\ Iman’s Constant Cravings… » The Shame of Being An American

The Shame of Being An American

Under: Around The World, Palestine, Uncategorized @ 12:19 pm on Monday, 07.24.06

Over dinner this past weekend, Maryam -my sister- goes around the dinner table asking every single person at the table the same question: “Are you proud to be an American?” the answers were quite unique and varying. The explanations to why each chose her answer were even more interesting. Anyway, I wont get into the details of that conversation here, but this article ( a long read, but worth it) puts a completely different perspective on being proud to be an American:

Do you know that Israel is engaged in ethnic cleansing in southern Lebanon? Israel has ordered all the villagers to clear out. Israel then destroys their homes and murders the fleeing villagers. That way there is no one to come back and nothing to which to return, making it easier for Israel to grab the territory, just as Israel has been stealing Palestine from the Palestinians.

Do you know that one-third of the Lebanese civilians murdered by Israel’s attacks on civilian residential districts are children? That is the report from Jan Egeland, the emergency relief coordinator for the UN. He says it is impossible for help to reach the wounded and those buried in rubble, because Israeli air strikes have blown up all the bridges and roads. Considering how often (almost always) Israel misses Hizbollah targets and hits civilian ones, one might think that Israeli fire is being guided by US satellites and US military GPS. Don’t be surprised at US complicity.

Why would the puppet be any less evil than the puppet master? Of course, you don’t know these things, because the US print and TV media do not report them. Because Bush is so proud of himself, you do know that he has blocked every effort to stop the Israeli slaughter of Lebanese civilians. Bush has told the UN “NO.” Bush has told the European Community “NO.” Bush has told the pro-American Lebanese prime minister “NO.” Twice. Bush is very proud of his firmness. He is enjoying Israel’s rampage and wishes he could do the same thing in Iraq.

Does it make you a Proud American that “your” president gave Israel the green light to drop bombs on convoys of villagers fleeing from Israeli shelling, on residential neighborhoods in the capital of Beirut and throughout Lebanon, on hospitals, on power plants, on food production and storage, on ports, on civilian airports, on bridges, on roads, on every piece of infrastructure on which civilized life depends?

Are you a Proud American? Or are you an Israeli puppet? On July 20, “your” House of Representatives voted 410-8 in favor of Israel’s massive war crimes in Lebanon. Not content with making every American complicit in war crimes, “your” House of Representatives, according to the Associated Press, also “condemns enemies of the Jewish state.” Who are the “enemies of the Jewish state”? They are the Palestinians whose land has been stolen by the Jewish state, whose homes and olive groves have been destroyed by the Jewish state, whose children have been shot down in the streets by the Jewish state, whose women have been abused by the Jewish state.

They are Palestinians who have been walled off into ghettos, who cannot reach their farm lands or medical care or schools, who cannot drive on roads through Palestine that have been constructed for Israelis only. They are Palestinians whose ancient towns have been invaded by militant Zionist “settlers” under the protection of the Israeli army who beat and persecute the Palestinians and drive them out of their towns. They are Palestinians who cannot allow their children outside their homes because they will be murdered by Israeli “settlers.” The Palestinians who confront Israeli evil are called “terrorists.” When Bush forced free elections on Palestine, the people voted for Hamas. Hamas is the organization that has stood up to the Jewish state. This means, of course, that Hamas is evil, anti-semitic, un-American and terrorist. The US and Israel responded by cutting off all funds to the new government. Democracy is permitted only if it produces the results Bush and Israel want. Israelis never practice terror.

Only those who are in Israel’s way are terrorists. Another enemy of the Jewish state is Hizbollah. Hizbollah is a militia of Shia Muslims created in 1982 when Israel first invaded Lebanon. During this invasion the great moral Jewish state arranged for the murder of refugees in refugee camps. The result of Israel’s atrocities was Hizbollah, which fought the Israeli army, defeated it, and drove it, with its tail between its legs, out of Lebanon.

Today Hizbollah not only defends southern Lebanon but also provides social services such as orphanages and medical care. To cut to the chase, the enemies of the Jewish state are any Muslim country not ruled by an American puppet friendly to Israel. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the oil emirates have sided with Israel against their own kind, because they are dependent either on American money or on American protection from their own people. Sooner or later these totally corrupt governments that do not represent the people they rule will be overthrown. It is only a matter of time. Indeed Bush and Israel may be hastening the process in their frantic effort to overthrow the governments of Syria and Iran.

Both governments have more popular support than Bush has, but the White House Moron doesn’t know this. The Moron thinks Syria and Iran will be “cakewalks” like Iraq, where ten proud divisions of the US military are tied down by a few lightly armed insurgents.

 If you are still a Proud American, consider that your pride is doing nothing good for Israel or for America.

On July 20 when “your” House of Representatives, following “your” US Senate, passed the resolution in support of Israel’s war crimes, the most powerful lobby in Washington, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), quickly got out a press release proclaiming “The American people overwhelming support Israel’s war on terrorism and understand that we must stand by our closest ally in this time of crisis.

The truth is that Israel created the crisis by invading a country with a pro-American government. The truth is that the American people do not support Israel’s war crimes, as the CNN quick poll results make clear and as was made clear by callers into C-Span. Despite the Israeli spin on news provided by US “reporting,” a majority of Americans do not approve of Israeli atrocities against Lebanese civilians. Hizbollah is located in southern Lebanon. If Israel is targeting Hizbollah, why are Israeli bombs falling on northern Lebanon? Why are they falling on Beirut? Why are they falling on civilian airports? On schools and hospitals? Now we arrive at the main point.

When the US Senate and House of Representatives pass resolutions in support of Israeli war crimes and condemn those who resist Israeli aggression, the Senate and House confirm Osama bin Laden’s propaganda that America stands with Israel against the Arab and Muslim world. Indeed, Israel, which has one of the world’s largest per capita incomes, is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. Many believe that much of this “aid” comes back to AIPAC, which uses it to elect “our” representatives in Congress.

This perception is no favor to Israel, whose population is declining, as the smart ones have seen the writing on the wall and have been leaving. Israel is surrounded by hundreds of millions of Muslims who are being turned into enemies of Israel by Israel’s actions and inhumane policies. The hope in the Muslim world has always been that the United States would intervene in behalf of compromise and make Israel realize that Israel cannot steal Palestine and turn every Palestinian into a refugee.

This has been the hope of the Arab world. This is the reason our puppets have not been overthrown. This hope is the reason America still had some prestige in the Arab world.

The House of Representatives resolution, bought and paid for by AIPAC money, is the final nail in the coffin of American prestige in the Middle East. It shows that America is, indeed, Israel’s puppet, just as Osama bin Laden says, and as a majority of Muslims believe.

With hope and diplomacy dead, henceforth America and Israel have only tooth and claw. The vaunted Israeli army could not defeat a rag tag militia in southern Lebanon. The vaunted US military cannot defeat a rag tag, lightly armed, insurgency drawn from a minority of the population in Iraq, insurgents, moreover, who are mainly engaged in civil war against the Shia majority.

What will the US and its puppet master do? Both are too full of hubris and paranoia to admit their terrible mistakes. Israel and the US will either destroy from the air the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Iran so that civilized life becomes impossible for Muslims, or the US and Israel will use nuclear weapons to intimidate Muslims into acquiescence to Israel’s desires.

Muslim genocide in one form or another is the professed goal of the neoconservatives who have total control over the Bush administration. Neocon godfather Norman Podhoretz has called for World War IV (in neocon thinking WW III was the cold war) to overthrow Islam in the Middle East, deracinate the Islamic religion and turn it into a formalized, secular ritual.

Rumsfeld’s neocon Pentagon has drafted new US war doctrine that permits pre-emptive nuclear attack on non-nuclear states. Neocon David Horowitz says that by slaughtering Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, “Israel is doing the work of the rest of the civilized world,” thus equating war criminals with civilized men.

Neocon Larry Kudlow says that “Israel is doing the Lord’s work” by murdering Lebanese, a claim that should give pause to Israel’s Christian evangelical supporters. Where does the Lord Jesus say, “go forth and murder your neighbors so that you may steal their lands”?

The complicity of the American public in these heinous crimes will damn America for all time in history.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com [source]

 

29 Comments »

Juan Free

07.24.06 @ 8:46 pm

When I think of arabs I don’t think terrorists, culture of killing, oppression of women and the weak. I think sweet, lovable, kind-hearted and peaceful.

All extremists are deplorable. It just seems as though the percentage is much higher within the arab community.

Tamara

07.25.06 @ 1:03 am

Iman

Great article as always …but I don’t think the Arabs and Muslims will do any thing any time soon. we are so busy running after food for our children that we cannot even think further than that, a few have the luxury to care… people in many countries and Jordan is one of them are afraid to starve or be kicked out of their homes …so believe me we need total reform in our mind sets to do any thing about what is going on.

kimmy

07.25.06 @ 5:28 am

You are so right.
The US supports the IOF in everything they do.

Iman

07.26.06 @ 8:01 pm

Juan Free, You really shouldn’t be such a passive reader/observer…reading beyond the headlines and seeing the big picture is not such a bad thing…really! and speaking of percentages, don’t get me started on the sick minds that seem to make a large portion of our American society!

Tamara, that’s always the case. I have really lost interest in talking about what we - as individuals in a society - can do to make a difference! at the end of the day, each one of us is selfish in their own way!

Kimmy, that’s how it is!

musketeer

07.27.06 @ 1:31 pm

Such an article is actually boring because it is so one-sided. There is no mention of the kidnapping or the rockets being fired into Israel.

I don’t claim to know all the answers, I’m just saying, I can’t take that article seriously. But I’m here because I would like a different, but reasonable, point of view.

I was born in the U.S. of A., and I think it’s a good place to live. There are other good places to live in the world. I think my country is neither the best nor the worst, and that there is really no such thing. The idea of “best” and “worst” is really childish. So I am not proud to live in America, nor am I ashamed.

I hope someone responds to this in a reasonable manner, as I’d like to have a conversation and learn more.

Thanks.

Dennis

07.28.06 @ 6:20 am

The barbarous slaughter in Lebanon is the most deplorable thing I’ve ever seen in my 63 years. The worst part about it is the fact that my government is supplying the radio-active cluster bombs and bunkerbusters which have as their purpose the indescriminate killing of civilians…The people of Lebanon and all Muslims should know: Jews represent less than 5% of the US population, but they control the Congress, the media, academia, they are even officers in the Israeli army!!! The vast majority of Americns neither support the Israeli war machine nor condone the killing of a single person in Islamic lands.

Rihab

07.28.06 @ 6:24 am

Musketeer

I agree that there is no point in placing labels on country such as “best” or “worst” because it is a relative matter. I think the thing is with the U.S is that when we take a look at public opinions in various countries, and quiz people on what they think of the world’s self-assigned policeman, it doesn’t really matter if we are in South America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia or South East Asia, we will always see that over half the people surveyed will have an unfavourable view of the U.S. The worrying thing is that it even includes America’s European allies, it doesn’t matter what survey you look at, most Europeans dislike American policies.

When faced with that much opposition from global public opinion, including opposition from your traditional allies, I’m not sure what an American feels but I would like to think a bit of shame would be expected. At the end of the day, you call yourself a “democracy” (although some political practices that are standard in America, e.g. campaign funding - would be seen as corruption in Europe… but whatever!) and so you are the ones who are responsible for having this administration in power and so yes you do bare at least some responsibility for what’s going on in the world and if you don’t feel some form of shame… then check your pulse.

musketeer

07.28.06 @ 1:13 pm

Dennis, there are Jewish officers in the Israeli army because Israel is a Jewish state. Everyone in the Israeli army is Jewish. You know that, right?

Rihab, if America is the police for the world, why doesn’t America do something about Darfur? I wish we would! I hate to see that slaughter. That is a real genocide, not what is happening in Lebanon.

The truth is, America does not have the resources to police the world. So our government chooses to involve itself in situations that it believes are in our best interests. And this is how every government behaves. America is no different from any other country, in this regard of international involvement. The only difference is we are an economic powerhouse, and so our military can be powerful. But we are far from all-powerful, as should, quite honestly, be evident. Of course, not everyone will agree with the decisions of the government. And, of course, they are influenced by big business.

But as far as corruption in politics, I think the Europeans are not cleaner than us. I think I do not have to cite examples.

As for the world hating America…yeah…then why does everyone want to move here?

Most European countries have far stricter immigration policies than we do. And look at countries like Japan: even stricter!

We are not a perfect country. No country can be, because the world is the world. I mean: problems are inherent in the world. People are naturally imperfect. But we welcome all kinds of people from all over the world into our country. They come here to benefit from our opportunities–and they DO benefit. So what don’t most people like about America? They are hypocrites.

Look, I am glad people can come here and make their lives better. I value all people equally. I don’t care where they’re from. Hopefully, someday, all countries can offer their citizens good lives, so that not just the lucky or privileged ones can have good lives or make it to countries where they can have better lives.

I know America is not the only country of hope. There are many. Personally, I would love to live in France for a year (I’ve visited there.) And I am fascinated with Morocco; I would love to visit there, someday I hope I will be able to.

I know I didn’t address all your statements, Rihab, but I am tired now. I will say more later. Thanks for your response.

musketeer

07.28.06 @ 6:16 pm

Oh, also, not everyone voted for Bush. I didn’t. So I’m not responsible for him being president. I have voted Democrat my whole life.

But shame is a strong word. Hasn’t every country committed something wrong? Is it the job of everyone in the world to shake our fingers at everyone else and say, “For shame!”

There are countries who have committed and are committing far worse deeds than the U.S. Why not treat all equally? Why not mention them also? I do not accept that everyone else gets a free pass while the U.S. always gets criticized.

Rihab

07.28.06 @ 9:23 pm

Rihab, if America is the police for the world, why doesn’t America do something about Darfur? I wish we would! I hate to see that slaughter. That is a real genocide, not what is happening in Lebanon.

Well, self-appointed policemen tend not to be fair. You’ve picked Darfur, so yeah let’s talk about Darfur, I happen to be Sudanese and as per your government’s interpretation of the problem in the Sudan I’m apparently categorised as one of the bad guys - you know “Arab Sudanese” killing “African Sudanese”… which is a pretty odd definition of the conflict given that we are all African (you know, with Sudan being in the African continent). I’m not sure how what’s happening in Darfur constitutes genocide, not because killings are not taking place… on the contrary they do take place, however, the reason for the killings has nothing to do with the ethnic or religious make-up of Darfur but it just so happens that we are under a military dictatorship that goes to extreme measures to silence any rebellious movement. It doesn’t matter to the government what your ethnic make-up is, what does matter to them is how much of a serious disturbance you are to their hold on power - if deemed a serious disturbance, then bang bang problem solved. When protests by “Arab” Sudanese took place in the capital, Khartoum, protesters were shot at (America chose to turn a blind eye to that), in fact when this government came into power and overthrew a democratically elected government, it killed anyone it simply suspected may challenge their authority at later point in time (again America - protector of democracy - turned a blind eye to this too). The first time America chose to take any form of interest in the Sudan was when they started exporting oil to the Chinese, then, America woke up from it’s 20yr slumber. Contrary to what you said, America does take interest in Darfur and Darfur was the centre of attention of the American media, however, I guess for the time being there are more urgent oil fields to secure, once that’s dealt with, I’m sure the focus will come back on Sudan.

I’m not sure how you can’t call what’s happening in Lebanon a genocide, when it’s the systematic killing of civilians by a state. If you want to call Hezbolla a “terrorist” organisation for targetting cities in Northern Israel, that’s fine. However, following the same logic isn’t the Israeli army a terrorist organisation for targetting civilian towns and villages in Lebanon? And since it’s an army carrying that out doesn’t that make Israel a terrorist state?

You can’t apply one definition of terrorism for one case scenario and ignore it in another… that’s what leads people to view Americans as having double standards.

The truth is, America does not have the resources to police the world. So our government chooses to involve itself in situations that it believes are in our best interests. And this is how every government behaves. America is no different from any other country, in this regard of international involvement. The only difference is we are an economic powerhouse, and so our military can be powerful.

Hold on. America had the resources and chose to squander those resources in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, America acts in its own interests as do other countries, however, unlike other countries it pretends to have a higher moral stance than the rest of the planet, and constantly claims to be the protector of “freedom” and “democracy”. Í’m not sure how you can claim you are a free nor democratic society under the PATRIOT Act.

There is not much about the macroeconomic fundamentals of the American economy that makes America an “economic powerhouse”. A country cannot be considered an economic powerhouse when it’s government spending is financed by bonds held by South East Asian central banks. A country cannot be considered an economic powerhouse when the value of its currency is at the mercy of those central banks. A country cannot be considered an economic powerhouse when despite having a 4.2% growth rate (2004), only the richest 1% feel the effects of that growth (with 12.5% increase in their incomes, whilst the remaining 99% experienced only a 1.5% increase of income) - so in normal terms you have one of the most uneven wealth distributions of a developed nation. If it weren’t for America’s political prestige (which is in decline), your economy would be in complete ruins - and no I am not making this up, your own Economists say this.

Yes, you have extraordinarily powerful military, however, as many examples from history have shown, a superpower that overspends on its military whilst not having the financial resource to support it, will eventually collapse.

But we are far from all-powerful, as should, quite honestly, be evident. Of course, not everyone will agree with the decisions of the government. And, of course, they are influenced by big business.

ok.

But as far as corruption in politics, I think the Europeans are not cleaner than us. I think I do not have to cite examples.

Are we talking Italians or are we talking Swedes?

As for the world hating America…yeah…then why does everyone want to move here?

Mexicans aren’t everyone. :grin:

Most European countries have far stricter immigration policies than we do. And look at countries like Japan: even stricter!

Wait, Native Americans aside, who isn’t an immigrant in America??? Your president is an immigrant! Wasn’t it Reagan who proudly (not sure why he took pride in it) said that “Only a Frenchman can be French, only an Englishman can be English, but anyone can be American”?? Europeans, Japanese, Chinese, Whateverese can be as picky as they want about their immigration policies because at the end of the day, they are the natives of those lands - however, America was stolen by immigrants and created for immigrants, so yeah you should have relaxed immigration policies, especially when you go around making other people’s countries a living hell!

We are not a perfect country. No country can be, because the world is the world. I mean: problems are inherent in the world. People are naturally imperfect.

Agreed.

But we welcome all kinds of people from all over the world into our country. They come here to benefit from our opportunities–and they DO benefit.

Who’s they? Again, you’re all immigrants.

So what don’t most people like about America? They are hypocrites.

Again, who’s they and why are “they” hypocrites?? And why do you seem to think everyone wants to live in America?? Of all the countries I’ve been to I’d like to immigrate to Malaysia - beautiful country at peace with others with lovely people.

Look, I am glad people can come here and make their lives better. I value all people equally. I don’t care where they’re from. Hopefully, someday, all countries can offer their citizens good lives, so that not just the lucky or privileged ones can have good lives or make it to countries where they can have better lives.

Í hope so too…

I know America is not the only country of hope. There are many. Personally, I would love to live in France for a year (I’ve visited there.) And I am fascinated with Morocco; I would love to visit there, someday I hope I will be able to.

The French suck, ask the Moroccans :grin:

Oh, also, not everyone voted for Bush. I didn’t. So I’m not responsible for him being president. I have voted Democrat my whole life.

Right, but given the fact that it is a democracy, he should have been impeached for lying about the reasons for going to war in Iraq… or does that only apply when he engages in sexual misconduct? ;)

But shame is a strong word. Hasn’t every country committed something wrong? Is it the job of everyone in the world to shake our fingers at everyone else and say, “For shame!”

Well, if America shakes its finger at other countries shouting “To the guillotine!”, why do you deny us the right to do the same to you - bearing in mind that you are the only country in history to destroy two cities with a weapon of mass destruction…

There are countries who have committed and are committing far worse deeds than the U.S. Why not treat all equally? Why not mention them also? I do not accept that everyone else gets a free pass while the U.S. always gets criticized.

Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq (and those are only the countries where you were directly involved) can all tell many stories of American “bad deeds”. The reason you get criticised is because you still believe you have the moral highground from which you can lecture the rest of humanity on acting humane - when you don’t!

musketeer

07.28.06 @ 11:39 pm

I happen to be Sudanese and as per your government’s interpretation of the problem in the Sudan I’m apparently categorised as one of the bad guys…

Not unless you’re janjaweed you’re not. But it sounds like we have different information about Darfur. It is my understanding that it is innocent, black Sudanese, men, women and children who are being slaughtered.

I’m not sure how what’s happening in Darfur constitutes genocide, not because killings are not taking place… on the contrary they do take place, however, the reason for the killings has nothing to do with the ethnic or religious make-up of Darfur but it just so happens that we are under a military dictatorship that goes to extreme measures to silence any rebellious movement.

This response seems a little disingenuous, Rihab. It is irregular Arab militia that is carrying out these killings, which is over 50,000, and some estimate in the hundreds of thousands, and around 2 million people displaced. I haven’t heard of any rebellion. If there was a rebellion, it certainly was stamped out long ago. The people are decimated.

And as for oil, our government has blocked any U.S. companies from operating in Sudan because of this conflict.

Remember, whenever you say “America turned a blind eye…” if no one else responded, then the rest of the world has turned a blind eye too. America is not the only country to involve itself in the affairs of other countries. I’m sure you know the big colonial powers all preceded America. While they have not gotten as powerful as the U.S., they still are an important presence in the world, and still effective in stopping conflicts if they wish to.

I know in an email discussion it is easy to get lost in semantics - and please let me know if there are any terms you would like me to be especially careful about - but when you said:

Yes, America acts in its own interests as do other countries, however, unlike other countries it pretends to have a higher moral stance than the rest of the planet, and constantly claims to be the protector of “freedom” and “democracy”

I hope you do know that it is our current president that gives our government this present flavor of “moral strength,” not even a majority of the people. Have you seen any polls lately on how we think our president is doing his job? He has fallen into the mid-30th percentile.

As one American writer once wrote, “Say what you like about my bloody murderous government, but don’t insult me poor bleedin’ country.”

One last thing - and I know I haven’t addressed all you wrote, Rihab, I believe and hope that the Israeli army is targeting combatants in this conflict, and that civilian deaths are a regretable but unavoidable consequence.

This is indeed the difference between a terrorist and a soldier: the terrorist targets unsuspecting, innocent civilians, the soldier targets an enemy soldier who is well-aware there is a conflict on.

That is why we (Americans anyway) have such a low opinion of terrorists. They hide behind civilians and also kill unsuspecting civilians. Israel hopes it will encourage the Lebanese to kick Hezbollah out. It will be better for their health to not harbor a group that lobs bombs into a civilian population. Why did Hezbollah start this anyway? Israel left Lebanon over 20 years ago!

Thank you for your correspondance, Rihab. I hope I don’t offend you, but I do want to be honest and learn your point of view.

Iman

07.29.06 @ 11:38 am

Musketeer, When you hear the word ‘terrorist’ what first comes to your mind?

Israel hopes it will encourage the Lebanese to kick Hezbollah out.It will be better for their health to not harbor a group that lobs bombs into a civilian population

israel doesn’t have the right to impose its political ideoglogies on the Lebanese people. Hezbollah is widely accepted and recognized by its people. Is is part of the Lebanese government; a legitimate political party in Lebanon with a military as well as civil arm. It has 14 seats in the parliament and is widely approved and accepted by the lebanese population. So tell me, why would an outside force classify it as a terrorist organization

Rihab

07.29.06 @ 12:44 pm

Not unless you’re janjaweed you’re not. But it sounds like we have different information about Darfur. It is my understanding that it is innocent, black Sudanese, men, women and children who are being slaughtered.

It’s an oversimplification to sum up the problem as Arabs vs. Blacks, I mean everyone is black in Sudan, different shades of it but we’re all African at the end of the day regardless of whatever ethnic mixtures we have in our blood. Take a look at the “Arab” president of Sudan, tell me if he looks white or black to you?? The problem with American media, is that it over-simplifies problems into x vs. y, I mean the world’s problems are little bit more complicated than to be spoken of in comic book terms of good vs. evil.

This response seems a little disingenuous, Rihab. It is irregular Arab militia that is carrying out these killings, which is over 50,000, and some estimate in the hundreds of thousands, and around 2 million people displaced. I haven’t heard of any rebellion. If there was a rebellion, it certainly was stamped out long ago. The people are decimated.

Well, if you haven’t heard of a rebellion doesn’t mean it never took place. I don’t know what your news source is but it’s a known fact that the reason the government recruited the Janjaweed was to crush out the rebellion in Darfur.

Here’s a bit on Darfur from the BBC:

The long-running Darfur insurgency exploded into a rebellion in 2003 partly because the Darfurian groups thought the agreement to end the main north-south war, between the government and the SPLA, was ignoring their own perceived marginalisation in Darfur.

It was the crushing of the Darfur rebellion by the Khartoum-controlled central army, with help from Arab militia called Janjaweed, which caused the massive displacement of Darfurians within Sudan and across the border into Chad.
Source: BBC

If you truly care to understand the root cause of the problem in Darfur and in other states in Sudan, then please read up on it more instead of listening to your news media because from what I can see of American news media be it CNN, Fox News, NBC, ABC or any other network it has a tendency of being grossly biased and reporting half the facts. In fact I do truely believe American media is by far the most biased in the Western world.

Anyway, I’m not going to sit and explain to you the history of Sudan’s conflict because it really will take too much time. But it really is much more than Arabs vs. Blacks, it’s almost an insult to simplify our problems in that way.

And as for oil, our government has blocked any U.S. companies from operating in Sudan because of this conflict.

What good is that to the Sudanese people?? All that happens, and has happened is that other countries will come and operate instead - and that is of some benefit because at least, it means Sudanese can get employed and at least it means that the returns from these investments can be used to improve and build the country’s ruined infrastructure, thus improving people’s lives. I really don’t understand this American policy of not dealing with regimes they oppose, it doesn’t do much for the people that you claim to care about.

Remember, whenever you say “America turned a blind eye…” if no one else responded, then the rest of the world has turned a blind eye too. America is not the only country to involve itself in the affairs of other countries. I’m sure you know the big colonial powers all preceded America. While they have not gotten as powerful as the U.S., they still are an important presence in the world, and still effective in stopping conflicts if they wish to.

Your wrong, other countries haven’t turned a blind eye and have made consistent efforts to help the Sudanese. Yes, I’m fully aware of the colonial powers that preceded America given that one of them bears partial responsibility for the current state of Sudan (I say partial because I know that Sudanese are mostly to blame for their problems). Also, previous colonial powers were as powerful if not more so than the Americans, it’s just that they existed in a different age, but relatively speaking they were extremely powerful, I mean when an island controls almost three quarters of the world - that’s pretty powerful in my book.

I know in an email discussion it is easy to get lost in semantics - and please let me know if there are any terms you would like me to be especially careful about - but when you said:

I hope you do know that it is our current president that gives our government this present flavor of “moral strength,” not even a majority of the people. Have you seen any polls lately on how we think our president is doing his job? He has fallen into the mid-30th percentile.

It’s not really just your current president, I mean America’s foreign policy agenda is pretty consistent, it’s simply that the techniques used vary between Democrats and Republicans. As someone once said, one eats with a knife & fork and the other uses their hand - your still performing the same function.

As one American writer once wrote, “Say what you like about my bloody murderous government, but don’t insult me poor bleedin’ country.”

Right. I have no issues against the people because I do believe, at least judging by those I’ve met, that they are quite misinformed.

One last thing - and I know I haven’t addressed all you wrote, Rihab, I believe and hope that the Israeli army is targeting combatants in this conflict, and that civilian deaths are a regretable but unavoidable consequence.

This is indeed the difference between a terrorist and a soldier: the terrorist targets unsuspecting, innocent civilians, the soldier targets an enemy soldier who is well-aware there is a conflict on.

So hang on a second, are you telling me that all 600 plus Lebanese killed in this conflict (45% of which are children by the way) are mostly made up of combatants?? Are the homes, the bridges, the airport, the ports are those the “terrorist targets”??

Ok, Hezbolla kidnapped 2 Israeli soldiers, they are soldiers not civlians but soldiers!! Lebanon never signed a peace treaty with Israel, and so was effectively still at war with them, and so the kidnapped soldiers are considered prisoners of war.

Now, are you trying to tell me that wiping out villages and destroying a country’s infrastructure is a legitimate response to the kidnapping of 2 soldiers?? Most countries would negotiate not wipe out villages, simply because they can! Israel has not achieved anything so far militarily or politically by this aggression, other than killing civlians - their aim was to eliminate or weaken Hezbolla and evidently neither has been achieved.

Now you said, a “terrorist targets unsuspecting, innocent civilians”…

You also said, “the soldier targets an enemy soldier who is well-aware there is a conflict on”.

-Hezbolla kidnapped SOLDIERS.
-Israel responded by bombarding civilian towns and infrastructure.

Either revise your definitions or revise your stance, because at the moment you’re contradicting yourself.

That is why we (Americans anyway) have such a low opinion of terrorists. They hide behind civilians and also kill unsuspecting civilians. Israel hopes it will encourage the Lebanese to kick Hezbollah out. It will be better for their health to not harbor a group that lobs bombs into a civilian population. Why did Hezbollah start this anyway? Israel left Lebanon over 20 years ago!

Americans anyway??? Sir, everyone has a low opinion of terrorists who kill innocent civilians, again, please stop this whole “Americans are more moral than everyone else” theme.

How does Israel encourage Lebanese to do this?! By killing them?! Lebanese weren’t all Hezbolla supporters before this war, in fact they probably didn’t even have anything close to a majority support, but as a result of Israel’s aggression 86% of Lebanese currently support Hezbolla’s targetting of Northern Israel because they view it as resistance against Israeli aggression.

So Israel has done nothing more than increase the popularity of Hezbolla.

Thank you for your correspondance, Rihab. I hope I don’t offend you, but I do want to be honest and learn your point of view.

Thanks, and don’t worry you haven’t offended me.

musketeer

07.29.06 @ 3:00 pm

Americans anyway??? Sir, everyone has a low opinion of terrorists who kill innocent civilians, again, please stop this whole “Americans are more moral than everyone else” theme.

Oh, you misunderstood me. When I said, “Americans anyway” I did that because I didn’t want to over-generalize and run the risk of exaggerating. Also, I was tired.

I don’t think Americans are more moral than everyone else.

Right, that does seem too easy: Arab v. black. In the BBC article you cited, it did use the term “Arab militia.” Could you please explain to me the significance of that term? I’m just trying to understand. Months ago, I did read a New York Times article that characterized the Arab militia as Semitic and the rebels as black.

What good is that to the Sudanese people?? All that happens, and has happened is that other countries will come and operate instead - and that is of some benefit because at least, it means Sudanese can get employed and at least it means that the returns from these investments can be used to improve and build the country’s ruined infrastructure, thus improving people’s lives. I really don’t understand this American policy of not dealing with regimes they oppose, it doesn’t do much for the people that you claim to care about.

Our government’s embargo on Sudanese oil is a nonviolent attempt to end conflict in Darfur. It is probably not that effective in this case, it is probably more symbolic. I think it’s good policy in general. Personally, I wouldn’t hang out with or do business with people I knew who were doing things that I thought wrong.

Of course, this policy isn’t always possible. A good example is China, which has human rights’ violations, but with whom we do a lot of business. Cutting off China would be killing ourselves, we can’t do it. So pragmatism enters into politics.

I think we (the American people and our government) see things in a lot less back and white terms than you believe we do. I recognize that it is difficult to grasp the general character of a country when one has origins in another. We should try to understand other societies, but humbly (and that’s hard, I frequently overstep that boundary). I had a friend from Korea who lived here for two years. Once she told me she felt she had pretty much understood Americans, which was absurd. She could no more understand Americans in two years than I could move to S. Korea and in two years “understand” Koreans.

Re: Hezbollah: But why did they fire rockets into two Israeli towns? This is what we mean by terrorism.

So hang on a second, are you telling me that all 600 plus Lebanese killed in this conflict (45% of which are children by the way) are mostly made up of combatants?? Are the homes, the bridges, the airport, the ports are those the “terrorist targets”??

What? No. Why on earth would you say that? I clearly said, which you quoted: “civilian deaths are a regretable but unavoidable consequence.” And I clearly explained that Hezbollah hides behind civilians and civilian structures. They are firing rockets from homes, schools, bridges, and so forth. That’s why these civilian locations become targets for the Israeli army. To not destroy them mean very real Israeli deaths from Hezbollah rockets. (I believe this and my previous comments addresses your question, Iman.)

No, on this point, I do not believe I contradicted myself, Rihab.

But I do hold that my opinions and beliefs are only as good as the information I have. If you present me with good information that persuades me Israel is wrong, I will believe it.

musketeer

07.29.06 @ 3:04 pm

Oh, yesterday in my home town of Seattle (I do not currently live there) a 31 year-old Muslim man shot six women, killing one, and the other five are in the hospital.

Yes, this is a cowardly act of terrorism, which I consider typical.

Iman

07.29.06 @ 3:23 pm

Musketeer, check this, this
and this
and this

musketeer

07.29.06 @ 3:53 pm

Hi Iman,

I checked out the sites you suggested. I believe they do not offer all the information relevent to the situation.

One example: the endtheoccupation site explained that Israel began in 1948 and Jews came from all over the world.

You see, I think is disingenuous. It makes it seem as if Jews chose this location randomly, that they had no history here.

In fact, Jews and Arabs have equal claim to area around Jerusalem. Just because Jews were dispersed centuries ago and lived in many other countries, this does not mean they should never be able to return to their homeland.

Jews were never really accepted in the many countries they fled to. They suffered pogroms and persecutions all over, in many different eras. This is why they said they needed to return to their homeland and create a safe country for themselves.

All this is usually ignored. Jews are usually portrayed as having no right to the land they live on, and thus people like the president of Iran say they would like to destroy Israel totally.

I hope this helps you understand how I see the situation.

Thanks for letting me comment so extensively on your site.

musketeer

07.29.06 @ 4:19 pm

Just so you know, I am a 39 year old graduate student. My name is Brian.

Rihab

07.29.06 @ 4:40 pm

Right, that does seem too easy: Arab v. black. In the BBC article you cited, it did use the term “Arab militia.” Could you please explain to me the significance of that term? I’m just trying to understand. Months ago, I did read a New York Times article that characterized the Arab militia as Semitic and the rebels as black.

Alright, the people in Sudan that are considered Arabs are so because they originate from an Arab tribe but not because they are “Semitic” in appearance. The Arabs of Sudan are still black or African in appearance and that’s simply because of the way Islam came into Sudan which was not by way of conquest. When the Arabs conquered Egypt they attempted to extend southward and conquer what was then a Christian Nubian kingdom. After a couple of battles, a truce was reached which remained intact for 600 or so years until the kingdom started to collapse and turned into several fiefdoms. At some later point in time, some Arab bedouin tribes that were kicked out of Egypt by its rulers travelled southward for refuge and by way of intermarriage were absorbed into the Nubian fiefdoms. Traditionally, in ancient Nubia a man’s property would be inherited by his sister, and so when Arabs married Nubian women, with time, the property had moved into their hands (given the fact that the children that would result from these marriages would be Muslim and so follow Islam’s ruling on inheritance) and with time Islam and the Arabian culture was absorbed into these fiefdoms that would later regroup and come to form an Islamic kingdom at Sennar.

So, the Arabs of Sudan do not look Semitic, and although a Sudanese can tell the difference between an Arab Sudanese and a non-Arab Sudanese, I think to the foreign eye we all look African.

Our government’s embargo on Sudanese oil is a nonviolent attempt to end conflict in Darfur. It is probably not that effective in this case, it is probably more symbolic. I think it’s good policy in general. Personally, I wouldn’t hang out with or do business with people I knew who were doing things that I thought wrong.

Right, but just because the government is corrupt it doesn’t mean its citizens are, and you would be doing business with the citizens not the government.

Re: Hezbollah: But why did they fire rockets into two Israeli towns? This is what we mean by terrorism.

Hezbollah fired rockets after the Israelis started bombing Lebanon. The sequence of events was - the soldiers were kidnapped, the Israelis responded by bombing towns in Southern Lebanon, and Hezbollah in return bombed Northern Israeli towns.

What? No. Why on earth would you say that? I clearly said, which you quoted: “civilian deaths are a regretable but unavoidable consequence.” And I clearly explained that Hezbollah hides behind civilians and civilian structures. They are firing rockets from homes, schools, bridges, and so forth. That’s why these civilian locations become targets for the Israeli army. To not destroy them mean very real Israeli deaths from Hezbollah rockets. (I believe this and my previous comments addresses your question, Iman.)

First off, like I said above Hezbollah fired rockets in retaliation to Israel’s bombardment of towns in Southern Lebanon. Another thing is, if it’s true that Hezbollah fires rockets from homes, schools etc. why is it that Hezbollah is still capable of firing at Northern Israel when the infrastructure has been completely destroyed?

I don’t believe Israel has any actual targets, because common sense says that by now they should have annihilated Hezbolla if they actually were in those towns. Israel is simply bombing everywhere and anywhere hoping that it may have, by chance, hit some Hezbollah outlet, and I don’t believe that’s a legitimate way of fighting a war.

Oh, yesterday in my home town of Seattle (I do not currently live there) a 31 year-old Muslim man shot six women, killing one, and the other five are in the hospital.

Yes, this is a cowardly act of terrorism, which I consider typical.

Right, do you also consider gangsters shooting at each other acts of terrorism?

Come on now, if that guy was a Catholic called John Smith, you would simply label him a murderer, so there is no need to label him a “terrorist” simply because he is Muslim.

musketeer

07.29.06 @ 7:39 pm

Rihab, are you purposefully being difficult?

Think about gangsters and the dynamics of their world. Are gangsters innocent people? Or do they have designs to subvert the law and frequently use violence or the threat of violence?

I am calling Naveed Afzal Haq a terrorist because his actions fit the description of terrorism. He walked into a community center and began shooting randomly, hitting six unarmed, unsuspecting women, one of whom was pregnant, one of whom has died. Why do you protect and defend this coward? Simply because he is Muslim? This is partisanism. Loyalty no matter what.

Yes, there is a difference between murder and terrorism, do you deny this difference?

Thanks for your clarification of the Arab militia. Although I suppose it would be helpful for me to see many examples, because I find myself trying to imagine how everyone looks. You said they are all black, yet you can tell the difference by looking, so there are some physical differences.

Re: the current conflict:

I have found conflicting reports of the initial events of 12 July.

Here’s the one from the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5179434.stm

However an Asia Times article supports your version:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HG15Ak02.html

…that Israeli troops were caught in Lebanon by Hezbollah, took two soldiers, then Israel responded, THEN came the Katyusha rockets.

I’ll read up more on this. Look at more sites.

However, in a way the events of 12 July are moot, and events must be traced back further; i.e., Hezbollah took the two soldiers because Israel is holding Hezbollah prisoners, etc., and so on and so on. I’m sure it could go back to 1948.

Ah, it tires me. Why can’t they just make peace?

Rihab

07.30.06 @ 1:11 pm

Brian, no, I’m not purposefully being difficult. I simply stated that if that guy was a Catholic called John Smith, I doubt you’d be calling him a terrorist. I mean, what about the KKK, why weren’t they ever labelled a terrorist organisation?

Also, I’m not Muslim and I don’t understand how you deduced that I’m defending him by calling him a murderer?? My point is that, every since 9/11, Americans have gone a little crazy and seem to think that Arab/Muslim = terrorist, which is insane. I remember, an Austrian friend of mine who was born in Iran (he’s fully Austrian, blue-eyed blond, but was born in Iran but never actually lived there!) anyway, when he went to get a visa for America from England they caused him so much hassle just because they saw that the country of birth was Iran!! If that isn’t discrimination taken to an insane level I don’t know what is.

lol! :grin: Are you trying to get me to put my pic up? j/k. Well, the generic differences is that Arabs would tend to have softer hair texures, facial features are a little different, a somewhat lighter skin tone… hmmm, I don’t know, just general differences like that.

On Lebanon, the BBC report says the same thing, if you scroll down to the first day covered and click on the link “Hizbollah seizes 2 Israeli Soldiers”, it states the same sequence of events.

Yeah, you’re right it can be traced back to 1948… or even 1895 when Theodor Herzl (founder of political Zionism) first proposed the creation of a Jewish state as a solution to “the Jewish question” - his words not mine. You should read his book, The Jewish State.

Peace?? I doubt anytime soon.

musketeer

07.30.06 @ 2:15 pm

Rihab, I think you are responding to your idea of Americans in general rather than to my actual statements.

Americans have gone a little crazy and seem to think that Arab/Muslim = terrorist

You’re not the only one who has done this to me in my life, but it’s something I find frustrating.

I think it is obvious that terrorism is politically motivated. If “John Smith” shot those six women, we’d have to know his motivations, wouldn’t we? If he had no political motives, perhaps he was just crazy, he’d simply be a murderer. If he said he perpetrated this shooting as a protest against Israel, yeah, then he’d be a terrorist.

The KKK was a racist organization, and the dynamics of their actions were and are different from those of Muslim terrorists.

All this really isn’t that difficult to understand is it?

I’ve read a few histories of the Jews and Israel, including one by David ben-Gurion. When I earned my first bachelor’s degree in history, I took two classes in Middle Eastern history.

Why do you assume I would not be able to tell the difference between blacks and Arabs with “softer hair texures, facial features are a little different, a somewhat lighter skin tone…” You seem to make a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions.

musketeer

07.30.06 @ 4:04 pm

That Asian Times article was wrong. I found this New York Times article, in which the first paragraph reads:

The Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah surprised Israel with a bold daylight assault across the border on Wednesday, leading to fighting in which two Israeli soldiers were captured and at least eight killed…

-13 July 2006. Greg Myre and Steven Erlanger.

musketeer

07.30.06 @ 4:53 pm

I found an article in The Economist (a British publication) with this statement:

The first language used by the legislators is English, but everything is translated into Arabic, an acknowledgement of the cleavage in Sudanese society between black Africans and Arabs.

-1 December 2005. “It’ll do what it can get away with” [the Sudanese government]

Rihab, you said:

It’s an oversimplification to sum up the problem as Arabs vs. Blacks, I mean everyone is black in Sudan, different shades of it but we’re all African at the end of the day regardless of whatever ethnic mixtures we have in our blood. Take a look at the “Arab” president of Sudan, tell me if he looks white or black to you?? The problem with American media, is that it over-simplifies problems into x vs. y, I mean the world’s problems are little bit more complicated than to be spoken of in comic book terms of good vs. evil.

musketeer

07.30.06 @ 5:07 pm

From the same Economist article:

…local African Muslims resented the discrimination and neglect that they suffered at the hands of the Arab Muslims in Khartoum. The rebellion was brutally suppressed by the northern government, using its mounted Arab militia, the janjaweed, as its proxy killers. At least 180,000 people are estimated to have been killed in Darfur between 2003 and 2004. A ceasefire was signed a year ago. But now, once again, killings and expulsions have restarted.

…the Sudanese government has done almost nothing to help or co-operate with the already under-equipped AU force that is supposed to enforce the ceasefire. Worse, the government has totally failed to carry out its obligation, under the ceasefire, to disarm or rein in its dreaded janjaweed. These militiamen massacred thousands of civilians during the war, and are now continuing to do so.

It seems to me there should be an article here titled “The Shame of Being a Sudanese,” no?

Or, perhaps, in all honesty, “The Shame of Being Human.”

Today, as I read another article about Iraq, I wondered why the Kurds were so prosperous and peaceful in the north, while the Shiites and Sunnis were still bombing the crap out of each other.

For some people, I think, the grudge is more important than their own children. For other people, their children are more important than any grudge.

Don’t get me wrong, the famous Hatfield and McCoy fued in the US went on for over a decade. For them, the grudge was more important than peace.

Rihab

07.30.06 @ 8:43 pm

Rihab, I think you are responding to your idea of Americans in general rather than to my actual statements.

You’re not the only one who has done this to me in my life, but it’s something I find frustrating.

LOL! Done what to you? This is a discussion, either calm down or don’t bother participating.

I think it is obvious that terrorism is politically motivated. If “John Smith” shot those six women, we’d have to know his motivations, wouldn’t we? If he had no political motives, perhaps he was just crazy, he’d simply be a murderer. If he said he perpetrated this shooting as a protest against Israel, yeah, then he’d be a terrorist.

Ummmmmmm… please re-read your comments regarding this event and let me know EXACTLY WHERE you mentioned that he was doing this as a protest against Israel because as I am aware this is the first time you make ANY mention of it.

The KKK was a racist organization, and the dynamics of their actions were and are different from those of Muslim terrorists.

All this really isn’t that difficult to understand is it?

As far as I understand, a terrorist is someone who terrorises other people’s lives; the KKK did that to blacks, Al-Qaeda does that to Americans, so I can’t see why one would be called a terrorist and the other not.

Is that so difficult to understand?

I’ve read a few histories of the Jews and Israel, including one by David ben-Gurion. When I earned my first bachelor’s degree in history, I took two classes in Middle Eastern history.

Bravo.

Why do you assume I would not be able to tell the difference between blacks and Arabs with “softer hair texures, facial features are a little different, a somewhat lighter skin tone…” You seem to make a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions.

No not really because, I have been to many countries and have met many people of many backgrounds and I do know that some people can’t always differentiate, so you see I tend to say things either from experience or from knowledge, I rarely make assumptions. Also, the reason why I used the word “generic” was because these characteristics are not always included in every single Arab Sudanese. E.g. Someone may have really dark skin but have soft textured hair, someone may be light skinned and have African features, so there is no single collection of features that characterises us, but the differences are more generic in nature.

That Asian Times article was wrong. I found this New York Times article, in which the first paragraph reads:

The Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah surprised Israel with a bold daylight assault across the border on Wednesday, leading to fighting in which two Israeli soldiers were captured and at least eight killed…

-13 July 2006. Greg Myre and Steven Erlanger.

and your point is??

Brian, do you actually read over what you write? You quoted something to me that said the language of Sudanese legislators is English then quoted the paragraph where I say that the the media oversimplifies the problem..

Exactly what is your point?

Also, legislators in Sudan use Arabic, I actually laughed reading that they use English, it’d be like me saying that legislators in America use Spanish. The native language of people in the North of Sudan is Arabic, the government has been overwhelmingly dominated by Northerners since our independence so the notion that they use any other language is quite frankly ridiculous. I mean, if you heard the average Sudanese speak English, you’d know how ludicrous that statement was.

I would appreciate if you could give me a link to that Economist article. I read the Economist somewhat frequently and I will write a letter in if that statement was made.

Finally, regarding the “Shame of being Sudanese” comment, (which I guess was an attempt to “get me back”) I actually do agree with it because I do reject the practices of my government and do find them extremely shameful. I won’t gloss over the actions of my government nor will I pretend that Sudanese are perfect people, because I don’t believe that there’s any chance of us improving our ways if we don’t admit our mistakes.

That being said, I will object to inaccurate reporting of what happens in Sudan because like I said from the very first reply on this issue - the government will crush any rebellion even if those rebelling are Arabs. There are rebellions in Darfur, there was a 50yr rebellion in the South, there is a rebellion in the East of the country (a region that is also dominated by Arabs) and there have been rebellions inside the capital Khartoum against the government because they have made life for every Sudanese a living nightmare - the only people that benefit from this government are those that have become members of the ruling National Congress Party and they are a minority. Everyone else be they Arabs, Furs, Bejas, Dinkas (I wonder if you even know who they are) suffers. So for the media to portray the situation as though every Arab is living the high life while everyone else starves, is inaccurate, discriminatory, and completely neglects facts.

I do not support this government, in fact I also believe governments that preceded this one have had a hand in causing many of the conflicts that face Sudan today and I do believe it is a great shame for every Sudanese that this country has not yet fulfilled its potential to become an extremely economically powerful country given the fact that it is completely self-sufficient in natural resources. However, I WILL NOT and WILL NEVER support distorted versions of the Sudanese conflict because misinformation only complicates problems, and as a Sudanese I care to see my country’s problems resolved.

So don’t lecture me on my country which you clearly no NOTHING about, and talk to me as though I enjoy seeing my countrymen killed and enjoy seeing my country in the state that it is in. If you care to know about Sudan and if you truly “care” about seeing our problems resolved then go read about it and when I say read I don’t mean Google “Sudan”. I mean read it’s 6000 yrs plus of civil history (yeah! believe it or not we did have a civilization, and a great one at that), understand the nature of our conflicts, then after you’ve thought long and hard of what works best for my country then you may come and calmly discuss it with me.

Not every African problem can be solved by throwing some food from the sky and Live Aid concerts - I said it once and I’ll say it again:

The world’s problems are a little bit more complicated than “Good vs. Evil”.

musketeer

07.31.06 @ 12:55 pm

I gave the date and title of the Economist article, so I thought you’d be able to find it, but here’s the link.

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5246599

I just mentioned some of the books I read about the Middle East to indicate I do have a general knowledge about this topic, since you frequently drop hints that I don’t know much about this topic.

“Bravo” to you for reading a book by Theodore Herzl, if that’s the tone we’re going to take.

You said:

I do know that some people can’t always differentiate, so you see I tend to say things either from experience or from knowledge, I rarely make assumptions.

You are making a lot of assumptions about me, which is why I’m getting frustrated. You should reread what you write.

You said:

…don’t lecture me on my country which you clearly no NOTHING about…

Ha! This is not the first time I’ve tolerated a demeaning tone about my country so that I could learn about another, only to receive a backlash in return.

I know more than “nothing” about your country, although I never claimed to know a lot, and I don’t believe I was lecturing you, which would be absurd. However, I have tolerated a tone from yourself as one who has a very great knowledge of the the U.S. - and oddly, of myself, whom you have never met. You seem to have an uncanny knowledge of the kinds of people I can recognize, or not, and the books I have not read, or not.

This need people have for coming off as confident and “expert” when they are not certainly gets in the way of someone simply trying to learn about the world. I had hoped this would go better.

Au revoir.

Rihab

07.31.06 @ 3:36 pm

What demeaning tone about your country? If I don’t like your government does that mean I’ve demeaned your country?! You’ve stated your objections to my government’s actions, did I tell you don’t demean my country or did I say I agree that their actions are wrong? If I assume you can’t tell the difference because of my own experience, how on earth do you take that as an insult on your powers of judgement??

You are the one who began talking with a hostile and demeaning tone - “Is this so difficult to understand?!”, “Don’t defend him just because he’s Muslim!” (oh there’s a false assumption u made about me) when you didn’t even fully explain what the guy did until 2 replies later!

When you talk to a person in a hostile and accusatory tone then don’t expect a friendly discussion.

A bientôt!

Rihab

07.31.06 @ 3:54 pm

And one more thing, I took a look at the article now, and it talks about the government of South Sudan, which is run independently of the central government of Sudan. So the legislators the article was talking about was those of South Sudan and not the central government of the whole Republic.

Please quote things within their context, it does help.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>