Rudy's Surprise
Rudy Giuliani says he’s never heard the claim that the US was attacked on 9/11 because we’d attacked Iraq. Guess he didn’t read Bin Laden’s 1996 “Declaration of War” against the US. Back then old UBL said:
“The youths hold you responsible for all of the killings and evictions of the Muslims and the violation of the sanctities, carried out by your Zionist brothers in Lebanon; you openly supplied them with arms and finance. More than 600,000 Iraqi children have died due to lack of food and medicine and as a result of the unjustifiable aggression (sanction) imposed on Iraq and its nation. The children of Iraq are our children. You, the USA, together with the Saudi regime are responsible for the shedding of the blood of these innocent children.
If Muslims did to us what we did/do to them, it would spawn American Mujahideen, like in the Reagan-era flick, Red Dawn.
The western assault on Muslim lands began a long time ago. It’s the same assault carried out against any group we can dominate with superior weaponry and political power. The Muslims (broadly speaking) are the one group that doesn’t seem interested in joining us; they are the most successful at resistance. They prefer Jihad over McDonalds. Can’t say I blame them….
(and by Jihad, of course I mean the greater jihad of spiritual development work carried out so one can better submit to god.)
JG, these people may use revolutionary rhetoric that sounds good to leftist ears. But you know perfectly well that they will not stop at ejecting the western imperialists from their “Muslim lands.” What the hell are “Muslim lands” anyway? I could maybe understand objections to western influence in Mecca. Maybe. But is Baghdad “Muslim” land? Jews and Christians and other people lived in Baghdad for centuries before and after the first Muslim showed up. What about Tehran? Jakarta? Kuala Lampur? London? Brooklyn?
The whole concept of “Muslim lands” is as racist and rightwing as the most abhorrent ideas of Meir Kahane. How can you call yourself a leftist and spout such garbage?
I support the efforts of leftists to stick up for the downtrodden and the underdogs, to try to give local people a chance to rule themselves free from international corporate taskmasters and cultural imperialists. I agree that western society is far from perfect, and that the fight for people’s hearts and minds in “free” society isn’t always a fair one.
But to suggest that Al Qaeda is somehow superior to McDonalds is naive at best and downright stupid at worst. It seems to me you either don’t understand what these people actually want, or you are so wrapped up in your Leninist/Maoist/Chomskyite/[insert leftist idol of your choice]ist rage against the power structure that you don’t care that what these people want is a million times worse than anything McDonalds serves on its menu.
Give me a McDonalds on my block any day. I’ll choose to not eat the burgers, and maybe some day McD’s will go out of business.
Meanwhile, once you finish tossing us western imperialists out of those “Muslim lands,” I encourage you to move there, where your friends at Al Qaeda will tell you what to eat/wear/read and deny your mother/sister/daughter her most basic human rights. Enjoy.
I wonder if Americans “resisting” an invasion would kidnap, torture and behead fellow Americans to make their point.
I also wonder if most Americans would really fight against an invasion force that came to depose a tyrannical ruler and help the citizenry establish its own freely-chosen government.
Eric: we did kidnap and torture ‘Americans’. We called them Tories and Indians.
TheMicah: you could teach me a thing or two about anger, man. Whoa….
I agree with you that the concept of Muslim lands is a bit off-putting. As racist as a Jewish Land, or a Christian Land. I’d love to see that part of the world evolve without the presence of US troops, US weapons, or US security firms.
And just for the record, as everything on the ‘net is forever, I don’t support al-Qaeda. Seriously. Not sure if I support any political entity over there. I do however have a list of what I don’t support: US troops, weapons and security contractors, along with the regimes that invite, support, and pay for them.
Hmm, funny. More Muslims are being killed around the world in the Sudan, previously in the Balkans, in any number of places. I somehow don’t remember Al Qaeda attacking the Sudanese; in fact he actually received shelter there. More Muslims are killed around the world by other Muslims (Shiite, Sunni, Sufi), yet we have not really (outside of some indiviual attacks in Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Turkey) seen a jihad against these states.
This post smells of moral equivalence.
MMmmmm, yes, there are just thousands of Jews and Christians and Buddhists running around beheading infidels and blowing up babies because they believe their religion compels them to do so; and they believe that they get the fast track to heaven by murdering those infidels – and even more points if they cut off the heads of those infidels, again all because that’s the way their religion instructs them – funny though, I’ve never met any of those Jews/Christians?Buddhists who engage in that behavior or claim their religion requires that behavior, I guess I just don’t travel in the right sophisticated circles.
Save Jewschool!!!
What the hell is Jewish about this post? Is Jewschool just another liberal blog? Is Jewschool trying to go up against Salon and Huffington? Aren’t there about 462,011 liberal media outlets spewing this crap 24/7, can’t you at least find a Jewschool twist or angle?
Even a post about collecting 1000(!) signatures opposing the war is more relevant and blogworthy than this. (And that is saying something) I could probably collect 1000 signatures demanding an end to posts like these.
Is it me or is this website going to hell?
Oh man Jew Guevara your commentary never fails to amuse.
The western assault on Muslim lands began a long time ago.
on this one you’ve already furiously backpedaled in the face of themicah’s astute commentary, so I’ll leave that one alone.
It’s the same assault carried out against any group we can dominate with superior weaponry and political power.
this comment assumes that the “West” is bent on carrying out an “assault” on “any group” we can dominate militarily or politically. however, since you seem to assume that “the West” can pretty much dominate any group given our vast evil military-industrial complex, how do you explain our selective anti-Muslim assaults? Could it be, perhaps, (*GASP*) that they’re the ones assaulting us?
The Muslims (broadly speaking)
oh brother. right, “broadly speaking.” I mean, is there really any other way of speaking for Jew Guevara, the human broad brush of political commentary? I could point out the great diversity within the Muslim world, etc. but I have the feeling it wouldn’t make much of a difference. your ideological blinders are impregnable.
They prefer Jihad over McDonalds.
do “they” Mr. Guevara? does that go for the millions of Muslims throughout the world that embrace Western culture and represent such a huge market for our goods? Or do those Muslims that fall outside of your simplistic dialectic simply not exist?
(and by Jihad, of course I mean the greater jihad of spiritual development work carried out so one can better submit to god.)
wow. I would like to assume that you are being sarcastic here. but alas, your posts on this site have not exactly inspired confidence. so I’ll try to draw you a picture: someone mentions the murderous jihadi attacks on the WTC >>> you chalk it up to Muslim “resistance” to Western domination >>> which takes the form of rejecting McDonalds >>> and instead choosing “jihad” >>> which has in the course of several sentences’ distance from a discussion of the WTC attacks morphed into non-violent “spiritual development work.” Uhhh…in the words of Chris Rock “how the f*ck did we get here?!”
The Muslims (broadly speaking)
oh brother. right, “broadly speaking.” I mean, is there really any other way of speaking for Jew Guevara, the human broad brush of political commentary? I could point out the great diversity within the Muslim world, etc. but I have the feeling it wouldn’t make much of a difference. your ideological blinders are impregnable.
They prefer Jihad over McDonalds.
do “they” Mr. Guevara? does that go for the millions of Muslims throughout the world that embrace Western culture and represent such a huge market for our goods? Or do those Muslims that fall outside of your simplistic dialectic simply not exist?
(and by Jihad, of course I mean the greater jihad of spiritual development work carried out so one can better submit to god.)
wow. I would like to assume that you are being sarcastic here. but alas, your posts on this site have not exactly inspired confidence. so I’ll try to draw you a picture: someone mentions the murderous jihadi attacks on the WTC >>> you chalk it up to Muslim “resistance” to Western domination >>> which takes the form of rejecting McDonalds >>> and instead choosing “jihad” >>> which has in the course of several sentences’ distance from a discussion of the WTC attacks morphed into non-violent “spiritual development work.” Uhhh…in the words of Chris Rock “how the f*ck did we get here?!”