George W. Bush still does not get it. He insists that the terrorists hate us because of our freedom. NO THEY DON’T!!!!!! What sheer, utter nonsense. If you don’t understand the task or problem at hand how can you come up with an appropriate fix? This is part of the reason that the Bush Presidency is in shambles. Call it the hubris of stupidity.
Let’s start with the basics. There is no such thing as a terrorist. There are individuals who engage in terrorist acts and many of those persons are affiliated in one fashion or another with a group of some sort. But “terrorist”? Doesn’t exist as an entity in and of itself.
The groups most keen on doing us in at the moment are Islamic extremists, largely Sunni, who swear allegiance of sorts to Osama Bin Laden. And what does Bin Laden want? God’s rule on earth. He sees the United States as a godless nation, full of pedophiles, drug addicts, and prostitutes. He sees a nation that tramples on the rights of other people in order to suck their natural resources from the ground. For Osama it is about faith and obedience. It has zippo to do with “freedom”.
Now, if you paid attention to the Bin Laden check list it probably reminded you a bit of the agenda of our own American religious extremists. What rich irony. A President waiting for the rapture complaining about Islamic extremists who want to destroy us because we are sinners.
That’s where the real battle needs to be waged. We need to confront religious extremism and intolerance. The President who presides over a Republican party committed to harassing homosexuals, denying global warming, preaching creationism, and sneering at science is frankly just a couple of steps removed from Islamic crazies hunkered over their prayer mats and praying to Allah.
At least most people of faith in the world–Christians, Moslems, and Jews–are not fanatics. Unfortunately the helm of two countries–the United States and Iran–are in the hands of such fanatics. It is an uncomfortable truth but it is still true. When a President consults his Father in heaven about the decision to invade Iraq, pray tell how that mindset differs from an Osama Bin Laden who is convinced that his God told him to strike the evil in America. Religious nuttery is nuts regardless of the particulars of the theology.
Left unsaid by George Bush is this terrible fact–his religious crusade to spread the faith of freedom in a land split between Sunni and Shia factions remains intact. God save us because our man of faith is still intent on going after the other religious kook in Iran.
How come, bush`s father in heaven, didn`t tell him there were no wmd`s in Iraq.
WELL SAID!
I have been thinking these exact thoughts for years but never could articulate them quite the way you just did. The Islamic people are no more all “terrorsit killers” than we Americans are all “Accountants” or “Film Makers.” It really is ridiculous. And Freedom? It is my impression that this is the one thing that they envy about us – not hate about us. And it’s the thing our own religious extremists would love to be rid us of. Dubya is no more sane than Osama. They both exploit religion to bolster their own sense of self righteousness. They are both Authoritarians. I swear, Osama’s rhetoric probably works less on his own people than Dubya’s does on us.
See I’m lousy at articulating this stuff. You did a much better job. Thanks Larry.
When a President consults his Father in heaven about the decision to invade Iraq,…
This was likely nothing more than theater for the fundies. His true religion is money and power.
They’re also only a hearbeat away from human sacrifice. A religion that promises rewards for the self-sacrifice of human life in pursuit of religious ends and a leader who uses the blood and sacrifice of his troops to attempt to sanctify his mission don’t present much in the way of practical difference. Any attempt at moral distinction would be no more enlightening than arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
I do agree with much of what you are writing, but there are two things that I disagree with and that is your view of the non-existence of terrorist and that freedom has nothing to do with Osama bin Laden’s and Al-Qaeda’s fight against societies not in accordance with his/their view(s) of how a society should be organized.
As you know yourself, Terrorism is not a political goal in itself but a means/strategy forward chosen by a group of people in order to obtain their political goals. The political strategy is to scare/terrorize society and the system/political elite into compliance. A precondition is of course that the use of terror is a vital element in achieving a political aim and not used occasionally (one tactics of many used randomly), that is it has to be used systematically and frequently as a strategy.
Freedom VS coerce
For Osama it is about faith and obedience. It has zippo to do with “freedom”.
Obedience is the keyword, obedience to their views through coercion.
In my opinion, the issue of freedom is actually quite important when understanding terrorist groups in general. Their strategy is based upon terror and coercion which is fundamentally against each and ever persons will and ability to chose (freedom). This is what Ayman al-Zawahiri realized when he left the Muslim Brotherhood and started Egyptian Islamic Jihad. The populace in Egypt couldn’t be “persuaded” to accept his views of how an Islamic Egyptian state was to come about, they had to be coerced into it. It is the same with all terrorist groups they are never a majority and realizes that they will never achieve their goals through the free will of the people and thus they have to find a more “efficient” political way forward and so freedom is very relevant, in my opinion, when people are discussing Terrorism.
Terrorist/Terrorism
There is no such thing as a terrorist.
Well a person or persons engaged in terrorism, systematic and frequent involvement in terrorist acts, in order to promote his/her/their political agenda is/are in reality a terrorist.
but our efforts to force our version of “freedom” on the rest of the world, that they hate…
“Freedom” is not a relative word either you have it or you haven’t, you cannot force anyone to accept “freedom”. And who are the people who are trying to force the other people?
Bin Laden’s orignial agenda really doesn’t have much to do with religion. He was on record as wanting us to stop supporting the Ibn Saud regime, to stop supporting Israel, and to get out of the middle east. He was big on opposing western cultural chauvanism as a danger to Islamic culture.
Bush’s agenda also has noting to do with religion, or for that matter, democraccy. It has to do with control of oil. The rest is just trash talk to justify it and keep his base of support because some are willing to sacrifice their lives for god and country but no one iwants to die for oil company profits.
Larry, your overall point here is unexceptionable (although I might add that it’s also unexceptional), but I think you need to think a little before you throw around phrases like “Islamic crazies hunkered over their prayer mats and praying to Allah.”
I’m not a big fan of religion of any kind, but this is a really pretty offensive statement (even to an unbeliever). Associating one of the basic devotional rites of a major world religion — i.e., kneeling and bowing while praying (in your words, “hunker[ing] down and praying to Allah”) — with “Islamic crazies” seems rather, umm, uninformed.
Let me break this down country simple: (1) there are lots of people in the world who follow the Muslim faith; (2) a sizble percentage of those lots of people adhere to the principle of daily prayer, which involves kneeling and bowing); (3) I would hazard that quite a few of them use prayer rugs; and (4) not all of the people comprehended in (3) above are “crazies.”
Now it may well be that you really do think that every Muslim who observes the devotional rite of daily prayer (facing Mecca, kneeling, bowing, praying) are “Islamic crazies,” in which case you should simply acknowledge that you are a bigot forthrightly. (If so, perhaps you’d share your views on other world religions, which would look something like: “Catholic crazies playing with beads, kneeling, lighting candles, and praying to God” or “Orthodox Christian crazies lighting incense and praying to God” or “Jewish crazies doing whatever it is that Jews do at Temple.”)
Alternatively, you may just be a sloppy writer (with or without unconscious prejudice toward Muslims).
Either way, you’ve sufficiently blown any credibility you might have had. I question the site owners’ judgment in letting this in.