Classic and typical jihadist evasion and displacement of responsibility. It's more disturbing that Barack Obama seems to agree, at least from the looks of his Cairo speech -- in which the only causes for tension between the West and the Islamic world that he mentioned were the fault of the West.
"Hezbollah blames U.S. for all terrorism," from CNN, November 30 (thanks to Bill):
Beirut, Lebanon (CNN) -- Hezbollah's chief on Monday announced the group's new "manifesto," which calls on all countries to "liberate Jerusalem" and declares the United States a threat to the world."American terrorism is the source of every terrorism in the world," Hassan Nasrallah said in a televised speech from an undisclosed location.
It was his first address since a unity government formed in Lebanon this month, ending a crisis that had left the country with no government since June's parliamentary elections.
Hezbollah, a political party in Lebanon, is listed as a terrorist organization by the United States and Israel. Nasrallah does not appear in public amid concerns for his safety.
"We invite and call on all Arabs and Muslims and all countries keen on peace and stability in the world to intensify efforts and resources to liberate Jerusalem from Zionist occupation and to maintain its true identity and its Islamic and Christian sanctities," Nasrallah said....
Observe the statement:
But what if we tweaked this a little bit and made the statement to read like this:
Jeez, do you think there would be a massive roar of condemnations and resolutions in the Useless Nations?
Mud-slime hypocrisy knows no bounds.
"American terrorism is the source of every terrorism in the world," Hassan Nasrallah said....
And we'd believe you, why?
Robert:- Classic and typical jihadist evasion and displacement of responsibility. It's more disturbing that Barack Obama seems to agree, at least from the looks of his Cairo speech -- in which the only causes for tension between the West and the Islamic world that he mentioned were the fault of the West. (end quote)
I'd be interested in knowing who's fault you think it is, Robert. Are you not evading the responsibility of the West to admit its own crimes? After all, Nazism, Fascism, Colonialism, extreme Nationalism, American Wilsonian Interventionist Idealism (which is still American policy) are all Western inventions.
Muslim suicide terrorism did not exist until the late eightees, borrowing the practice from Tamils who were steeped in Hindu valorisation of suicide and from the Kamikaze. Christians have their own suicide terrorist: Samson, who murdered innocents on the way. Jews have the Sicarii. So to blame all suicide terrorism on Islam, in which it is an aberration and late introduction, is extreme bigotry, see: http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/moonlight.htm
As for terrorism as a tactic, in which civilians are tagetted to achieve a political goal, Muslims were not the source. In fact, Muslims had their own legal concept of terrorism (hiraba) (terrorism was only introduced in the legal vocabulary of the West in the late nineteenth century) - see: http://users.tpg.com.au/dezhen/jackson_terrorism.html
Islam too strongly discouraged revolution and uprisings against even tyrant rulers, as peace and security in the absence of civil war is preferred - instead it favoured peaceful means of changing authorotarian rule. However in the West revolutions (like the French Revolution, the Dutch Revolution, the Puritan Revolution, the American Revolution) defined populist movements, and hundreds of thousands of innocents were normally casualties. In other words, terrorism was the norm. A case in point is the European revolutionary anarchists of the nineteenth century who would randomly kill. In Islam, these were extremely rare.
In Israel/Palestine, it was firstly the Jews that engaged in terrorism as a tactic, quite successfully in fact - the irgun and the lehi, offshoots of the haganah. The Palestinans began engaging in terrorism a few decades later having witnessed the success of the Jews. However, they were not so lucky. Meir Kahane a Jewish terrorist leader and his follower Baruch Goldstein (who in the ninetees murdered dozens of Muslim worshippers) are hailed as heroes and martyrs by extreme Jews. In fact, Goldstein's terrorist act in 1994 killed more Palestinians than Hamas rockets have killed in the entire last decade.
In terms of global terrorism, the revolutionary anarachists of Europe were perhaps the first example. The CIA also created a network of terrorist activities in Vietnam for example (the Phoenix programme), in Nicaragua where its involvement led to the death of tens of thousands and in other places. The recent US paramilitary organisation Balckwater is responsible for the terrorist and brutal acts of Felluja and Abu Ghuraib and for many targetted assassinations. Al-Qaeda, a platform for a global terrorist ideology, is more a reflection of this Western counterpart than anyting Islamic. John Gray wrote "No cliche is more stupefying than that which describes Al-Qaida as a throwback to medieval times. It is a by-product of globalisation. Its most distinctive feature - projecting a privatised form of organised violence worldwide - was impossible in the past. Equally, the belief that a new world can be hastened by spectacular acts of destruction is nowhere found in medieval times. Al-Qaida’s closest precursors are the revolutionary anarchists of late nineteenth-century Europe".
Muslim terrorism is invariably reactionary and a response to Western (normally American) backed terrorism or invasion. Israel's terrorism is supported by the US. It likewise supports dictators in the Arab world in order to suppress populist movements like the Muslim Brotherhood, which has led to the massacre of tens of thousands of civilians over the last several decades.
If put into its proper context, therefore, Muslim terrorism is in fact a clear aberration of its own history and reflects an imposed internalisation of some Western norms. This is largely the effect of colonialism and continued neo-colonialism (including the systematic breakdown of traditional Islamic learning). Jihadist terrorists (who are opposed by almost everybody who holds an Islamic ijaza and has qualified as an alim) simply appropriate selectively the classical jihad ideology to create their own system. A typical Muslim fatwa in response to jihadist (ignorant, and non-alim) justification: http://www.livingislam.org/maa/dcmm_e.html
Taken together, therefore, in modern history, the West has been the biggest exporter of terrorism, and the major cause of any clash created between Islam and the West. Islam was pretty silent during the World Wars, quite peaceful even in today's "African World War" (involving many nations and killing up to 5 million people). Being twenty percent of the world population Islam was probably responsible for two percent of all killings in the twentieth century, the rest was either Chinese, Russian, European/American. An objective analysis of modern history will certainly reveal that Muslims are more peaceful than most other politically active group.
American terrorism? More like American cowardism, and aiding terrorists, including PLO,al-Qaida, Hamas, Habbash, KLA, and, yes, Hezbollah out of abject, subservient cowardism/dhimmism/stockholmism:
Tuesday, March 8, 2005: the above-mentioned Nasrallah speaking before the cheering crowd of 500,000 Shi'ites in Beirut, gleefully recalls killing 241 US Marines right there, in Beirut on October 23, 1983. Nasrallah was one of the 4 Hezbollah leaders who met in Baalbek, Lebanon with Ahmed Kanani, the top Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander in Lebanon, in late September 1983 and gave the final go-ahead to dispatching an Iranian suicide bomber, Ismalal Askari, on a Kamikaze attack on the Marine barracks.
Now, 22 years later, Nasrallah boasted about the killing of American Marines before the entire world. Directly addressing President Bush, he challenged him to send more Marines to Lebanon so Hezbollah kill them, too.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005: exactly one week later came Baby Bush's bleating response to Hezbollah: Please disarm and become a political party, and we will gladly accept you.
Nasrallah contemptuously rejected Baby Bush's plea.
July 12, 2006: Hezbollah finally gets the fight it has been asking for with ... Israel. Baby Bush and Cowardeezza plunge into uncontrollable panic, terrified that "Istael is making the Muslims too mad" by actually fighting back, and begin frantically nagging Israel for "hurting innocent Lebanese civilians", demoralizing Israel instead of standing by its side at the time of war. Finally, they stop Israel's war effort in its tracks with a UN cease-fire resolution, rescuing Hezbollah, a serial mass-murderer of Americans.
Cowards, Cowards, Cowards-in-Chief, Republican and Democrat, succeeding one another in the White House.
Just last year, we had a chance to elect a hero, Rudy Giuliani, to the presidency. Did not take the Republican primary voters any time to get rid of him, did it? What a blunder! What a catastrophe!
Now, the nation is broke, in steep decline, facing military defeats in both Iran and Afghanistan, its government heavily infested with Islamists and their American Dhimmi Quislings. Meanwhile, Iran is getting ready to send nuclear suicide bombers into the US to bring about the demise of "The Great Satan" and "the coming of Mahdi".
Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.
I don't know who this muzammmil is, but I got as far as this portion of his/her comment:
"I'd be interested in knowing who's fault you think it is, Robert. Are you not evading the responsibility of the West to admit its own crimes?"
What nonsense.
Whose fault is it? The Muslims who do it and the "religion" that teaches them to do it. Simple enough for you to grasp?
Ladies and gentlemen
observe our Muslim spin-doctor proving Mr Spencer right in spades by engaging in a barrage of Turnspeak, Tu Quoque, Brazen Denial, Lies and Half-Truths.
The United States was not even in existence during most of the centuries that the Empire of Islam waged its undistinguishing and exterminating war against all the non-Muslim part of mankind that it could reach with its armies or its bands of ghazwa raiders and pirate kidnappers and slavers, spreading havoc, ruin and terror, engaging in economic warfare by burning woods and standing crops and killing or carrying off livestock. Spain, for example, was 'softened up' for jihad conquest by such repeated destructive raiding, year after year. The Somali Muslim pirates - like the Muslim Barbary Pirates or Acehnese Muslim pirates of old - are carrying out a sea-borne war of attrition today, damaging the economies of the non-Muslim nations whose ships, cargoes and sailors are being continually seized and then held to crippling ransom.
The Hindus and Buddhists of 8th-C through 18th-C India (see K S Lal - Muslim Slave System in Medieval India) might have something to say about what Islam did to their country - ruin, pillage, mass rape, mass murder, and mass enslavements.
The millions upon millions of Black Africans enslaved by Muslims from the 8th to the 20th century (and its' still happening, in the Sudan) might have something to say, too: about the mass-murdering raids on their home villages, the raping of women and small girls (sometimes unto death), the cutting off of breasts of nursing mothers, the castrations (8c-18thC) of black boys by the slashing off of all external genitalia in order to create eunuchs for the harems of Arabia and Ottoman Turkey and other parts of the Muslim world, and the relentless use and abuse of black girls as sex-slaves (the babies they bore as a result of the rapes, were usually murdered).
Mohammed said, "I have been made victorious by terror".
A modern Pakistani Muslim soldier, Brigadier General S K Malik wrote a book entitled "The Quranic Concept of War" (1979):
From Lt Myers' review of that book, which may be found here:
http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/06winter/win-ess.htm
'Malik’s most controversial dictum is summarized in the following manner:
in war, “the point where the means and the end meet” is in terror.
He formulates terror as an objective principal of war; once terror is achieved the enemy reaches his culminating point. “Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose . . . .”.
'Malik’s divine principal of Islamic warfare may be restated as “strike terror; never feel terror.”
'The ultimate objective of this form of warfare “revolves around the human heart, [the enemies] soul, spirit, and Faith.”
'Terror “can be instilled only if the opponent’s Faith is destroyed . . . . It is essential in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate [the enemies] Faith.”
'Those who are firm in their religious conviction are immune to terror, “a weak Faith offers inroads to terror.”
'Therefore, as part of preparations for jihad, actions will be oriented on weakening the non-Islamic’s “Faith,” while strengthening the Islamic’s.
'What that weakening or “dislocation” entails in practice remains ambiguous. Malik concludes, “Psychological dislocation is temporary; spiritual dislocation is permanent.” The soul of man can only be touched by terror…".
Well, Mo, I read muzzy as far as Samson being a Christian terrorist, perused the rest and concluded I had enough Muslimthink to last me a day or two. There's only so much of the "it's really not our fault but yours" mentality one can take. Instructive, though, of how Islam warps the brain. Meanwhile, Islamic terrorist attacks or attempted attacks go on everyday throughout the world and are exculpated or just plain ignored by the most self-pitying (and deluded) people on earth--------Muslims.
Hizbollah speaks from the Muslim mindset whereby 'terrorism' and 'war' are only ever 'anything non-Muslims do to resist Islam' whereas whatever Muslims do to force non-Muslims to submit to Muslim dominance (or, for that matter, to impose ever-stricter sharia upon fellow Muslims) is NOT war *or* terrorism, it is just ...spreading 'peace'.
The political scientist Bassam Tibi observes
"At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. "We have sent you forth to all mankind" (Q. 34:28).
'If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (da'wa) can be pursued peacefully.
'If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them.
'In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya.
'World peace, the final stage of the da'wa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam..
'*Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur'anic command to spread Islam as a way to peace* {my emphasis - dda}.
' The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used [by Muslims] only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims {nota bene - dda}.
'Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of "opening" the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad.
'Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur'an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists.
'*Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da'wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da'wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it* {my emphasis - dda}.
'In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. {Classic 'blame the victim' paradigm! this is the rationale of the abuser - 'you *made* me do it! I *had* to punish you! - dda}.
'Only when Muslim power is weak is "temporary truce" (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of "temporary").”
- Tibi, Bassam. (1996). War and Peace in Islam, in Terry Nardin (ed.) The Ethics of War and Peace: Religious and Secular Perspectives. (pp. 129-131). Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press].
Susanp summed up the ghastly twisted 'logic' of Muslimthink, as exemplified in this report by Hassan Nasrallah in his blaming the USA for terrorism, in a brilliant posting not so long ago:
Susanp | November 20, 2009 9:42 PM | Reply
...
"According to muslim rationale,
if people resist the spread of islam they are attacking islam,
giving muslims the right to wage jihad to defend islam.
When muslims attack or prey upon non-muslims
and the non-muslims attempt to defend themselves,
the non-muslims are declared the attackers and enemies of islam,
their wealth is seized, and they are killed.
The muslim ethos defies logic as we understand it
because in their twisted minds, only islam is important...".
"...to liberate Jerusalem from Zionist occupation and to maintain its true identity and its Islamic and Christian sanctities," Nasrallah said...."
Interesting attempt, it seems, to co-opt Christians onto the side of Islam against the Jews. Nice try Nasrallah, but no cigar.
Listen here metamucil, you want to blame the US and Israel for terrorism when Islam and Islamic terrorism has been around for 1400 yrs. Hardly before Israel was reestablished as a nation and America was founded and had a foreign policy.
Let us look at the definition of terrorism shall we?
Terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.
Now metamucil, is that not what the Islamic jihadists in Sudan, Bosnia, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Europe, Russia, America use as a coercion to get people to conform to their ways or beliefs? I mean Surah 9:29 says to either convert them peacefully, if they do not convert, make them pay the jizya tax, or wage war with them. Cannot take that out of context. What about the school children in Besla who were shot and killed by the Islamic terrorists and threw them out of the windows while their parents watched, have anything to do with America or Israel?
When Muhammed your butcher prophet attacked his Quraysh tribe after returning back from Medina with an army, would that be considered terrorism? The use of coercion to get them to convert to their ways? Or how about 3 years after Butcher Muhammed died, in 632A.D., his followers attacked Damascus, Syria, spread their jihad into other parts of the Arabic world, India, China, and Europe; was that the result of American imperialsim as you would have it? Now remember this was centuries before America was founded.
Let us look at other parts of history metamucil since you seem to want to bring up history.
During the completion of the new Granada Mosque, which was marked by celebratory announcements July 10, 2003 of a “return of Islam to Spain,” disconcerting statements were made by European Muslim leaders. Specifically, the keynote speaker at this conference, Umar Ibrahim Vadillo, a Spanish Muslim leader, encouraged Muslims to cause an economic collapse of Western economies (by ceasing to use Western currencies, and switching to gold dinars), while the German Muslim leader Abu Bakr Rieger told Muslim attendees to avoid adapting their Islamic religious practices to accommodate European (i.e., Western Enlightenment?) values.
Bat Ye’or and Andrew Bostom state that: “We believe that reiterating these ahistorical, roseate claims about Muslim Spain abets the contemporary Islamist agenda, and retards the evolution of a liberal, reformed ‘Euro-Islam’ fully compatible with post-Enlightenment Western values.” “Iberia [Spain] was conquered in 710-716 AD by Arab tribes originating from northern, central and southern Arabia. Massive Berber and Arab immigration, and the colonization of the Iberian peninsula, followed the conquest. Most churches were converted into mosques. Although the conquest had been planned and conducted jointly with a strong faction of royal Iberian Christian dissidents, including a bishop, it proceeded as a classical jihad with massive pillages, enslavement, deportations and killings.”
Is this not terrorism?
“In the regions under stable Islamic control, Jews and Christians were tolerated as dhimmis – like elsewhere in other Islamic lands – and could not build new churches or synagogues nor restore the old ones. Segregated in special quarters, they had to wear discriminatory clothing. Subjected to heavy taxes, the Christian peasantry formed a servile class attached to the Arab domains; many abandoned their land and fled to the towns. Harsh reprisals with mutilations and crucifixions would sanction the Mozarab (Christian dhimmis) calls for help from the Christian kings.”
The humiliating status imposed on the dhimmis and the confiscation of their land provoked many revolts, punished by massacres, as in Toledo (761, 784-86, 797), Saragossa from 781 to 881, Cordova (805), Merida (805-813, 828), and yet again in Toledo (811-819). The insurgents were crucified, as prescribed in the Koran 5:33.
Is this not terrorism?
According to Bat Ye’or and Bostom, “Feuding was endemic in the Andalusian cities between the different sectors of the population: Arab and Berber colonizers, Iberian Muslim converts (Muwalladun) and Christian dhimmis (Mozarabs). There were rarely periods of peace in the Amirate of Cordova (756-912), nor later.” “Al-Andalus represented the land of jihad par excellence. Every year, sometimes twice a year, raiding expeditions were sent to ravage the Christian Spanish kingdoms to the north, the Basque regions, or France and the Rhone valley, bringing back booty and slaves. Andalusian corsairs attacked and invaded along the Sicilian and Italian coasts, even as far as the Aegean Islands, looting and burning as they went. Thousands of people were deported to slavery in Andalusia, where the caliph kept a militia of tens of thousand of Christian slaves brought from all parts of Christian Europe (the Saqaliba), and a harem filled with captured Christian women. Society was sharply divided along ethnic and religious lines, with the Arab tribes at the top of the hierarchy, followed by the Berbers who were never recognized as equals, despite their Islamization; lower in the scale came the mullawadun converts and, at the very bottom, the dhimmi Christians and Jews.”
Is this not terrorism?
Bat Ye’or and Bostom state that: “The Muslim Berber Almohads in Spain and North Africa (1130-1232) wreaked enormous destruction on both the Jewish and Christian populations. This devastation – massacre, captivity, and forced conversion – was described by the Jewish chronicler Abraham Ibn Daud, and the poet Abraham Ibn Ezra. Suspicious of the sincerity of the Jewish converts to Islam, Muslim ‘inquisitors’ (i.e., antedating their Christian Spanish counterparts by three centuries) removed the children from such families, placing them in the care of Muslim educators
Is this not terrorism?
So terrorism did not start in the late 80s, with America, or Israel like metamucil would like to shove down our throats like an Islamic sword.
It started centuries prior to that, centuries prior to the Spanish Inquisition, the salem with trials, and the massacre of the Knights Templars.
Terrorism started 1400 yrs ago by a man who speculated revelations and started his own political movement that terrorized, forced conversions, raped, pillaged, and murdered that still goes on today.
He was a false prophet trying to promote his false god so he could justify his blood thirsty rampages and his rape of a 9 yr old girl, (pedophiler) and other women. He was a perverted and sadistic loon who is still being revered by Muslims.
Oh, the madness.