Senate Revolution in the Muslim World

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Lowbacca_1977, Jan 28, 2011.

  1. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    People are actually well-known to do this during the dedication phase of LDS Temples when they are open to the public. Do Mormons subsequently form organized lynch-mobs against these people? (Actually, not "homosexual pedophile", but rather "polygamist charlatan", because he's, you know, well-documented to have been that)

    I do need to clarify, however, that I was not suggesting that this film is strictly factual. It is tasteless and exploits stereotypes about Arabs. But that doesn't change the fact that Mohammed was, as attested by Islamic primary sources themselves revered as Islamic Scripture, a 7th century illiterate warrior polygamist pedophile. Any film that depicts him truthfully at all is going to be rather unpalatable to a modern audience.

    But again, it's becoming increasingly clear that this film was actually just being used as a pre-text for a 9/11 Anniversary attack.

    I understand your sentiment, but we absolutely cannot dignify this mayhem. The reason why terrorism works is because terrorism works. It gets people's attention. Every time we dignify an act of terror with a response, it all but assures there will be another one to follow.
    Last edited by Condition2SQ, Sep 13, 2012
  2. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    I don't see how this mayhem has been "dignified." People in the region are clearly angry. And it may not be all about that stupid video either. What about those unmanned drones over Yemen and Pakistan and the collateral damage caused nearly every time we attempt an assassination of a terrorist leader? What about our continued armed presence in Afghanistan and heavy naval occupation of the Persian gulf? What about all the domestic and Israeli sabre rattling over a potential fifth U.S. war in the region (counting our mission over Libya)? These things have consequences. Just because tensions burst over a parody religious desecration video trailer doesn't mean that's what the the tension is all about.
  3. Kimball_Kinnison Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 28, 2001
    star 6
    And if someone did that, the most that would happen to them is they would be arrested for trespassing if they refused to leave.

    Back in 2007, Lawrence O'Donnell said some rather disparaging remarks about the LDS Church, and Joseph Smith in particular, on national TV. Shortly afterward, he appeared on Hugh Hewitt's radio show and discussed his comments. Here is the transcript:
    For the record, I think Mormons (at least in Utah) would condemn him to a fate worse than death: green Jell-O with shredded carrots. Maybe with a side of funeral potatoes.
  4. Lord Vivec Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 8
    I can't believe this. Approximately 14 people are dead and more might die, while we're sitting here in the safety of our homes arguing over whether the outrage and reaction over a YouTube clip is justified.
  5. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    You're widening the scope of the discussion significantly. I am emphatically not in favor of the systematic drone campaign being waged by the Obama Administration(I favor ad hoc drone strikes against high-probability targets. The "signature" strikes being utilized are ridiculous, and the strikes against funeral-goers are appalling, not to mention the killing of Al-Alwaki's 16-year old son)

    Let's keep the focus on the factors at play in these particular incidents: Islamic lynch mobs killing people ( possibly ostensibly) over an atrociously produced film, and the heads of state of the countries and neighboring countries reserving the majority of their outrage and indignity for the film. (Though I hasten to point out that Libya's response has been pretty much exemplary; those of Egypt and Afghanistan are decidedly not)
  6. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Thank goodness the president acted quickly to fortify our embassies and increase security.

    There they go again, doubling down on condemning hate speech. The video at best is a tenuous proximate cause. Hatred of American interests in the region runs deep. It's understandable to hide under a cloak of victimized moral outrage when something as awful as 9/11 happens, for a little while. But 11 years later, maybe we can take stock in a more analytical and dispassionate way. Even though Obama is almost certainly going to bomb the hell out of someone, and probably his wife, children and extended family too, over the Libya attack.

    Edit: Sorry, I missed your response, and I mostly agree with that last paragraph.

    But again I think there was a coordinated 9/11 attack on a U.S. facility and its personnel undertaken under cover of a legitimate if misguided protest, not a mob lynching. Peaceful protests are also free speech. When they devolve into riots, then the governments that failed to protect our diplomatic missions are at fault. We agree on this I assume. I'm not going to weep at any Muslim protester shot while storming one of our embassies.

    Still, trying to defuse tension by condemning hate speech is not Un-American or in any sense letting the terrorists win. Islam isn't to blame for the protests either. Ignorance is to blame. Awful, cleptocratic governments that used religion and the dole to placate the masses instead of educating them and trying to make them partners in a successful society (and incidentally partnered with U.S. interests in perpetuating this situation) are to blame. The Arab Spring didn't automatically make more people literate or give them meaningful jobs. The U.S. helped create modern Iran. We helped create the Egypt that got toppled, etc. There's a lot of anger about it.
    Last edited by Jabbadabbado, Sep 13, 2012
  7. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    I agree that the riots per se are not the sum of the problem; rioting is not uniquely endemic to the Muslim world, both now and throughout history.

    What's most troubling to me is how difficult it is to get unequivocal condemnation out of Muslim leaders in positions of power and influence.

    Watch for example, this clip from the Mohammed Cartoon incident(essentially the same conflict)



    Never directly answers any of Hitchens' most-pointed questions. Obfuscation the entire way through, especially his rambling, incoherent response to the rampant anti-Semitism in the Arab world.
  8. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 7
    The reason it's hard to get unequivocal condemnation out of Muslim leaders over extremists incidents is because they either fear for their lives and the lives of their loved ones....or because they sympathize with the attackers but cannot say so publicly.
  9. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    Precisely. Which is why this nonsense word "Islamophobia" needs to be expunged from the lexicon.
  10. Jabba-wocky Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 4, 2003
    star 8
    What does this have to do with anything? I said he was correct to say that the film was divisive. It is, so he was. Whether subsequent events were more or less divisive is irrelevant. Whether the response from the general public was appropriate is irrelevant. We already noted he should have made some remark about the violence. But, as I noted in my original post, there's not really an error of commission here. People of all faiths are perfectly right to be offended by that film, and to publish public statements explaining as much. That's not a comment on the people who got offended, nor an endorsement of their behavior.

    And if Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell truly valued religious freedom, they'd be a lot less exorcised about prayer in schools while being comparatively quiet when people openly advocate racial profiling against Muslims and preventing the building of mosques. Why don't some atheists who dislike the implication that they have no morals or conscience feel bothered about implying that theists have an infantile, under-developed conscience such that they need someone to "tell them what to do?" Hypocrisy isn't unique to the Afghans on this issue.
  11. GenAntilles Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 5
    And the common peoples reaction will be. "No it's blasphemy, they must be punished and so must you for defending them."

    Never expect the mob to bow to reason.
    ViolentVioletMenace likes this.
  12. Violent Violet Menace Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    The adoption of democratic principles by the people in the Middle East will take a long time. The Turks are arguably the most advanced, after Israelis, in this area.
    Last edited by ViolentVioletMenace, Sep 13, 2012
  13. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2002
    star 6
  14. VadersLaMent Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 3, 2002
    star 10
    So, some felon gets a film maker to film footage in the Muslim world, dubbs in words that were never spoken and uses it as a big ol' anti-Muslin thing, sparks an anti-American assault that results in death of our ambassadors and the GOP uses it to say Obama is a foreign policy disaster and all this death and violence is his fault.

    Did I miss anything?
    Last edited by VadersLaMent, Sep 13, 2012
  15. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2002
    star 6
    Nope. Looks like you got it.
  16. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Yes, the protest in Libya was probably just used as cover for the armed group that attacked the consulate.

    I haven't seen the evidence that it was the video that caused the protests though. Do we know for sure that it was even a factor? I hate to think that people are so easily enraged by such crude attempts to enrage them. On the other hand, internet trolling...
  17. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2002
    star 6
    At this point, your guess is as good as mine. There are investigations into the video that may prove how the protests got started. And Muslims have very thin skins about their religion.
  18. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    The violence is the real story here, and the violence is being committed in the name of a faith that President Karzai actively promotes as the Guidance for Mankind. He is a venerable spokesman for that faith, so while he's of course not directly responsible for the violence, it is absolutely fair to expect of him to say something of substance against the violence.

    A more localized example, remember when Jared Lee Loughner shot Congresswoman Giffords and the media almost immediately seized upon the "depraved right-winger inspired by vehement tea-party invective!" storyline? Remember the Sarah Palin "target" image? It turned out he had actually never even seen it, but nevertheless, it was appropriate for the occasion that everyone take a step back and temper their rhetoric a bit. Sarah Palin herself--not even a public official at that point anymore--was even pressured to go on national television to address this

    You'll find me nowhere arguing that Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell ever truly valued freedom of religion for its own sake rather than simply as a tool to facilitate the spread of Christianity. You may also want to notice that Morsi and Karzai are, you know, chief-executives of extremely important nation-states in the midst of a foreign policy crisis with actual power and not marginalized inconsequential parochial figures. The fact that that they're, you know, alive (unlike Jerry Falwell) also seems a tad relevant.

    And really, why even bring this up? As @Lord_Vivec succinctly noted, fourteen people are dead and more probably will be soon. Is this really the time to play "Let's put Robertson and Morsi's heads on a scale and see who's more vile!" Do you think these are the sorts of things President Obama, Secretaries Clinton and Panetta and assorted US diplomats are discussing at this very moment? Maybe I'm being a bit presumptuous, but I thought we try to keep things in a fairly high register, here.
    Last edited by Condition2SQ, Sep 13, 2012
  19. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 7
    The story I got from what I've read and heard is that the protests started because of the video, but then, under the cover of the protests, these attacks were initiated against the embassies.

    So it almost sounds like there was legitimate peaceful protests against this video outside the embassies and then an attack was launched from within the ranks of the protesters against the embassies.

    For all we know, an al-Qaeda linked group used the protesters as cover as they scaled the embassies and attacked.
    Last edited by ShaneP, Sep 13, 2012
  20. Juliet316 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 8
    And clips of the film were supposedly put on some Libyan and Egyptian TV stations.
  21. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    Last edited by Condition2SQ, Sep 13, 2012
  22. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    Yeah, sure, there aren't any people who have an irrational fear and hatred of Islam and Muslims. Oklahoma's in danger from Sharia law, after all.
  23. Condition2SQ Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 5, 2012
    star 4
    Nice straw-man.

    A shade better than invoking the name of Jerry Falwell as relevant to the present foreign policy crisis, I suppose.
  24. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    You called Islamophobia a "nonsense word." It's pretty clear that your post was meant to apply to more than just this current situation.
  25. Ghost Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2003
    star 6
    Condition2SQ, I don't get why you apparently want President Obama to lecture Muslims on American values. I could see something like that potentially backfiring in a big way. Most of the protesters believe the US is secretly funding videos like this anyways. You can't change an entire culture by one speech from an outsider, especially when the ones he'd be trying to sway with this hypothetical speech already don't trust him.


    EDIT:

    There also seems to be a growing consensus that there was a small, peaceful protest of the movie... which was then broken by this highly organized assault. Derna, a city to the east of Benghazi, was apparently the biggest source of foreign "Al Qaeda in Iraq" militiants during the Iraq War. The late ambassador wrote a report on the importance of Derna to Al Qaeda during the Iraq War, and how after the war, Al Qaeda was trying to turn Derna into a new stronghold. That report was then leaked by Julian Assange, as one the many leaked diplomatic cables during the Wikileaks scandal/crisis. It also appears that one of the masterminds behind the 1993 WTC bombing has a militant group named after him in the Derna area, and that the Number 2 in core Al Qaeda killed this summer was a Libyan. Perhaps an Al Qaeda-affiliated group in Derna is responsible for this attack? It did take place on the anniversary of 9/11, and just a few months from the death of the Libyan Al Qaeda leader. Also, a major promoter of the movie was Terry Jones, the Florida pastor who burned Korans a couple years ago.

    It seems to be a reminder that everything is connected, and all seems to come together at certain times.
    Last edited by Darth-Ghost, Sep 13, 2012