine revelation.

"Like Orthodox Jewish law, the Muslim Shariah is meant to cover the whole of life, not some arbitrarily demarcated private sphere, and its legal system has few theological resources for establishing the independence of politics from detailed divine commands. It is an unfortunate situation, but we have made our bed, Muslims and non-Muslims alike."

Somehow I get the impression you would not be so sanguine about US drones killing hundreds of Jews every year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?pagewanted=9&_r=0&ref=magazine

 

[SAYIT]

Secular Muslims find the "honor" killings at least as reprehensible as those of us living in democracies do; however, Arab elites (dictators and generals) came to power by using religious fundamentalism as a primary tool for intimidation and control. Sixty years ago, US elites saw secular Arab nationalists like Nasser in Egypt, for example, as a threat to western control of Arab oil. Our reaction to leaders like Nasser was to encourage religious fundamentalists to take control of Arab states; our model was/is the House of Saud. Two generations have come into existence since that time, and it appears US elites have created a fundamentalist Frankenstein across much of the Middle East.

Chomsky.info has some good references if you're interested.

The US did not create Islamic fundamentalism and our support for the Saudis is a function of their ability to deliver stability in the oil market ... something that benefits the entire world, but that's a subject for another thread. Arab/Muslim states have for many decades swung from religious liberalism to fundamentalism. The choice of which will exist tomorrow is up to the Arabs to decide. Our aid to those countries is tied to our interests in the region and has little impact on how they live their lives.
Mark Lilla, professor of the humanities at Columbia University, authored a brilliant essay adapted from his book “The Stillborn God: Religion, Politics and the Modern West” which directly addresses your points. I highly recommend it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?ref=magazine

Millions of Muslims have immigrated to western (imperialist) nations without a clue about how to live under laws that aren't divinely inspired. When US drones kill hundreds of innocent Muslims every year, their choices largely revolve around revenge and worse.

Your (excellent) link:

"Similarly, we must somehow find a way to accept the fact that, given the immigration policies Western nations have pursued over the last half-century, they now are hosts to millions of Muslims who have great difficulty fitting into societies that do not recognize any political claims based on their divine revelation.

"Like Orthodox Jewish law, the Muslim Shariah is meant to cover the whole of life, not some arbitrarily demarcated private sphere, and its legal system has few theological resources for establishing the independence of politics from detailed divine commands. It is an unfortunate situation, but we have made our bed, Muslims and non-Muslims alike."

Somehow I get the impression you would not be so sanguine about US drones killing hundreds of Jews every year.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?pagewanted=9&_r=0&ref=magazine

The casualties of Arab/US conflicts have nothing to do with Muslim immigration to the West or the points raised in Lilla's essay:

In the end, though, what happens on the opposite shore will not be up to us. We have little reason to expect societies in the grip of a powerful political theology to follow our unusual path [*to liberal democracy], which was opened up by a unique crisis within Christian civilization. This does not mean that those societies necessarily lack the wherewithal to create a decent and workable political order; it does mean that they will have to find the theological resources within their own traditions to make it happen.

Our challenge is different. We have made a choice that is at once simpler and harder: we have chosen to limit our politics [*our legal systems] to protecting individuals from the worst harms they can inflict on one another, to securing fundamental liberties and providing for their basic welfare, while leaving their spiritual destinies in their own hands. We have wagered that it is wiser to beware the forces unleashed by the Bible’s messianic promise than to try exploiting them for the public good. We have chosen to keep our politics unilluminated by divine revelation. All we have is our own lucidity, which we must train on a world where faith still inflames the minds of men.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/19/magazine/19Religion-t.html?ref=magazine

 

[georgephillip]

When Lilla says, "(i)n the end, though, what happens on the opposite shore will not be up to us," isn't he missing the consequence of killing hundreds (or thousands) of innocent Muslims every year?

We may have chosen to keep to keep our politics unilluminated by divine revelation, but we have also chosen to base our economy on war and its tendency to inflame the lives and homes and cities of others.

Possibly, humanity can no longer afford the luxury of private wealth earned from killing others?

 

[SAYIT]

When Lilla says, "(i)n the end, though, what happens on the opposite shore will not be up to us," isn't he missing the consequence of killing hundreds (or thousands) of innocent Muslims every year?

We may have chosen to keep to keep our politics unilluminated by divine revelation, but we have also chosen to base our economy on war and its tendency to inflame the lives and homes and cities of others.

Possibly, humanity can no longer afford the luxury of private wealth earned from killing others?

Our economy is not based on war as you claim and Lilla's conclusion is that the we can't fix what is wrong with the Mosque-based legal systems which are so prevelant in the Arab Middle East. Unless and until the Arabs themselves decide to separate Mosque from State their spasms will continue. We can only defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout and if that requires making war with them, so be it.

 

[pbel]

We can quibble about Abbas's refusal to seek a change in Palestinian law which allows for "honor" murders but the real issue is the victims.
According to Robert Fisk (Robert Fisk: The crimewave that shames the world - Robert Fisk - Commentators - The Independent) upwards of 20,000 women are murdered for family "honor" EACH YEAR.
Various sources including the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the Twentieth Century Atlas and The Polynational War Memorial say fewer than 20,000 Palestinians have been killed in the conflict - killied, Sherri, not murdered - SINCE 1948.
So Sherri whines incessantly about the conflict's Palestinian casualties and when presented with evidence of "honor" murders by her Muslim brethren and Abbas's refusal to seek changes in Palestinian law which enables them, she not only refuses to condemn Abbas but actually tries to defend him! You not only are not Christian as you claim, Sherri, you aren't even human.

All wars in the 20th century - the Polynational War Memorial
Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Abbas Reneges on Promise to Reform "Honor Killing" Laws | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

How can anyone argue about how Feudalistic most of Asia is...Human Honor is much more important to survive in these under developed areas than their very struggling lives.

As much as I agree with you, we must understand that we cannot compare our developed Western Societies with second or third world mind-sets...

Thant’s why I highly support the PNAC think tanks recommendation to invade Iraq to start a chain of events to bring Democracies to these areas.

I think it will work, and Israel needs to set her borders to what the UN votes for and share Jerusalem...Israel is key to spreading Democracy...it is her ONLY future protection from the horde...Democracies by far are less bellicose precisely because they bring prosperity and stability.

 

[georgephillip]

When Lilla says, "(i)n the end, though, what happens on the opposite shore will not be up to us," isn't he missing the consequence of killing hundreds (or thousands) of innocent Muslims every year?

We may have chosen to keep to keep our politics unilluminated by divine revelation, but we have also chosen to base our economy on war and its tendency to inflame the lives and homes and cities of others.

Possibly, humanity can no longer afford the luxury of private wealth earned from killing others?

Our economy is not based on war as you claim and Lilla's conclusion is that the we can't fix what is wrong with the Mosque-based legal systems which are so prevelant in the Arab Middle East. Unless and until the Arabs themselves decide to separate Mosque from State their spasms will continue. We can only defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout and if that requires making war with them, so be it.

We've maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims in the last 22 years, and you've convinced yourself it was all done to "defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout."

What "fallout?"

Are you worried about the moral fallout the US is facing?
How do Empires die?

 

[SAYIT]

When Lilla says, "(i)n the end, though, what happens on the opposite shore will not be up to us," isn't he missing the consequence of killing hundreds (or thousands) of innocent Muslims every year?

We may have chosen to keep to keep our politics unilluminated by divine revelation, but we have also chosen to base our economy on war and its tendency to inflame the lives and homes and cities of others.

Possibly, humanity can no longer afford the luxury of private wealth earned from killing others?

Our economy is not based on war as you claim and Lilla's conclusion is that the we can't fix what is wrong with the Mosque-based legal systems which are so prevelant in the Arab Middle East. Unless and until the Arabs themselves decide to separate Mosque from State their spasms will continue. We can only defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout and if that requires making war with them, so be it.

We've maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims in the last 22 years, and you've convinced yourself it was all done to "defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout."

What "fallout?"

Are you worried about the moral fallout the US is facing?
How do Empires die?

I certainly am concerned about moral fallout in America but I don't consider there to have ever been an American empire so I am not particularly concerned with how empires die.
The tragic collateral victims of our global policies are not a function of America's "evil" nature as you seem to assume but rather of legit conflicts and mistakes. America makes mistakes.
How many Syrians have been maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated in just the past few months?

 

[pbel]

Our economy is not based on war as you claim and Lilla's conclusion is that the we can't fix what is wrong with the Mosque-based legal systems which are so prevelant in the Arab Middle East. Unless and until the Arabs themselves decide to separate Mosque from State their spasms will continue. We can only defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout and if that requires making war with them, so be it.

We've maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims in the last 22 years, and you've convinced yourself it was all done to "defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout."

What "fallout?"

Are you worried about the moral fallout the US is facing?
How do Empires die?

I certainly am concerned about moral fallout in America but I don't consider there to have ever been an American empire so I am not particularly concerned with how empires die.
The tragic collateral victims of our global policies are not a function of America's "evil" nature as you seem to assume but rather of legit conflicts and mistakes. America makes mistakes.
How many Syrians have been maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated in just the past few months?

Well George is correct that National Hedonism kills Empires especially from within...Rome, Greece, England...prosperity and volunteer armies are a sure road to Economic collapse...as we can all see in Congress, the Fiscal Cliff is looming.

Geoge, Sayit is right...most if not all collateral dammage by the US is unitentional...the best way to avoid American Economic collapse and inflicting death is to shrink our Empire to our Western Continents and get out of those Shiite holes draining our life-lines!

 

[SAYIT]

We've maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Muslims in the last 22 years, and you've convinced yourself it was all done to "defend ourselves and our interests from the fallout."

What "fallout?"

Are you worried about the moral fallout the US is facing?
How do Empires die?

I certainly am concerned about moral fallout in America but I don't consider there to have ever been an American empire so I am not particularly concerned with how empires die.
The tragic collateral victims of our global policies are not a function of America's "evil" nature as you seem to assume but rather of legit conflicts and mistakes. America makes mistakes.
How many Syrians have been maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated in just the past few months?

Well George is correct that National Hedonism kills Empires especially from within...Rome, Greece, England...prosperity and volunteer armies are a sure road to Economic collapse...as we can all see in Congress, the Fiscal Cliff is looming.

Geoge, Sayit is right...most if not all collateral dammage by the US is unitentional...the best way to avoid American Economic collapse and inflicting death is to shrink our Empire to our Western Continents and get out of those Shiite holes draining our life-lines!

Interesting. You claim that prosperity is a sure road to economic collapse. Care to amend that?

 

[pbel]

I certainly am concerned about moral fallout in America but I don't consider there to have ever been an American empire so I am not particularly concerned with how empires die.
The tragic collateral victims of our global policies are not a function of America's "evil" nature as you seem to assume but rather of legit conflicts and mistakes. America makes mistakes.
How many Syrians have been maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated in just the past few months?

Well George is correct that National Hedonism kills Empires especially from within...Rome, Greece, England...prosperity and volunteer armies are a sure road to Economic collapse...as we can all see in Congress, the Fiscal Cliff is looming.

Geoge, Sayit is right...most if not all collateral dammage by the US is unitentional...the best way to avoid American Economic collapse and inflicting death is to shrink our Empire to our Western Continents and get out of those Shiite holes draining our life-lines!

Interesting. You claim that prosperity is a sure road to economic collapse. Care to amend that?

I said Hedonism. Hedonism is a result of prosperity gone wild without Moral guidelines. Our armed forces like Rome’s in which new poor foreigners, like the Germans for Rome, are an indication of the Citizenry withdrawing from their civic duties...The pleasure principal loses out to the practical laws of Economic principles and the system collapses from within.

If all these shootings and senseless crimes spurred by the violent Holywood culture are the first signs that like Rome's gladiator games...killing and mayhem are big box sellers.