What is it with the support of fundamentalist Islamism here?

[ButterflyBlood]

I've been pretty annoyed with this here for some time, but it's gotten the biggest now. While I most certainly don't support the current actions of Israel, I would never go to the level of many here actually positioning themselves as apologists for Hezbollah and Hamas.

As far as I'm concerned, Hezbollah and Hamas' tactics alone make them irredeemable terrorist groups, period, regardless of Israeli actions, two wrongs don't make a right. But even if we look past that and focus only on ideology, there is absolutely nothing progressive about them at all, and absolutely no reason for any progressive to do anything but oppose them, unless one is big on the idea of a fundamentalist Islamic state taking over the current states of Israel and Lebanon. The oddest thing about this though, is everyone gets it here as far as extremist fundamentalist Christians are concerned. So why the double standard? What makes Robertson and Falwell different from the Islamists? They are the same thing, extreme fundamentalists with an agenda out of the middle ages, and no one with such an agenda is EVER getting support or even defense from me, regardless of what happens.

The fact that Hamas was democratically elected doesn't mean shit to me by the way. Horrible governments win elections all the time. The Nazis had much legitimate support. Segregationist governments were democratically elected. And I guarantee you that if some extreme Christian fundamentalists who wanted to introduce the death penalty for homosexuals and adulterers and marginalize women in society were ever to take over where I lived through free elections, I would not accept it and would take up arms against them if neccesary. Republicans win fair elections all the time too, it doesn't make them suck any less.

The fact is, I don't see why people just can't take the consistent position that all fundamentalist religion and attempts to impose religon onto government suck and is not worthy of defense or support, regardless if the other side is not perfect either.

[Selatius]

1. Talk to the Atheists and the Agnostics about it

They've been pretty consistent about the issue of religion be it Judaism, Islam, Christianity, or anything else. The brotherhood of mankind should not be divided merely because of religious views or religious intolerance. It should be fought and destroyed as a barrier to the advancement of humankind.

As I'm a Deist myself, I can relate somewhat to the Atheist's message and more so with the message of Agnostics. I'll leave it up to others to explain themselves instead of trying to explain for them. I don't find very much common ground with ultra-rightwing Likudniks and Hezbollah or Hamas as far as religious tolerance goes. If anything, I'd be repulsed by their intolerance.

There is no peace as long as intolerance is allowed to rule, but the second moderate voices gain control, peace becomes possible. Until then, I see little chance for peace.

[mr blur]

77. All religious faith is madness.

I mean that literally, it's a form of mental illness. A society founded on a religious belief/faith is one which is fundamentally flawed and doomed. Doesn't matter what the religion is, it's all madness. Humanity is doomed to destruction unless we grow up, leave this ridiculous garbage behind and take responsibility for all our actions.

[KittyWampus]

96. Actually, Materialism is a mental illness.... strikingly similar to autism

[lumberjack_jeff]

128. Could you please elaborate?

There's debate whether "mental illness" accurately describes autism.

[BurtWorm]

135. I'll take a stab at what crying shame seems to mean

She can tell me if my guess is right.

She seems to mean that materialism is a condition in which the person can't see beyond the material realm to the spiritual, just as the autistic child has difficulty seeing beyond the self to the world and persons outside.

I won't comment on what's wrong with this view until she confirms that this is, in fact, her view.

[Bridget Burke]

130. You regard "Materialism" as the opposite of "Creative Design"

And Autism is not generally considered a "mental illness."

Brush up on those life sciences!

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

153. "The elephant in the room"

Have you read the article "Religion's misguided missiles" by Richard Dawkins, published on September 15, 2001? It speaks to many of the points that you raised.

I'm a non-theist and rarely agree with Deists, however I would like to thank you for that insightful post.

[Lithos]

2. There is more to Hezbollah and Hamas than their religion

Just as there is more to Israel than religion. If anything, religion is a cloak worn by many people and groups in the region whose motives and impetus are quite complex. Truthfully, there are few "noble" players in the field.

L-

[Erika]

6. Why should we care or give our $? Thanks,

[Lithos]

8. I don't follow

If your post below about not paying for "religious wars" is the reasoning, as I stated above, it's not a war of religion. That's an excuse for the most part for what's going on. The war itself is linked to quite a few geo-political and economic issues not only in the ME, but which are world wide.

You are a player, to take a passive, non-caring view essentially is an abdication that it will continue and will most certainly continue to affect you.

L-

[Warren DeMontague]

26. If I get to pick and choose the bullshit I don't want my $ paying for

the first items on the list are going to be: The drug war ($40 Billion a year), Alberto Gonzales's "war on obscenity", the Iraq War, the half of the prison-industrial complex that goes toward warehousing non-violent drug offenders, corporate welfare, anything involving no bids and Halliburton... and last but most certainly not least the 500 Billion Dollars we spend on our own overly bloated military-industrial apparatus, which at the very least ought to be pared down to something sane.

Aid to Israel is pretty far down the list.

[rooboy]

3. Can you please direct me to threads whcih directly support Hamas etc? n/t

[Erika]

5. Their are none

[chookie]

10. I haven't seen any "I (heart) terror against Israelis" threads either

What I have seen here are threads that in essence say that *everybody* bleeds during a war, or that the crisis is complex and cannot be reduced to simple judgements, or that question whether the degree of Israeli response is proportional to the instigation, or question whether it is wise for Israel to respond so forcefully -- not because we are anti-Semitic or anti-Israel or pro-terror, but because we fear that Israeli actions in recent days -- however justified -- may lead to further destabilization of Israel's security, and even increase terrorist targetting of America.

I've been a member of DU since 2001, and I have yet to see a discussion praising or defending fundamentalism -- be it Muslim, Jewish, or Christian. (Or Hindu, Sikh, Bahai, Rastafarian, Wiccan, Atheist, Shamanistic, pantheistic, etc)

But if I missed an overt "I (heart) Israel's enemies" thread, or "Should DU ban non-fundamentalists because they are not progressive?" threads -- please PM me -- and I will stand humbly corrected.

[LostinVA]

62. There aren't any

There are plenty of posts condemning Israel's current actions, though, so I guess that's what they may be referring to. But, condemning Israel doesn't equate into supporting Hamas, et al.

[treestar]

88. Exactly, they are always creating the false dilemma

supporters of Israel do it more than anyone I've ever seen or heard of.

You support everything Israel does or you support "the terrorists." those are the only two choices they'll let you have.

[Erika]

4. Most of us are just tired paying for religious wars

We don't care whether they are Christian, Muslim, whatever. Just don't use our taxes in warfare based on religion and the value attachment.

[HuffleClaw]

7. nice spin

but i've certainly not seen any evidence of what you claim.

[Solon]

9. First, I have not seen one post stating outright support for either group.

So stop the lying. Second, Hamas is not a fundlementalist organization. The Palestinians have a large minority of Christians who ARE members of Hamas. Both groups could be considered mostly political terrorists. Then again, I deplore violence in ALL its forms, so I don't really care about the leadership of either Israel or either of those groups, a pox on ALL their houses, and all their leaders to the Hague, but that's just me. What's next, you gonna call me an anti-semite?

[ButterflyBlood]

16. Hamas' name means ISLAMIC RESISTANCE MOVEMENT

That's not what I'd call a secular organization. And they didn't win a single one of the seats reserved for Christians in the Palestinean elections. Palestinean Christians have played major roles in secular Palestinean terrorist groups like Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, but not Hamas.

[rug]

55. The money used to pay for the weapons says "In God We Trust".

What does that mean?

[ButterflyBlood]

60. Really, nothing

If I were to buy a book about atheism, the money I would use would say the same thing. It's just that you can't use any other money. Hamas however could name themselves whatever they wanted, and if they were to be a secular or ecunemical organization, I don't think they would've included "Islamic" in the name.

[rman]

11. "Islamism"? What's next - Christianism?

"Evangelicalism"?

Why is everything turned into an "ism" these days?

[Solon]

12. Psst...Hamas isn't a fundlementalist Muslim organization...

really, are we to take the OP seriously if they can't even get the facts straight?

[ButterflyBlood]

14. Hamas is secular?

Gee, that's interesting. Could've fooled me with the fact that their name is an acronym for "Islamic Resistance Movement", their leadership is almost exclusively religious clerics, their charter calls for an Islamic Palestinean state and also says they would not accept a secular Palestinean state even if it replaces a destroyed Israel, and that they constantly feud and just had a recent spat with secular Palestinean factions like Fatah.

[Solon]

17. They have Christian Members...

Remember this, many Palestinians are also Christian, hell, some are even Jewish(gets complicated), however, the stated goals of Hamas are largely secular yes. Don't get fooled here, Allah is the Arabic word for God, not the MUSLIM word. Go to the Middle East and even the Christians there would refer to God as Allah.

[ButterflyBlood]

20. Hamas charter's stated goal:

"raise the banner of God over every inch of Palestine"

Yes, many Palestineans are Christian but they are not Hamas members. Hamas did not do well at all in the Christian areas in the election. And can you name some of these prominent Christian members? It seems weird that any Christians would support Hamas when secular groups like Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and al-Aqsa which DO have Christian members do not get along with them at all.

[Solon]

23. Dammit, I got screwed up, thinking of the more secular groups...

Mainly the former majority party, Fatah, but what the hell, don't like most terrorists at all, don't really care what their religious proclavities are. By the way, do you have any examples of supporters of terrorist groups?

[ButterflyBlood]

28. Posted below

Skim through, you'll see examples of people saying things saying Hezbollah attacks are legitimate and they are just defenders of the people, blah blah.

[The Magistrate]

70. An Attack By Hezbollah Fighters, Sir

Against a military target, like a border patrol or a warship, is a legitimate act of war. An attack by Hezbollah fighters against non-combatants civilians, seperate from any military presence, is a crime of war. An attack by Hezbollah against a target like Haifa, a port with facilities of military utility, is a borderline case that it could be soundly argued was a legitimate military action, despite non-combatant casualties being certain to occur in the operation.

Hezbollah has as much right as any other organization to engage in acts of war in pursuit of political or territorial objectives. That it is not formally a state does not matter, to my view. People have a right to fight. What they do not have a right to is to fight without opposition from their foes, and they certainly do not have a right to success in their efforts. That is determined by the outcome of the contending forces. Nor do they have any right to commit crimes of war: no one does.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

95. A DU Mod thats supports hezbollah?

~The Magistrate~ "An attack by Hezbollah against a target like Haifa, a port with facilities of military utility, is a borderline case that it could be soundly argued was a legitimate military action"

Are you fucking kidding me?! Is this the Twilight Zone?

[Violet_Crumble]

117. I don't say this often, but...For Crying Out Loud!

The Magistrate does not support Hezbollah. Nowhere in his statement did he give any indication he did. He was pointing out an example of a target where there could be an argument that it was a borderline case of attacking a legitimate military target. If someone were to point out the obvious fact that Hezbollah are a far more formidable opponent for Israel than the Palestinian militant groups, that wouldn't be supporting Hezbollah either...

[The Magistrate]

146. With All Due Respect, Ma'am

You would seem to have inadvertantly illustrated the fable of the blind men and the elephant, in which the beast is likened to a snake, a tree, a wall, a rope, etc., depending which portion of the beast their fingers have touched. It is my practice to employ a unitary standard in assessing the legitimacy of any particular act of violence, whether my support is given to the side which carries it out or not. My acknowledging that Haifa could be viewed as a military objective, properly assailed by the area fire weapons that are all that is available to one side of a battle, is based on the same ground as my occassional statements that when Israel bombs a building in which a Hamas leader is present, and along with him kills a number of his non-combatant neighbors, it is not a crime, though it is a horrid thing, just as the death of non-combatants in Haifa is, and the death of non-combatants in Lebanon now is. My friends on the other side of this issue, such as Ms. Crumble who replied to you above, may not agree with my view of that sort of action by Israel, but they do at least treat it seriously, because they will have seen me denounce acts by Israel that do in my view warrant it, and acknowledge when acts by Israel's opponents do not warrant denunciation as crimes, and know that I require more than just knowledge of who has done some killing for my view on whether or not it is a legitimate military action. When people employ a standard that boils down to "What my side does is right and what the other does is a crime!", there is no more reason to take their charges or their defenses seriously than there is to look to a stopped clock for the time, because you know in advance what they are going to say, and that they are simply employing the cry of "War crime!" as a rhetorical bludgeon. Doing that devalues the whole concept, and trivializes it to something many people have come to view as something they do not need to take seriously, and this works against the creation of popular support for real enforcement of the laws of war, which is sorely needed.

My prefered outcome for this present episode would be that it end with the destruction of Hezbollah entire, or at least with its neutralization as an armed force exerting a pernicious effect on Lebanese political life, and engaging in hostilities, many of them quite illegitimate, against Israel. How this outcome is achieved is a matter of indifference to me, save that it would be better if the violence employed to achieve it remained within the bounds of the laws of war. My distaste for armed radical Islamic fundamentalist bodies runs pretty damned deep: they are reactionary, illiberal, and anathema to everything persons adhering to left and progressive views and values stand for, and they are quite clear themselves, in their own writings, that it is precisely those elements we represent in Western culture that makes it in their view the unholy enemy of their god. That the early steps of their projected program require the expulsion of the West from Islamic lands has some crude over-lap with anti-colonial orthodoxies on the left should blind no one among us to the fact that they are not our friends but our enemies entire.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

149. Oh, OK.

:rofl:

[JVS]

134. The idea that references to "allah" in the party statements refer to...

both the Muslim God and Christian God (or even Jewish God too) seems to be too ecumenical for the parties involved. I highly doubt those involved would agree with such an interpretation

[ButterflyBlood]

13. Islamism is an actual word, different meaning from Islam

Islamism doesn't refer to simply the religion, but rather the religion turned into a political ideology, with the theory that it should be the guiding force behind government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism

[rman]

18. So in your OP you were not referring to the religion of Islam?

And given all the references to religion by Bush regarding his politics, doesn't "religion turned into a political ideology" also apply to the Bush regime? Then why is there never any mention of Newbornchristianism or some such?

[ButterflyBlood]

21. I was not referring to the religion as a whole

hence the use of the word as a distinction. Rather only militant fundamentalist Islam that seeks to actually integrate the religion into the state. As for the Christian equivalent, there are terms such as Dominionism and Christian Reconstructionism that refer to such ideology.

[k_jerome]

24. randomly click a thread...

you will see many mentions of Newbornchristianism. It rivals Islam as the most barbaric religion on earth.

[chookie]

22. I think it's called Sharia law

Kinda like Americans who assert that America is a (Judeo) Christian nation, and that law must be based on the Ten Commandments, and that secular law which does not actively invoke G-d causes things like hurricanes and attacks on skyscrapers.

Nobody likes to talk about it, but religious dogma is incredibly flexible, and is constantly molded to justify brutal political motives.

(PS -- always take Wikipedia with a grain of salt. Also -- folks make up words that have no actual meaning.)

What I guess you are really referring to are those brutal manifestations of Islam that condone the public beating of women who allow a bit of their bodies to show outside their burkas, or public executions/beheadings of people accused of theft or adultery. I have never seen that anyone in DU -- and there are some 80,000 members by now, that are cool with this violent repression. No cheerleaders of this madness here. This repression is not a policy of Hamas, or Hezbollah either, so rest assured that Israeli or the US aren't next to feel its irrational and brutal sting even if turbaned ruffians are spotted in the victinity.

[Clark2008]

68. Yes - like people using "Islamic" when describing followers

of Islam. They're Muslim. Muslim is the adjective. This "Islamic" business is relatively new.

I just hate it when words are perverted, but I realize "Islamic" is now ingrained in the lexicon.

I also agree with you about Wikipedia.

[Recursion]

137. If we take our cue from Arabic

To let linguistics get its say in:

Islam is a noun describing a religion or state of being (theologically, they would say anyone who believes in one God and a day of judgment is in a state of "islam", but is not necessarily following the religion they also call "Islam", kind of like how god and God are the same word but one is a class and the other a proper name). This is why in the Qur'an there are different rules for warfare against Christians, Jews, and Zoroastarians, because they are also in a state of "islam". The word "islam" is derived from the noun salam which means "peace" or "acceptance" or "submission".

Muslim is a noun that is formed from "islam" by adding the m- prefix which denotes a person or agent. So, a person in a state of islam (and in practice, a person in "the" state of Islam) is a muslim.

In theory the adjectival form is saliym, but in practice islamiyya is used to form a phrase known as a genitive construct, where a noun in the genitive is used in situations where Indo-european languages tend to use an adjective (the distinction between nouns and adjectives is an artificial one in semitic languages, and only imported by foreign "orientalist" grammarians).

At any rate, "Islamic" is closer to how Arabs describe it; I prefer to use "Muslim" strictly to refer to a person who follows Islam.

[Wonk]

15. Got links? Voices in your head don't count.

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[ButterflyBlood]

27. You can look through these threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1635673
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2390365
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2388757

[Wonk]

35. and find posts such as "Lebanon didn't want this war"

and

"If a foreign country was blockading New York with warships...
Of course we'd fire at these warships directly attacking and attempting to strangle our country."


Is that what you're equating to "DUers supporting fundamentalist Islam"?

[k_jerome]

19. Jews saw very little support during WWII in the US and elsewhere...

these are the same voices urging restraint now. restraint while your people are liquidated, restraint while your country is slowly obliterated, what is the difference?

they do what they have to do on their own now. more power to them.

[rman]

30. "little support" is a bit of an understatement

More than a few US business men did in fact support the Nazis, ideologically and/or financially. Dupont, Morgan, Prescott, IBM, Coca Cola...

Coca Cola made a new product for the occasion (Fanta), so that it wouldn't be to obvious that they were trading with the enemy.
IBM provided mechanical computers to help manage the logistics of the Holocaust. Punch cards to that end where printed in the US during the war. IBM doesn't deny it, they just say it wasn't as bad as it seems. See the documentary "The Corporation" www.thecorporation.com.

[chookie]

33. You're leaving out an important player in US support of Nazis:

"How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

[k_jerome]

39. who is the Prescott named in the post you reply to? nt.

[Wonk]

42. Prescott Sheldon Bush, Dubya's grampa and GHWBush's dad. nt

[k_jerome]

43. i was actually responding to the post that said he was left out...

when, in actuality, he was not. but thanks.

[chookie]

44. You are new here!!

It is a fascinating fact, of uncertain significance, that, in the words of the article I linked to:

"George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany."

Imagine that!! A US senator, George's granddaddy, and Pops of George 41, bankrolled the Nazis, and got rich off them. Probably bought the estate at Kennebunkport on the profits!! There has been some mention in this thread of American apathy towards Jews prior to WWII, but this is an example of an American who supported Nazism. We're not talking about some long-deceased black sheep of the family from the Dark Ages -- this is a mid-2oth century kinda guy, a generation away from George W. Talk about inconvenient truth....

[k_jerome]

45. lets break it down...

the guy you responded to mentioned Prescott. You replied that he had left out this certain player. I responded that Prescott was mentioned. Thanks for the help though.

[k_jerome]

40. acknowledged...

i refer more the the citizenry of this country, as well as european countries that had the power to do more but did not.

[chookie]

32. Not a whole lot of support for Palestinians these days either.

6 million Jews killed by Nazis.

Russian civilians killed by Nazis: 19 million
Russian military killed by Nazis: 27 million

Chinese killed by Japanese in WWII: 9 million

Palestinian death during Nakba: conservatively 100,000 (nobody cared either)

Genocide is not just perpetrated upon Jews. It sucks everywhere -- just not so well known. I've just listed a few of the examples of the last century -- apologies to Armenians, Sudanese, Rwandans, Cambodians, etc. And don't get me started about Atilla the Hun, Genghis Khan, or Oliver Cromwell.

Everybody bleeds.

>>they do what they have to do on their own now<< Why slap your fellow Americans in the face, when we have generously supported Israel for 6 decades? $3 billion a year in direct aid from the US negates your claim that Israel is on its own....

[k_jerome]

37. that is because palestinians elect and support...

terrorism in preference to peace.

[chookie]

46. So right

Why they don't accept that they are second rate humans and must humbly and unquestionably submit to Israeli ambitions and that they have no place in their former homeland, which, after all was given to Jews by G-d Himself long ago, can only mean that they are depraved madmen.

To paraphrase and update former attorney general Ashcroft's (PBUH) statement -- Jews will launch a regional war to rescue one of their soldiers, who are loved they were the child of all Israelis, whereas Muslims wantonly send their children to blow themselves up solely to vex well-meaning Jews, because all Arabs are addicted to violence. How true, how true.

They need to trust that, in spite of 60 years of strife, that Israelis mean them no harm, and that they make every effort to facilitate their security, economic development, and free commerce.

Look -- I don't know if you are posting from Fiji, or some other place across the international date line, but I'm going to sleep now.

Bye bye, and Shalom to all people. I want nothing more than to see all of us get out of this mess with at least a little fur left on our tails.

[LostinVA]

63. NIce black and white there

Too bad that isn't true. The HUGE bulk of Palestinians -- just like the huge majority of those in No. Ireland -- want nothing BUT peace.

[k_jerome]

97. please supply some links pointing to data that shows that to be...

the case. that huge majority is certainly not voting for peaceful leadership.

[madeline_con]

103. Israel's leadership isn't very peaceful, either. n/t

[k_jerome]

107. they don't encourage the killing of civilians...nt

[madeline_con]

108. They've been doing it since day one.

And it cannot be denied. It is a fact.

[k_jerome]

109. those assumptions can be made throught the right colored glasses...

if you think jews are inherently evil, there is no debate here.

[madeline_con]

110. SO predictable.

When did I say I think Jews are inherently evil? Putting words in my mouth now, so you can twist what I wrote around?

But it's about Israel's governemnt. It would be convenient for you to pretend it's about someone being Jewish, wouldn't it?

[k_jerome]

111. deliberately targeting civilians, killing women and children..

that is evil. their leaders must be evil, their soldiers evil and the citizens that support them. it is convenient to say you only think the govt is evil.

[madeline_con]

112. I can't lump every leader, soldier and citizen in with

those who have supported Israeli atrocities against civilians over the years. Many Israelis are working to end the racist, genocidal practices of their government, just as many Americans are working to end those of their own government.

[k_jerome]

113. the current leadership and military, however...

must be evil to deliberately target civilians. Their citizens are like the villagers next to the concentration camp that claimed they knew nothing. Do you feel they are innately evil or have developed to this point from some sinister outside force?

[madeline_con]

116. No.

On edit:

What's this "inherently evil" thing you keep going on about?

[k_jerome]

120. don't you feel that deliberate mass murder of civilians is evil? nt.

[madeline_con]

121. I don't use the word evil much, unless...

I'm talking or writing about evangelical "Christians". It has religious connotations for me.

Deliberately targeting civilians is bad policy. It drags more combatants into the conflict, because many join the cause, whichever one they may join, for revenge or their idea of justice. It makes the conflict bigger when people who would remain outside the frey take up arms.

Both sides have targeted civilians. Israel has just always had better weapons to carry it out. Hezbollah is beginning to retaliate in a very real way. Pretending that Israel has never deliberately targeted civilians or made life hell for many many innocents is just lying to oneself.

[LittleClarkie]

152. Making life hell

If you call destroying Lebanon's infrastruction making life hell, then yes, Israel is making your average Lebanese citizen's life hell.

It's such a vicious cycle. You did it to me so I do it to you then you do it to me and so I do it again to you. I support neither, and the citizens of both who are caught in the middle of this mess.

[madeline_con]

155. Yes, Lebanon and ...

Palestinians since Israel came to be.

[rman]

122. I suppose accidentally killing lots of civilians is ok

Even if it's the predictable consequence of ones actions.

What's the score anyway, re the number of Israeli civilians killed by "terrorists" vs the number of civilians killed by Israel?

[LittleClarkie]

150. No. They're not.

That's a pretty wild generalization.

What I don't support is that Israel can't see themselves in their enemies. If the stuation was reversed, they would be acting much the same.

Support for Jews and support for Israel are two different things.

The way the Jews were treated does not give them the excuse to treat others as less than human. Rather like the abused child that grows up to be an abusive parent. That's what I see.

The Palestinians are not the Nazis.

Neither side has much to crow about really. But not all Jews support what Israel is doing, I reckon.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ButterflyBlood]

29. I've been rather critical of Israel as well throughout this

But I haven't gone to levels as some have in saying things such as that Hezbollah and Hamas are justified resistance groups just defending their people as you can see in the above threads I linked.

[rman]

31. You're saying Israel has the right to defend itself,

but Hamas, Palestine, Syria etc do not?

[chookie]

41. Gotta include Hezbollah here

Hezbollah is not a monolithic organization solely dedicated to the destruction of Israel; it is a service organization as well -- additionally it has two main factions, one diplomatic, one militaristic, and they are quite at odds with each other, and recently have been working at cross purposes.

The modern government of Lebanon has not organized a program of national defence. Only Hezbollah has put together a program of national defence of Lebanon.

Looks like Lebanon is gonna need it, given the massive walloping it is sustaining, not to mention the naval blockade.

Israel has the right of self defence, surely, but it is a bit of a stretch to demand that Israel's neighbors NOT possess any means of self defence. Are they to blindly trust that Israeli and US intentions are always benevolent and they have nothing to fear if they have nothing to hide? And that they should be unprepared if one of their Arab neighbors choose to attack them?

[ButterflyBlood]

59. Hamas is a terrorist organization, so no

Syria would against an unprovoked attack, but Israel has yet to launch such a thing against them.

The Palestineans do, but this means exactly that, defense against military actions, not suicide bombs in shopping malls.

[LostinVA]

65. THe Palestinians have no real way to defend themselves

So, they rely on guerrilla methods like suicide bombs. Although I cannot condone these actions, I can understand what would drive someone to acting like this. Northern Ireland, South Africa, the Palenstinians.... apartheid and institutionalized discrimination tend to breed desperate and barbaric acts against oppressors.

[Porcupine]

73. The "terrorist orginization" label just doesn't fly anymore.

We all know that it includes everything from PETA, Sea Shepherd, and Earth First to Hamas, Al Quaida and Hezbollah. When I see those words I know I am seeing somebody parroting BFEE/Zionist propoganda.

Lets try "Hamas is a stated enemy of the Israeli state." Which is more accurate. Israel kills civilians; Hamas kills civilians. Does it matter that much to to the civilians in question if they were bombed, run over by a tank, or had their house blown up by a hellfire missile? I think not.

The "we have collateral damage; they kill innocent civilians" line are pure propoganda. Dead is dead. Maimed is maimed. The means do not matter to the killed, maimed and orphanded children.

[ButterflyBlood]

75. Wow, now I'm a BFEE propagandist

Amazing. Just because I think people that blow up crowded restaurants are terrorists.

The question was, "does Hamas have the right to defend themselves?" And I think they don't have this "right" anymore than Nazi Germany, because they are the same, a murderous disgusting organization that I would be perfectly if it was wiped off the face of earth. Hamas hasn't done any positive contributions to humanity and quite a few negative ones.

Is Israel right in its civilian casualties? Of course not, and I've made that pretty clear here. This is hardly an issue of taking sides. Of course I don't support Israel's actions here. But I will NEVER EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER support any type of fundamentalist religious extremists, which is what Hamas are.

P.S. Thanks for just proving my point with your defense of Hamas! Hope you'll be cheering them on when they behead gays and adulterers.

[Porcupine]

83. "parroting BFEE/Zionist propoganda" was the phrase.....

Call things by their proper names.

If party A kills civilians with measure a and party B kills civilians with measure b it matters not to the civilians wether method a or b was used. THEY ARE STILL DEAD.

So when you refer to party A as defenders of the peace and party B as terrorist I wonder what your motives are. Both parties are killing civilians and noncombatants.

Remember party A's fathers and grandfathers were born in the region and party B's fathers and grandfathers moved onto the land as an armed force. An ongoing bone of contention.

[ButterflyBlood]

86. Is Israel wrong? Yes. Are they terrorists? No.

Plain and simple, nations' militaries don't commit terrorism. It goes against the very definition of terrorism. The Holocaust wasn't terrorism either. The Zionist groups that operated there prior to Israel's foundation were terrorists, but once a nation is founded it can not engage in terrorism by definition, period. It can fund terrorist groups, but no nation's military is ever a terrorist organization by the exact definition of terrorism. It's that simple.

That doesn't make Israel right, it just means they don't fit the exact definition of terrorism. Not all wrong acts are terrorist. I'm not parroting propaganda, just the dictionary.

[Violet_Crumble]

114. Terrorism can and is carried out by states...

It's called state sponsored terrorism. The US was found guilty by the World Court of this crime in Nicaragua...

You do realise that yr argument excludes Hamas from being a terrorist organisation? While Palestine is not yet a state, it has some of the trappings of statehood with a democratically elected government. You are saying that governments can't be terrorists, yet turning around and yelling that Hamas are terrorists. It's already been pointed out to you that groups like Hamas are much more complex than just a religious organisation. They had/have their military wing, political wing, and provide social services to the Palestinian population. I'm an Atheist with no time for religion, but I have always supported the welfare work of Hamas, especially as that service was one that wasn't being provided by anyone else. I totally opposed the tactics of Hamas when they were engaging in attacks on Israeli civilians, but I will support any attempts made by Hamas to enter into negotiations with Israel that will result in a fair and equitable resolution of the conflict with two viable and independent states emerging...

btw, when it comes to the term terrorism, there's a hell of a lot more to it than a mere dictionary definition...

[ButterflyBlood]

142. There is still a difference between Hamas and the Palestinean Authority

They have different security forces, most PA security forces are not Hamas supporters, hence the recent skirmishes there. Hamas commits terrorism through its military wing, not the forces of its government.

[treestar]

89. There are many supporters of Israel who claim Israel has a right

to preemptive strikes as "defense." It of course goes without saying they will tell you Arab countries have no right to defend themselves from Israel. After all, they will tell you, the Arabs all want to "push them into the sea."

They are the most unreasonable and one sided people you will ever debate.

[ConsAreLiars]

38. That post was made after my question, but it does little to answer it.

I suppose that somewhere in the 200+ messages you linked there was something you found offensive. Somewhere Maybe. Your claim that DUers in general are supporting Fundie Islamist groups is hardly supported by that kind of "evidence." I suspect you are making things up. Maybe you can cite one case -- you haven't yet -- but even if you could, tht would not substantiate your deranged accusations.

[rucky]

34. Who are you talking to?

I read alot of DU and haven't seen the sentiments you describe.

[Rosemary2205]

36. You didn't word it well but

I get your meaning. I've had the same "shake my head" feeling reading posts. I've read quite a few posts that leave me with the feeling the poster hopes Israel is wiped off the face of the earth. And I've read a few posters who obviously got the same feeling and made an attempt to bring the discussion back to the middle.

So you aren't alone.

[JackNewtown]

47. Progressive values and fundamentalist Islam

I am also surprised by the relatively high rate of progressives who don't view fundamentalist Islam as a threat or a major threat. Right now, the biggest threat in the world to progressive values is fundamentalist Islam. What could be more regressive than Taliban Afghanistan?

Many progressives correctly fear Christian fundamentalism. I am firmly opposed to all forms of religious fanatacism but the difference between Christian fundamentalism and Islamic fundamentalism is like the difference between night and day. Does anyone truly believe that, as bad as it would be, a state run by Christian Coalition types would be nearly as bad as fundamentalist Iran or the Taliban's Afghanistan?

Islamic fundamentalism is nothing more than a new form of fascism with a religious veneer.

[chookie]

50. Examples? Or just your impressions, based on...what exactly?

DUers praising Islamic fundamentalism? Despite being a member since 2001, I have yet to see one of these, but that doesn't mean they don't exist -- please let me know who these assholes are!!

Please have a look at postings above which assert, as I do here, that no one on DU -- even crazy DUers (and you know who you are :-)) has a soft spot in their heart for Islamic fundamentalism.

There is a lot of contentious debate here -- and oh boy can it get hot!! -- but while some DUers have iffies about Israel -- even pretty strong at times, which scares people who react reflexively to emotionally charged subjects -- I have yet to come across a cheerleader for the destruction of Israel . Frustration with Israel, anger, even intense anger, at Israel-- yes. DUers feeling a need to present the POV of Palestinians and Arabs angry at what has transpired since 1947? -- yes again. DUers who are troubled by the prospect that Americans will become involved in a major regional ME war due to our 60 year support of Israel?-- yes again. DUers who suspect that current Israeli actions will not ensure security for Israel, but will make it less secure? -- yes again.

Now that we are discussing extreme reactions to the current crisis -- how do you feel about DU folks who contend that any criticism of Israel, and boy oh boy, do I ever mean ANY criticism of Israel, is anti-Semitism? DUers who equate criticism of Israel (not Jews in general) with long-suppressed urges to commit genocide upon all Jews, in yet another hideous pogrom? DUers who equate condemnation of "NeoCons" as equivalent to condemnation of all Jews?

[datasuspect]

52. hmmm . . .

"Does anyone truly believe that, as bad as it would be, a state run by Christian Coalition types would be nearly as bad as fundamentalist Iran or the Taliban's Afghanistan?"

yes. it would definitely.

ever been to a pentecostal service? scary shit indeed.

[LostinVA]

66. It would be worse, imo!

[Laotra]

53. Worse than Iran

On par with Taleban. But just guessing... :)

[rman]

125. I don't understand why islam fascists and christian/capitalist/neocon

fascists fight one another.
Both have more in common with one another than either has in common with any other movement in the world today. Both hate liberalism, democracy and freedom, both believe violence is the only way to achieve their goals.

Also i'd say that the latter are more dangerous, given the resources at their disposal.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wakeme2008]

49. I am easy, I HATE ALL RELIGIOUS WACKOs running any Govt

And IMHO Israel is being run by religious wackos today

[progressivebydesign]

80. That's what turned me athiest... the religious nuts. n/t

[sweetheart]

51. injustice sucks

Fundamentalism: the inability to live life out of common sense for prepackaged preconceptions.

Then those who live out of preconception, of all ilks are at risk. And when injustice is done,
we must see each event as its own crime, not the mythical battle of peoples and tribes, but
people being nasty, not a religion, but stupid militarists, not a public, but some criminal
trash arisen in the degenerate areas.

Prison states and their apologists needs be challenged, and its not about islam, or heizbullamas.

[mmonk]

54. I dislike Islamic fundamentalism.

But have you ever thought your thinking has been influenced and may be compromised? Our current government wants war in the middle east and they are dishonest. Our news is compromised with a contrived view of everything. It's best to check facts and not to make statements that may conflict with facts on the ground. You are free to choose to back Israel. You are free to judge the situation void of facts of how this curent conflist has all come about but you should withhold judgement of people expressing suspicion and concern and lumping them in with terrorism.

[ButterflyBlood]

61. I don't support Israel in this situation

I don't believe their offensives into Lebanon or Gaza are right.

However, there is no way I'd ever support the fundamentalist assholes who are their primary opposition.

[lonestarnot]

64. Well I am changing or have changed my mind. I'm taking sides now

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmonk]

57. It's a good thing

you're not knee jerk. I'm sure you haven't brought any preconceived notions into this current situation.

[LostinVA]

67. Nothing gives you to right to come in here and judge and insult posters

"Knee jerk" reactions? WTF? "Open our eyes"?

I think plenty on here realize that Islamic Fundamentalism is just as dangerous as Israeli Fascism. Too bad certain posters can't struggle against their own knee jerk reactions to also see it the other way around. Instead, they use the banner of "Muslim Fundamentalism" as a chance to spout their anti-Arab rhetoric -- nice cover, huh?

Have fun playing here.

[smirkymonkey]

87. Thank you!

"Seems to me that some of the knee-jerk Arab supporters here are hopelessly naive about what a lot of these people and groups are about. None of that justifies any particular action of Israel, but some people here need to open their eyes to the reality that even moderate Arabs are reactionary by American standards."

I also think that a lot of this has to do with the notion that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," and I don't think many people here realize that if the Islamists had their way, we would be living in a state that would make life under the Bush Adminstration seem like Utopia.

[madeline_con]

104. Speaking only for yourself, I'm sure. n/t

[Solo_in_MD]

58. Its "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of thinking, which is

somewhere between dumb and dangerous.

We rail about the xtian fundies, but they have not beheaded anyone for quite sometime and they don't have massive riots over cartoons. While I do support Xtian fundies, those who ignore the Islamic fundies or fall into the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" trap are not looking at the big picture

[Porcupine]

74. Yep, Xtian fundies will drag you behind a truck, wire you to a fence

or just plain shoot you because you are gay, black or somehow different. Xtian fundies are currently supporting a man who justifies torture by american troops and reads everybodies e-mail. They frequently get on t.v and the radio and call for the torture of fellow american citizens. Our constitutional protections are a direct result of the excesses of Christian religious violence. Read Jefferson's notes.

Somebody hand these guys a history book.

[The Stranger]

69. So OPPOSING BOMBING INNOCENTS is SUPPORT for ISLAM?

HOLY MOTHER OF ALL STRAWMEN, BATMAN!

[ButterflyBlood]

71. No, I too have been criticizing Israel HOWEVER

claiming that Hezbollah and Hamas are just good defense movements or that they are the "good guys" in this situation certainly is.

[The Stranger]

72. This strawman thread appears to be another attempt to hide Israel from

criticism for what is in plain sight.

And it fails utterly.

[ButterflyBlood]

76. Gee, then why have I been criticizing Israel?

Already this thread is proving my point, the fact that I hate Islamic fundies makes me a BFEE apologist and person who thinks Israel should never ever be criticized apparentely.

[smirkymonkey]

90. I think what is more prevalent here is not necessarily support for

Islamic Fundamentalism, but a violent opposition to any CRITICISM of it. You are immediately labeled racist or intolerant - there seems to be no room for discussion. Any mention of Islamic intolerance is usually met with examples of Christian intolerance, western oppression or Zionist aggression.

The problem I have is the immediate leap people make in thier minds from a simple criticism of rabid fundamentalism of the Islamic type, to a wholehearted support for Israeli/US warmongering. Both sides are wrong, neither side is beyond criticsm.

Most of the goals of the Islamic terrorist groups are not defensive, but offensive. They will not stop until the entire world is living in a repressive Islamic Theocracy.

[ButterflyBlood]

92. And we're seeing this right in this thread

With people accusing me of being apologist for the BFEE or Israeli agression.

[The Stranger]

94. Probably because the War for Terror is based on intolerance and a

focus on terrorism while forbidding any discussion of the causes of terrorism.

If you want to hate Muslims, turn on your television. Fucking have at it. Meanwhile, the rest of us here will be trying to prevent the bloodlusting, warmongering fucks on television from bringing the world to war.

[ButterflyBlood]

99. OK, so all criticism of any Muslims is taboo

Is that what you're saying?

[U4ikLefty]

106. Notice the crickets. n/t

[The Stranger]

126. Cute.

Guess most people can't live on the Internet.

[The Stranger]

127. Another straw man.

Go back and read the prior post. The Progressive goal is to try to defuse the hatred that is the engine for the war(s), not reinforce it.

[ButterflyBlood]

145. And shouldn't Muslims do their part as well?

Those that don't aren't making things any better obviously, and they deserve criticism for that.

[progressivebydesign]

79. Show me proof that this is a prevailing attitude here...

Show us.. show us that DU is somehow, as a group, supporting terrorists. You can't.

[Violet_Crumble]

118. She can't because it isn't a prevailing attitude here...

I've seen one poster over the past few days trot out stuff about Hezbollah being noble warriors who are only defending themselves, blah blah blah, and they were banned. That's it. One poster. Apparently what is being misinterpreted by some as support for Hezbollah is if people who aren't into frothing at the mouth and shrieking 'Die Terrorist Scum!! Die!!' actually try talking about terroristic type things like the military capability of Hezbollah or pointing out they're a rather complex organisation. A good example of that in this thread is where the Magistrate was accused of supporting Hezbollah merely because he pointed out there could be an argument that Haifa having military targets could be a borderline case of a legitimate attack...

[madeline_con]

105. Aren't you gald someone spoke up and explained

why we think the way we do? :sarcasm:

[progressivebydesign]

78. My daughter's friend in Lebanon an exchange student and girl scout..

she lives in Lebanon, and is back home.. just returning there. So.. my anger the Israel is killing civilians over in suburban Lebanon where she lives is somehow being an "apologist" for those terrorist organizations?

I have yet to see ONE thread that sides with them... what I DO see and hear, and this is from the lips of Jon Stewart and Al Franken (who are Jewish) is that Israel is attacking disproportionately to the events at hand. I can't figure out if it's because they realized that Bush is a fucking puppet who will not stop them, or if the president of Israel is trying to quell his sex scandal, all I know is that someone captured a few Israeli soldiers, after Lebanese citizens were kipnapped, and now we have a freakin' world war on our hands because SOMEONE overreached!

[ruggerson]

81. Thank you, great post

Nominated.

The support for fundamentalist islam here is juvenile, fringe-left claptrap. It's as insane as supporting fundamentalist christian theocracy in this country. But somehow the Hamas lovers here never see the hypocrisy.

[smirkymonkey]

91. Politics makes strange bedfellows, doesn't it?

If there were only progressives and religious fundamentalists in the world, the lines would be drawn quite clearly.

[jsamuel]

82. Could anyone please show me a thread that says Hamas,ect are good guys?

Thanks

[moondust]

84. A good day to populate the ignore list.

[benburch]

85. Is Hezbollah fundementalist?

I didn't form that opinion of them.

[ButterflyBlood]

98. They want to establish a Shiite theocracy in Lebanon

In addition to destroying Israel. I don't think there are too many moderates who favor theocracy.

It also would seem odd for anyone other than fundamentalists to name an armed group "Party of God"

[Violet_Crumble]

119. Another example of religious fundamentalism...

It would seem odd for anyone other than fundamentalists to slap a line on their currency saying "In God We Trust" ;)

[sendero]

93. I don't support Hezbollah..

.. or their actions. But I fail to see how Israel's actions are any better. Maybe .001% better. No more.

So, as I always say - there are no "good guys" in the middle east conflict. A pox on both their houses.

[Guaranteed]

100. They're BOTH assholes! They are both killing indiscriminately.

They're both KILLING, period!

And they've been doing it for decades, and as for Christianity and Islam it's been going on for centuries.

It's all rubbish. There is no "reason" behind any of it.

[madeline_con]

101. I don't think the faith professed by anyone in this....

holds a lot of water. It's about the actions, not whether they're of one religion or another.

[The Straight Story]

102. Let me re-word your OP if I may to bring to light the issue:

You see people on DU bitching a bunch about how evil and bad their fellow americans who happen to be christian are. You see them bring to light often mistakes made by people who were/are christians.

Then you see something like, oh 9/11, and a group of religious nutbags carrying out such acts. And you see...well people saying not to bitch a lot about islam because it stirs hatred and brings about hate crimes.

I am a christian myself. I don't want a government ran by some sect of my faith and forcing their beliefs on others. I like my freedom to worship the way I want. And I like not having the pope (for example) being my president and telling me I have to do hail mary's or go to jail - cause my sect of christianity don't buy that.

Basically - we have no problem smacking down one faith on a regular basis, but doing that about islam is a RW talking point or promoting hate to some.

[LittleClarkie]

115. In a poll a couple of days ago

It appeared that the majority supported the antics of neither.

[dorkulon]

123. I think the religious affiliation of these groups is a red herring

Terrorism isn't about religion; it's about powerlessness in the face of occupation. Nobody blamed Catholicism for the IRA.

[FujiZ1]

124. agreed.

But I do think it serves as a cohesion mechanism for said groups.

[ButterflyBlood]

141. There's a difference

The IRA's stated goal wasn't to establish a Catholic theocratic state.

[Xenotime]

129. I don't understand why they just can't get along...

Where does all the hatred come from?

[leesa]

131. I think people just try to counter the knee jerk pro-Israel propaganda

Fundamentalist extremist beliefs are always bad, but sometimes we are confusing freedom fighters with fundamentalist extremists because of erroneous and deliberate propaganda. Quite often these groups are quite willing to moderate or secularize, like Iran was beginning to trend, and then we come along and throw a wrench into the works. I don't think Hamas has much of a choice in its tactics, do you? I agree, it's all awful, but how do they fight their occupation by Israel?

[ButterflyBlood]

140. How does blowing up civilians in restaurants resist Israel?

It reminds me of an Onion article that had the Israel PM saying that one more suicide bombing would force them to dissolve the Israeli state. Of course it was satirizing the idea that this could possibly do so. In no way does this cut down on or defend from Israel agression, in fact it only increases it.

But since Hamas are religious fundamentalists, they would never get my support, even if they did not target civilians.

[Bridget Burke]

132. Hezbolla & Hamas are NOT religious fundamentalists.

Some members may be, but Fundamentalist Islam is not the uniting factor.

[ButterflyBlood]

138. You are probably once again confusing them with the secular groups

They call themselves "Islamic Resistance Movement" and "Party of God". Their leaders are virtually all religious clerics. They call for a religious based government in the state they will establish in place of the destroyed Israel (and have said they won't accept a secular state in its place either). What else can they be?

[Bridget Burke]

147. Perhaps

But, is it OK when Israel kills indiscriminately?

[ButterflyBlood]

148. NO! I've been saying that throught this whole thing

I'm not supporting Israel. But there is no way in hell I'm ever going to support or defend fundamentalist assholes who oppose them.

[Bridget Burke]

154. The violence from both sides is the problem for me.

Whatever their ideological/religous beliefs. You have not proven that all those fighting Israel are doing so for religious reasons. And there are plenty of Fundamentalists among the Israeli hardliners.

[JVS]

133. Because it's super fun!

[malaise]

136. Oh well

"The fact that Hamas was democratically elected doesn't mean shit to me by the way. Horrible governments win elections all the time".

Horrible governments like Bush -oh yes he was not really elected, but he and his goons decide for people in sovereign states what is a 'horrible government'.

You know what they say about taking the beam out of the eye?

Give the Palestinians their land - that's why people support their resistance movement and get the hell out of Iraq.

Edit -add

[ButterflyBlood]

139. I don't support Bush either, what's your point?

Can't I criticize both Bush and other awful people in power in other places?

[Beelzebud]

143. I'm against ALL extremists.

[lonestarnot]

144. Too damn late to nominate.

[seabeyond]

151. hezbollah is reigning terror on the lebonese equal to isreal

the odds are the bombs arent falling on them. they hide behind the innocents that are just trying to live a life. and they escalte the madness for death and destruction