Archive for Monday, September 25, 2006

No apologies

September 25, 2006

Advertisement

To the editor:

I'm confused about why the leaders of the Western world are constantly apologizing to violent Muslim mobs. It seems to me that Muslim leaders should be doing the apologizing. Neither the pope, Danish cartoonists, Jews or anyone that I can think of has come within light years of uttering the kind of vile, intolerant, bigoted language that routinely pours out of the Muslim world. It's not just language either. Somali Muslims allegedly murdered an elderly Catholic nun because of the pope's remarks. In Gaza, "protesters" torched churches. Of course, that's just the latest. And the pope is apologizing? This makes no sense to me.

It's not a new thought, but if Muslims protested terrorism with the same energy they protest criticism, I'm sure there'd be a lot less of both. Not likely to happen, though, since the same Muslim leaders who incite the protests are also the ones who incite the murder and destruction.

But I still don't see why anyone should apologize to these people. Straightforward condemnation is more appropriate for violence, bigotry and intolerance.

Gary Henry,

Lawrence

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 10 months ago

"Straightforward condemnation is more appropriate for violence, bigotry and intolerance."

Too bad what we get from our leaders and their supporters is just a mirroring of violence, bigotry and intolerance.

Porter 8 years, 10 months ago

Which list is longest? Wow!! That's a GREAT justification for war!

This peeing contest has to stop. We can't out-fanatasize fanatics. An eye for an eye has NEVER ended violence.

You can't kill all the muslims, can you? For every one fanatic you kill, you create several more!! When is everyone going to realize that trying to kill all the fanatics is like trying to put out a fire with gasoline?

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 10 months ago

"And the pope is apologizing? This makes no sense to me."

It makes perfect sense in light of your letter. Hate and bigotry should be confronted at all times.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 10 months ago

"But I still don't see why anyone should apologize to these people. Straightforward condemnation is more appropriate for violence, bigotry and intolerance."

Indeed. Whether the comments come from muslims or christians.

Sacerdotal 8 years, 10 months ago

All the monotheistic religions are soaked in blood and worship the same skygod. Have we lost all sense of irony?

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/opinion/15593793.htm

3dogs 8 years, 10 months ago

I think our problem is -- too much religion, not enough spirituality.

3dogs 8 years, 10 months ago

I bet none of you are Jewish or have Jewish friends. Because if you are, you should be aware the Arab countries, and the Palestinians teach their children that you are apes and pigs and should be killed. It's in the textbooks and classrooms, and has been for decades. No apology needed for that, evidently. Maybe that's all right with you.

Confrontation 8 years, 10 months ago

I bet Gary is really ASBESTOS. The same idiot argument was posted last week.

3dogs 8 years, 10 months ago

From NPR, May 24: Morning Edition, May 24, 2006 * In the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, the United States pressured Saudi Arabia to reform its educational curriculum by eliminating educational material that demonizes Christians and Jews or that urges holy war on "the unbelievers." Senior Saudi officials have assured the United States that the reform has been completed, but a new report by the human-rights group Freedom House suggests otherwise.

3dogs 8 years, 10 months ago

--Daily Standard, Washington, DC "Kill a Jew--Go to Heaven" Natan Sharansky draws attention to a new report by the Palestinian Media Watch. by Rachel DiCarlo 02/08/2005 5:56:00 PM "Treachery and disloyalty are character traits of the Jews and therefore one should be aware of them," the Palestinian textbook Islamic Education for Ninth Grade says. When such content was brought to the PA's attention in 1999, the U.S. government offered to fund the reprinting of that book and others. But the PA refused. The report also contains 20 segments from interviews with various individuals on Palestinian television who compare Jews to animals.

Paul Rosen 8 years, 10 months ago

The most silly comment above, I guess mr. Reese forgot that Gandhi and MLK jr. changed alot with power and not force. How many people did they threaten with the weapons you say keep us free?

Paul Rosen 8 years, 10 months ago

Oh absolutely not am I saying that India is Shangri-la, what I am saying is that great change can be brought through peace (Jesus, Buddha anyone?) While a vast majority of people (christians, muslims, jews, ahh hell most people) have forgotten their message i.e. they protect peace with violence. Isn't that something that we are supposed to live ( for christians be christ like i.e. prince of peace) Many of the other faiths in the world promote peace in a similar fashion. I do not deny that for many many people human nature is violent and aggressive, but does that mean that we (humans) can never change? I think I suffer from optimism and not peacitis or however you spell the made up word.

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 10 months ago

oh marion how you like to rant sometimes:)

p.s. you ever been to India?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 10 months ago

Porter,

"We can't out-fanatasize fanatics. An eye for an eye has NEVER ended violence."

Here's a little pop quiz:

Question 1: The violence of Tojo's Imperial Japan from 1941- 1945 was ended by:

a. Harsh language.

b. Placing daisies in the rifle barrels of fanatical Japanese soldiers.

c. Clever negotiations.

d. Retaking territory with extreme violence by Island-hopping US Marines, culminating with the effective targeting of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic munitions, which broke Japan's will to continue Imperial policy and convinced them that peace was, in fact, the best policy.

Question 2: The violence of the Third Reich executed upon European nations and imprisoned "enemies of State" was ended by:

a. Holding a mixer with Hitler, Hess and Goebbels to break the ice and attempt to understand them as people.

b. Neville Chamberlain.

c. Conducting non-lethal targeting against the Gestapo and SS with Barnie videos.

d. Conducting violent combat operations against all fronts of German conquered territory of North Africa and the European Mainland over a two year period, conducting violent and continuous bombing of German strategic centers of gravity, ultimately capturing Berlin and breaking the will of the Third Reich to continue imposition of their inhuman policies.

Hell, this is just within the last 60 or so years. We could go back to Rome's rather violent destruction of Carthage in response to decades of continuous violence wrought by Hannibal. This violence brought about many centuries of local peace.

Only later, when Rome adopted the appeasement strategy of the "intellectuals" of their times did they fail utterly as a civilization.

I beg to differ Sir; violence, if ferociously delivered beyond the will and ability of an adversary, is the one thing you can count on to end violence!

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 10 months ago

look at it like this people get offended everyday most just walk away with maybe a comment or the universal sign so why does being offended give people the right to burn things destroy property blow people up and in general make idiots out of themselves? I can not recall one time when the people here have acted in this manner but there have been plenty of times when other countrys and non christian religions have offended the USA and christianity.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 10 months ago

Prizzle,

"I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence... I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor.

But I believe that nonviolence is infinitely superior to violence, forgiveness is more manly than punishment. Forgiveness adorns a soldier...But abstinence is forgiveness only when there is the power to punish; it is meaningless when it pretends to proceed from a helpless creature..."

--Mohandis Ghandi

Hmmm, it seems the pacifism of Ghandi was not without limits. BTW, when did Ghandi and MLK gain the prestige of bearing the responsibility of "keeping us free?" This is news indeed.

You may think Reese "silly," but I find nothing in his piece that does not square with historical precedent. Perhaps you will share with us the precedent of history to support your peaceful outlook, or are you a victim of the "illusory world" Reese accuses you of having created for yourself?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 10 months ago

Sasquatch34,

"Lepanto-Your examples are not even close to the current situations we find ourselves in."

When did I say it was? Re-read the challenge posed by Porter, before making half-thought out paid political announcements.

BTW, since were dealing in dismissives, by YOUR logic Sasquatch, we'd be the largest English speaking provinces of either the German or Japanese Empires.

Logicsound04,

"...both of those situations were ultimately sealed with a peace accord and treaty--words and ideas--NOT with the violence that led to the peace accord." The point being that eventually the battle between the two sides involved will require some sort of agreement by both sides or it will never end."

Logic ,look deeper into the cause and effect of things. In the aforementioned examples which were rebuttals to the argument that "an eye for an eye NEVER ends violence," one side FORCES the other to the peace table. How is this accomplished? Sudden guilt pangs? Threat of use of politically incorrect language? Pathological accomodation and negotiation? No. It was the use of greater violence or the credible threat of it that brought on the effect of which you speak.

Why did the Japanese surrender unconditionally? You write as if they went to the peace table of their own accord.

They did not go willingly until FORCED to do so.

You may wish to believe that they "saw the light" in an instantaneous flash of enlightened reason and donned headbands, sandals and fired-up the bongs and guitars to sing "Summer breeze", but you do so contrary to well established facts of history.

If you know some detail of history I am overlooking regarding this matter, please feel free to share.

BOE 8 years, 10 months ago

Road To Darkness

by Charley Reese

I really don't understand George Bush. Why can't he say: "I was convinced that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction but apparently our intelligence was faulty. I'm sorry to have misled you, but getting rid of Saddam is still a good idea, etc., and so forth"?

No, there is apparently something in the Bush genes that forbids ever admitting to having made a mistake. Such arrogance cost his father a second term, and it could do the same to the son's political ambition. In the father's case, he refused to apologize to the American people for breaking his promise never to allow new taxes.

Now, son Bush doesn't bring up the topic of weapons of mass destruction, except to say that he's sure they will find evidence of "programs." Well, dormant programs weren't used to sell Americans on going to war. Stockpiles and imminent acquisition of nuclear weapons were used to sell the war. That was, as Sen. Edward Kennedy has put it so bluntly, a fraud.

Saddam was a bad dictator, though the worst of his brutalities occurred during the 1980s when he was an American ally. But a Saddam Hussein without weapons of mass destruction, living in a falling-apart economy with a decrepit, falling-apart army, was a problem for Iraqis, not for Americans. All of Saddam's neighbors told Bush that they were not afraid of Iraq. Therefore, getting rid of him was not worth the 300 American lives already spent and more sure to come.

Now the neoconservatives who got us into a war on false pretenses are saying we "can't afford to lose the peace." This same ploy was used to prolong America's stay in Vietnam. We won't lose the peace if we hand Iraq over to the Iraqis and say goodbye. We will if we prolong our stay.

That old colonialist racism is manifesting itself in all these remarks about our having to tutor the Iraqis in running their own country. The Iraqis can govern themselves. They've been a nation as long as Finland and a civilization longer than Europe. Bush wants to stay in Iraq for purely economic reasons. He wants to make sure it's we, not the Iraqis, who decide who gets the business of a rebuilding a country. He doesn't want a democratic government in Iraq. He wants a puppet government that will follow his orders.

BOE 8 years, 10 months ago

Road To Darkness

by Charley Reese (continued)

It's too bad Bush isn't a reader. He's following in the colonialist footsteps of the British. They tried occupation and found it was too bloody and costly, so they set up a puppet government. The Iraqis overthrew it. And the probability is high that they will drive us out and overthrow whatever puppet government we leave behind. The question is how many billions of dollars and how many American lives we want to spend teaching George Bush a lesson he should have learned at the library.

We Americans are not cut out for empire. When Arab terrorists struck the twin towers, the FBI and CIA suddenly discovered they were woefully short of people who could read and speak Arabic. Yet we've been involved in the Middle East for a century. I met an Air Force general in charge of choosing nuclear targets, and during the conversation he referred to Iran as an Arab country. It's not, in case you don't know. God only knows what poor people he chose as targets for annihilation.

We have soldiers scattered around the world in 120 countries. The vast military-industrial complex is bleeding us out. We have a president who advocates an endless war. Our country will not survive an endless war. We'll go bankrupt. If the president aspires to be the emperor, he should read some Roman history. None of the emperors, or their people, fared very well.

My prayer is that Americans will wake up and re-establish the republic the Founding Fathers gave us, along with a policy of armed neutrality and no foreign entanglements. That way leads to a bright future. The road to empire leads to darkness.

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 10 months ago

goodluck with that job glad it is you and not me yuck...

ASBESTOS 8 years, 10 months ago

It's too bad that BOE can't produce his own original thought, but can only cut and past off some left wing blog BS, and that is the sum of the posting and debate talent.

BOE 8 years, 10 months ago

ASBESTOS

"...that is the sum of the posting and debate talent. "

===

As opposed to what? Your "Sound and Fury"?

"It's too bad" that you confuse your prolificacy, (plus lots! n lots! of CAPs!) with "posting and debate talent", simply because you have a lot of free time to kill.

Oh and BTW...

here's a "left wing blog BS" link for ya, Einstein. lol

http://reese.king-online.com/Reese_20030929/index.php

-

Since you've been gracious enough to impart a little constructive criticism my way, allow me to volley back with something that could be enormously helpful to you.

Start over, drop the "left wing blog BS" foolishness and begin with:

"I'm attacking you for your posting of a Charley Reece column, but not conman's because ....."

...and maybe, just maybe, you can begin to get to the bottom of your problem.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.