There is enough blood on everyones’ hands. But, as the Qur’an says, not all are equal and humanity is arranged in ranks.

In the present day, to me
Least worst of all are the Muslims. Their crimes are modest, but their infamy is beyond compare. Two soldiers kidnapped and war breaks out. How many muslims languish in prisons without recourse to law or outcry from the international community? They are too simple and too disorganized to create great havoc, yet who has created more distrust? They do themselves great disservice.

Next worst are the Israelis/Jews. So many wonderful achievements and yet the reputation preceeds them. 2000 years of suffering and they still can’t stay out of the shit.

Worst of all are the Anglo/Americanos. Killers like the Muslims, but silent. Meddlers and connivers too, but all done below the radar. No traces. Masters of diversion. The publicity machine berates small infractions while ghastly humanitarian disaster quietly pass by. No greed to great, no deed too low and inhumane and yet it all is done within a stiffling, suffrocating, silent, massive scream.

It is a delicate topic, but if we are gonna talk, let’s talk.

Being a victim is such a great diversion. One of our lesser soul’s favorites I think. Our Adamic natures says, “I have wronged myself” while our Satanic natures says, “You made me like this.”

None of that obviates the fact of historical injustices, but each person is responsible at least to do no more harm. You cannot make other people be ethical or do right, you can only change yourself.

Look, just my 2 cents. I think one can balance telling the truth about injustice, even wrongs done to onself, and at the same time choose not to continue and escalate the suffering. Not saying it is easy. Not saying I do it. I’m just saying it seems like the only answer to me.

Hmmm. I think anything that proposes to be able to trace current political situations to ‘thousands of years of history’ (much of which, in the case of the three major monotheistic religions, is actually folklore that has been elevated to the status of history; evidence for the events of the Old Testament are sketchy at best) can aptly be termed racist. Certainly the ‘thousand years of history’ spiel has been dragged out for the crimes of Muslims, and before them Africans, Russians, and whoever else we in the castle of North America happened to be angry with, including the Jews.

So it’s a shame he indulges in this crap, because I think his complaint against Israel as a state is fairly legitimate.

The “State of Israel” is just an outcrop of Western Imperialism.

Noam Chomsky made the only fitting critique on the paper recently public about AIPAC and other Israel Lobbies and the United States foreign policy.

He said, in essence, it is impossible to distinguish between the Israeli lobbies and large corporate concerns, Israel’s safety in the Middle East and weakening Arab states to protect the price of oil. And so forth.

That seems to sum it up. It ain’t about Judaism and the Second Coming. These people are not concerned about the condition of their souls and what state they are in to meet their Maker.

Profits! Short-term, massive profits. Greed, greed, greed and power.

The rest is a smoke screen of religious hoopla that makes no sense and serves no purpose except to sacrifice many millions of common people to the purposes of but a few.

Always was that way. Always will be?

This is a neat post, and I had similar thoughts when I read Gaarder’s polemic. What really struck me though is not just that it’s a traditional anti-semitic trope, but that it’s a traditional Orientalist trope. After all, what has he done but attempted to explain the actions of particular people – the Israeli government – by invoking a half-understood, de-contextualized bit of scripture which he then claims represents some essential quality of that group? Isn’t that precisely what Sa`id was describing?

For my own musing, I attribute this to a sort of exported cultural war mentality. Gaarder and those who move in his milleu view themselves as good post-nationalists (that being the whole European project), and one source of their opposition to Zionism is that it’s so terribly nationalist, so very early 20th century. So to me, it’s no shock that he’d seize upon the nationalist Other and attach essentialized and negative images to it. Again, look to Sa`id. It’s mostly about ‘us’, and defining who ‘we’ are relative to the Other. And some post-nationalists apparently need a nationalist boogeyman like the US or Israel to define their identity. And some, like Gaarder, see no problem with using Orientalizing tropes in the process. Vile.

It would seem to me that you erect an other. In this case it happens
to be post-nationalist Europe, one with an eerie resemblance to
old Europe….

Your understanding of Said is superficial at best. Said always
countered the manichean world view of which you speak. IN fact,
he always spoke of overlapping histories and stressed that
no culture is self-contained. The question for him was to
interact on terms of equality and dignity. Those are precisely
the kinds of stances that get marginalized and overlooked.

The real question for Israel is will it evolve into an integrated
democratic state capable of treating all its citizens regardless
of faith or ethnic affiliation equally or not. THe discourse about
the Jewish nature of the state is so deeply ingrained and so
exclusivist as to be barely visible. But that is a form of racism
more difficutl to grapple with and rarely discussed. This is not
about an abstraction called the nationalist other but about concrete
practices like the law of return. what soft targets you go after.

To the anonymous person who responded to my comment:

Does the chosen people thing not strike you as a classically Orientalist trope? If so, why not?

Israel has a law which allots 93% of the land to Jews, at the exclusion of non-Jews.

This is a modern example of racism, the Jews of Israel for the most part are European refugees and immigrants to Palestine who for better or worse displaced Palestinians from their homeland.

Most Jews cannot claim with any certainty that they are direct descendants of the ancient Hebrew peoples who lived in Roman Judea before the Roman expulsion and destruction of the state of Israel.

Even during the time of Christ, there were other Messianic movements and charismatic prophets claiming to be the long-awaited Messiah and promised “king of the Jews.”

Judaism was already a multicultural, missionary religion gaining Gentile converts.

The Jews of Afghanistan and Uzbekistan are Turkic peoples, who converted after the Roman expulsion, having no genetic lineage to ancient Palestine.

The Jews of the Ukraine are descendants of 8th century Slavs who converted, having no lineage to ancient Palestine.

The Jews of Yemen are Arab converts, having no lineage to the ancient Hebrews of Palestine.

Basically, Jews cannot claim with much certainty any “indigenous” right to Palestine since they are a multi-ethnic group of peoples whose history is marked with mass conversions of Gentiles who assumed a Jewish identity that is linked with pre-modern Zionism.

I find it offensive as someone who is Mexican and Persian, but being Mexican, no one raises hell about American, English speaking Jews fighting for a foreign country who is engaged in hostilities against a neighboring country who America is at peace with.

Jewish Americans in the IDF are violating the Neutrality Act!

Yet, whites raise hell about Mexican migrant workers working in the agricultural fields and tell the sons and daughters of Mexican migrants that flying a Mexican flag is a form of sedition in this country.

If a Jewish American wants to fight against the terrorists, then as AMERICANS enlist in the US military or go commissioned officer.

But to paraphrase the xenophobes, “If you waive a foreign flag in America, then go back there!”

GM, good stuff, esp the observation about migrant Latin American workers.

Homais, I have to say I can’t see what our anonymous critic was quite so bent out of shape about, but that’s the internet for you. However, he/she does bring up what I think is a valid point about Said; he was by no means uncritical of nationalism, and stressed cultural interdependency over what he termed “identity fetishist” ideology. (I’m getting this from ‘Power, Politics and Culture: Collected Interviews of Edward W. Said’, which was compiled by one of his students. It’s incredibly enlightening, as he clarifies many of his views very candidly. There’s also a great throw-down with Bernard Lewis.) Said at one point was so critical of the way in which the Palestinian Authority was going about selling the Palestinian identity that he himself was called an Orientalist by one of its members. (Also cited in P, P and C.) I don’t know how the man kept from dropping dead of 2 heart attacks a day.

We who struggle in his wake are grappling with something very specific, I think; as members of what he made into a movement, we want everything to be binary. Dogmatic. Nationalism is good, or it’s bad. Religion is good, or it’s bad. Said, because he was a truly brilliant mind, could reconcile these dualities and say with astonishing precision when and how nationalism and religion are good and bad. But we’re none of us that subtle, sadly.

In the present day, to me. Least worst of all are the Muslims. Their crimes are modest, but their infamy is beyond compare.

This attitude is what drives me crazy. I have and will defend Islam the faith, as best I can. That said, I will not defend the deceit or countenance the fraud that passes itself as islam today.

It was Muslim (GIA) that raped and dismembered children in the Algeria. The ongoing slave trave is perpetrated by Muslimsin Mauritania. It is Muslims that are singing and raping their way through Darfur. It was Muslims that converted- and circumcised Christians at the end of a sword in East Timor.

Muslims per se, are the reason for the decline of islam.It is the smorgasbord of the most corrupt and dysfucntional regimes in the world that have made Islam into the caricarture we see today.

Islamic ‘leaders are paid by the regime to spew the despots agenda. Does anyone really believe that religious leaderes are free to speak their mind? Do you really believe that they would continue to be paid if they did?

Ask yourself- why are Islamic religious ‘leaders’ quiet when the worst education system in the world is found in the Arab world? Why are they quiet when there are no functioning economies to sustain whole populations? Why aren’t religious leaders demanding more rights and freedoms for their flock, rather than supporting the regimes that keep citizens depriverd and without hope? Is that what a religious leader does?

Instead of worrying about the Jews being ‘chosen’ (and it is interesting to note that Muslims make that very same claim and more) seems to me dealing with current realities is a bigger priority.

You cannot claim to espouse western values of freedom and equality and at the same time, support some of the most dysfunctional and oppressive regimes in the world.

Then again, living in a world of delusion is a lot easier than living in reality.

Sweet Sc&A: Did you realize that the essay was written by a Christian and critiqued by a Muslim? You make such a comment on a website that is devoted to speaking honestly and openly about all difficult matters? Is that just a touch ironic? Did you notice the end of the critique in which I make the point that injustice cannot fight injustice?

I hate to be so blunt, but did you realize that your complaints are so filled with hatred, ignorance, and an unwillingness to open your eyes that you should perhaps give up speaking to people other than the two you approve of, and come to think of it maybe not even them.

We are not here to prove anything to you sweetheart.

You don’t get to walk into our home, spit in our face, and demand an explanation for our existence.

Be well and sort your anger issues out with your therapist. Should you decide you actually want to talk to anyone here, I am sure we would welcome your company.

That said, if you want a fight I am sure Gustavo and BK will be glad to slap you around a bit.

Just remember: Injustice cannnot fight injustice.

Bonkers, where are you!

- A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.

Bonkers realized she wanted to bite this fellow’s ankles until they bled, and so asked Uncle Khosrow to come and help out. Witness, the Smackdown blog hosted by Uncle Khosrow, the Beloved Iron Sheik.

Diagnosis SC&A:

I caution and beg patience with individuals such as SC&A. These are people who are not in control of their actions and see the world through a very narrow stinky lense.

Allow me to be more specific. SC&A, a case I have been famailiar with for some time, suffers from an acute congenital condition known as Rectal-Cranial Conjoinment. RCC afflicts large portions of the so-called Red States and is particularly virulent in the neoconservative crowd.

During fetal development, pressure from the developing Anus cut off oxygen-rich blood supply to the cortex and other higher order cognitive components.

One wonders at the narrow views, but here we have actual physiological foundation to one who is, by affliction, FORCED to “talk out his ass” if you will forgive the expression. Only the narrowest brain structures, so-called lower, subcortical structures in the brain stem and limbic system were given room by the constricting anus and bowel channels to grow.

If I could refer you to some clinical photos here, I would show you pictures surprisingly remniscent of the children’s character, “Gumby”, with his severly slanted head, which results when, as adults, the head is extracted from the posterior.

It is no great surprise that the individual’s arguments and world view will be correspondingly slanted.

These people struggle through great hurdles and deserve compassion and support as they attempt to live constructive lives with the crooked heads.

I ask your patience and understanding.

Laury, you said,

“I hate to be so blunt, but did you realize that your complaints are so filled with hatred, ignorance, and an unwillingness to open your eyes that you should perhaps give up speaking to people other than the two you approve of, and come to think of it maybe not even them.”

You have no idea the lengths I have gone to to in defending Islam, in both my professional and personal life.

What outrages me are the hardore idiots, that insist on defending the smogasbord of dysfunction that has come to charaterize the Arab world.

As for anyone attempting to ‘smack me down.’ feel free.

Buzz, quit hiding and do it out in the open, not hiding behind skirts. Show me you’re a man, not some cockroach that hides and runs when the lights come on. This is not a commnet on your admitted homosexuality, but rather, a comment on your character.

As for Gustavo, with all do respect to your comment re theg origin of Jews, DNA has proven the drivel you spout, moot and nothing more than a rehash of neo-nazi mindlessness.

Islam does not need deceit as a cornerstone.

It is not necessary to piss on Jews to defend the honore of Islam. While it is true that under the dysfunctional oppression of despotic regimes, hating Jews is the only accomplishment of the Arab world, there is no reason for Arabs to revel in that dirt.

Ask yourselves- why are hundreds, if not more, Arab dissidents- real heroes- imprisoned and tortured for rejecting the very ideas you espouse?

How can you side with people that have deliberately polluted Islam?

Observe how the afflicted responds with obsessive and angry tirades.

The only active brain matter, the brain stem and limbic system allow the body to survive in a veritable comatose state of dreary, delusional rage.

With SC&A, the little brain matter that does exist suffers from a form of Turrets syndrome. So we have a cranial cavity that basically won’t shut up.

Bonkers says:

This sounds like borderline “smack down” material. Gettin’ a wee bit personal, as funny as it reads! :)

Bonkers nods to your wisdom, the smack part of this discussion is being moved to Smackdown.

Oh, and Islamophobia, homophobia, verumaphobia and all other bizarre and twisted fears.

In other words, he is a card carrying republican.

Take it to Smackdown!

LOLOL@Buzz!!

Try to stay on point, Buzz. Can you answer any of the points I raised? Or will run like you did on that other blog.

You see, Buzz, people react in predicatable ways, in predetermiend patterns. Your response (s) here are identiacl to the patterns you used on that other blog.

“How can you side with people that have deliberately polluted polluted Islam?”

Care to answer, Buzz?

Or will you run away like before?

Selling a shade of Islam out to the rest is not necessary. I am an American. I don’t support or identify with Bush’s maniacal policies or actions.

People are sucked into this boogyman scenarios. We feared the red threat. Well, that is played out. Now we have to fear the Muslim threat. It, too, is also played out except for the particularly gullible or those who are served by the farce.

State Sponsored Terror is more of a serious concern. Al-Qaeda is a miniscule threat next to a regional bully like Israel or a global bully like the Neocon led US.

Are we gonna provoke Iran now? Because of militant Islam? That is total crap just like Iraq was total crap.

You and Santy and Gates of Vienna and Anchoress get your undies all twisted up over Islam. I’m gonna give you the bottom line insult on Muslims, the worst you can say:

As a threat, given the scale of threats we are talking about, they are pathetic. Ill organized, rag tag losers. Osama Bin Laden in his tent or his stone hut or his cave is as much threat as you let him be.

Nothing more.

You wanna worry, worry about weak world leaders with lots of promises out to greedy men.

That is it. Beginning – middle – end.

You are right, of course.

That’s why the entire civilized world is concerned about Iran going nuclear.

You make it sound as if the corrupt, dysfuctional regimes are a part of civilized society- and as if they were moral equals.

Figure this out for yourself, Buzz:

When nations that are led by or are under the influence of tyrants or dictators, attempt to justify those actions, we can rightly assume that justification is false. Tyrants and dictators do not make moral choices, because moral choices can only lead to the demise of the tyranny.

The Arab world has been under the influence of dysfunctional and corrupt regimes for decades.

The effects of that are evident to any observer.

“When nations that are led by or are under the influence of tyrants or dictators, attempt to justify those actions, we can rightly assume that justification is false. Tyrants and dictators do not make moral choices, because moral choices can only lead to the demise of the tyranny.”

When you say this, I think of Bush. Keeping people in jail without legal recourse against the geneva convention, spying on his own people, invading other countries engaging in lies and conspiracies.

Who are you talking about? Ahmadinejad?
Get a life. Those people have a right to exist and protect themselves just like you.

Should they throw themselves on the mercy of Israel and the US?

You must be huffing glue.

“That’s why the entire civilized world is concerned about Iran going nuclear.”

If you are interested in numbers, the majority are worried about the US and are not sympathetic to Israel, as you know. These states’ friends are bought.

“You make it sound as if the corrupt, dysfuctional regimes are a part of civilized society- and as if they were moral equals.”

This sounds positively Nazi-esque. That is my biggest problem with you, SC&A. Your completely deluded sense of superiority. You should travel and put yourself at the mercy of strangers. Instead of disgust and loathing, you might pity and that would be a step forward for you.

You are gonna have to step out of your provincial bigotry and see the world for what it is, not what Pat Santy brainwashes you with.

You are making a better case for the results of dysfunctional ideologies than I ever could.

Thank you.

Weakest answer yet.
Checkmate.