911 in 2008 - How has this changed us?

[Cyrus]

Right dude, I refer you to these links:

My name is not 'dude'.

Muslims Celebrate on 9/11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDbpbiJE3mI"

You picked an extreme example and extrapolated it. What a spectacular lack of sophistication on your part in understanding world affairs.

A British-American Historian who specializes in the history of Islam and the interaction between Islam and the West: http://tonyinosaka.googlepages.com/muslimrage-atlantic.pdf"

Why are we jumping from terrorism on 9/11 to the history of islam interaction with the west? You play this game of replying to what I said with posts that have nothing to do with anything.

I'm the one challenging your points. You respond with personal attacks.

I think you're just bringing up moot points that have nothing to do with what I said. When you actually challenge my point, I'll reply.

I'm curious about what you see as a solution for the turmoil in Iraq. It doesn't have to be too specific. Just a general view.

This isn't about a solution in Iraq. Get with the program.

Whats next. Are you going to ask me questions about the fall of the soviet union? Your questions really are that off topic.

 

[BadDog]

Today 9/11/2008. I’m saddened at the thought of a Bush (republican) third term; I don’t feel I have ever feared terrorism.
Sarah Palin could be a Bush clone and to see the “republican country first” cult, back in worship, saddens me.

 

[vociferous]

And I never said they were, but to rightfully deny that they hate us is baseless.

Okay, then who is "they"? It certainly is not all Muslims in Southwest Asia and North Africa. I do not know if you have ever been to Kuwait or Kurdistan, but the United States is generally held in pretty high regard in those places.

Even in places where the US is much more distrusted or disliked (most of the Muslim world unfortunately), I doubt more than a small minority support the actions of Al Queda or see the murder of innocents as justified.

Islamic extremism is certainly something that I think is dangerous, but the majority of Muslims, though much more conservative than Westerners, are not extremists.

I am sure that some Muslims did celebrate the September 11th attacks, but I am fairly certain it was a small minority. If you saw a video of a handful of Britons celebrating on that day, would you think that their actions represent the opinion of the majority in that country?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

That appears to be what you think happened, but I don't know anyone who lives in fear and the Bill of Rights is still the Bill of Rights.

I listed the assaults that we have seen on the Constitution, and living in fear is to conceed to the loss of liberty and law in place of perceived security. But first one has to understand the value of that lost - why we fight wars, and why soldiers promise to give their life for the Constitution, if needed - otherwise we don't have a common frame of reference.

Given the many threads discussing the Bush admin attack on the Constitution, and given that no one has even been held accountable for attacking the wrong country, or for torture, or for illegal wire taps, etc, your answer is rather silly.

 

[LightbulbSun]

My name is not 'dude'.

Do you prefer the name 'naive'?

You picked an extreme example and extrapolated it. What a spectacular lack of sophistication on your part in understanding world affairs.

Again, if you actually read my posts I already said I don't think Muslims are a carbon copy caricature. You, on the other hand, went to the other extreme said "nuh uh, all Muslims love us. Anyone who says they don't is a moron."

Why are we jumping from terrorism on 9/11 to the history of islam interaction with the west? You play this game of replying to what I said with posts that have nothing to do with anything.

I think you're just bringing up moot points that have nothing to do with what I said. When you actually challenge my point, I'll reply.

*Sigh* You really can't follow a conversation. You must of scored poorly on your reading comprehension tests.Lets follow the chain of this conversation so you can see why it's on topic:

What was the answer pushed by the repubicans? Because they hate our freedom. They hate our way of life. Um, no. Sorry. If you really think this, you ought to go watch some real news sources and listen to real people who know what's going on in the middle east.

They actually do hate our way of life. We are the infidels to them. Their goal is to rule the world with their retarded ideology. Yes, there are other factors involved, but that's the underlying foundation of their hate towards western civilization.

No Lightbulb sun, no. They don't go around bombing most of the western world. How many terrorist attacks do you see in South America from middle eastern terrorist? Yes, you are infidels to them because by its very defnition it means 'non-believers'. So let's not blindly use that word without a proper context.

For clarification I never made a claim about bombings in South America, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from?

If you want to say 'ideological retards', and 'they hate our freedoms' then you really know almost nothing about the problem at hand. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but its the truth. By all means, go listen to some experts.

Right, nothing to do with anything. You made the claim that the Middle East doesn't hate western civilization. I brought up 9/11 to refute your nonsensical point.

Get lost with this racist garbage. When 9/11 happened countries like Iran held a candlelight vigil for the lost americans. You really need to read up more before speaking.

Waiting for a citation on this one.

If you're going to make all these bold uninformed claims, please back this garbage up with sources.

So after you were screaming about listing experts and sources, the second one I provided you with is an expert on matters concerning the conflict between the Middle East and Western Civilization since you seem to think it doesn't exist and was made up by Fox News.
So what do you say after I provide some sources?

Why are we jumping from terrorism on 9/11 to the history of islam interaction with the west? You play this game of replying to what I said with posts that have nothing to do with anything.

I think you're just bringing up moot points that have nothing to do with what I said. When you actually challenge my point, I'll reply.

Right dude. Follow the conversation maybe?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

A reminder to keep the discussion friendly please

 

[LightbulbSun]

Okay, then who is "they"?

Muslims.

It certainly is not all Muslims in Southwest Asia and North Africa. I do not know if you have ever been to Kuwait or Kurdistan, but the United States is generally held in pretty high regard in those places.

I don't travel internationally so I wouldn't have first hand experience of this.

Even in places where the US is much more distrusted or disliked (most of the Muslim world unfortunately), I doubt more than a small minority support the actions of Al Queda or see the murder of innocents as justified.

I'm not doubting that there are Muslims who are against the actions of Al Queda. I'm challenging Cyrus' extreme point that any Muslim hatred towards the West doesn't exist.

 

[vociferous]

Given the many threads discussing the Bush admin attack on the Constitution, and given that no one has even been held accountable for attacking the wrong country, or for torture, or for illegal wire taps, etc, your answer is rather silly.

Most of those issues are not cut and dry.

For instance, the Constitution does protect American citizens against torture, but does not apply to legal or illegal combatants captured on the battle field. Rather, the Geneva and Hague protocols apply.

The Supreme Court has held that the government needs a warrant to be issued only on probable cause to listen in on telephone conversations of American citizens or foreigners residing in the United States, but I think you are referring to the issues with FISA. Foreign communication has no special protection under the Constitution and intelligence agencies are allowed to spy on whomever they want outside the United States, including foreign telephone calls, emails, et cetera that may pass in and out of the United States and may have a US citizen on one end.

That is why congress passed FISA, because it still allows for the NSA to listen in on a phone call between Pakistan and New York without forcing the NSA to become a law enforcement agency and show probable cause to a judge. However, it also requires that intelligence agencies show some kind of reasonable suspicion that the phone conversation has valuable intelligence information or something of the sort by applying retroactively within a certain period of time to a secret FISA court. The big issue with the Bush administration was that it was apparently eavesdropping on calls without a FISA warrant, which is probably not unconstitutional, but probably is illegal (because it violates FISA, which was passed into law during the Regan administration).

 

[baywax]

I know the events on 9/11 have made big changes for myself. First of all I had an advertising agent working near there that morning and he has his family near there as well. His name was Jesus, which was pronounced Hey Zeus, and I'll never forget the shaken emptiness in his voice on the phone when all this was taking place. And it shook me up because I had Jesus there, in harms way, taking care of some insignificant detail no one would have noticed otherwise. So, this became a catalyst for an invention that provides a more efficient mode of placing and replacing advertisements, without involving an agent.

 

[quadraphonics]

I don't travel internationally so I wouldn't have first hand experience of this.

As such, your pronouncements about the sentiments of far-flung populations carry very little authority.

 

[LightbulbSun]

As such, your pronouncements about the sentiments of far-flung populations carry very little authority.

Right, I've never claimed to be an expert on the subject matter, which is why I defer to the experts on the subject matter.

 

[quadraphonics]

Right, I've never claimed to be an expert on the subject matter, which is why I defer to the experts on the subject matter.

I count only a single expert invoked by you, Bernard Lewis, and he had this to say (from the link that you provided):

"But Islam, like other religions, has also known periods when it inspired in some of its followers a mood of hatred and violence. It is our misfortune that part, though by no means all or even most, of the Muslim world is now going through such a period, and that much, though again not all, of that hatred is directed against us. We should not exaggerate the dimensions of the problem. The Muslim world is far from unanimous in its rejection of the West, nor have the Muslim regions of the Third World been the most passionate and the most extreme in their hostility. There are still significant numbers, in some quarters perhaps a majority, of Muslims with whom we share certain basic cultural and moral, social and political, beliefs and aspirations; there is still an imposing Western presence—cultural, economic, diplomatic—in Muslim lands, some of which are Western allies."

That you manage to reduce this viewpoint to "Muslims hate us" leaves little room for faith in your ability to draw useful inferences from expert sources. And that you do not even attempt to synthesize multiple viewpoints from different experts reduces the credibility of your assertions to near-zero.

 

[LightbulbSun]

I count only a single expert invoked by you, Bernard Lewis, and he had this to say (from the link that you provided):

"But Islam, like other religions, has also known periods when it inspired in some of its followers a mood of hatred and violence. It is our misfortune that part, though by no means all or even most, of the Muslim world is now going through such a period, and that much, though again not all, of that hatred is directed against us. We should not exaggerate the dimensions of the problem. The Muslim world is far from unanimous in its rejection of the West, nor have the Muslim regions of the Third World been the most passionate and the most extreme in their hostility. There are still significant numbers, in some quarters perhaps a majority, of Muslims with whom we share certain basic cultural and moral, social and political, beliefs and aspirations; there is still an imposing Western presence—cultural, economic, diplomatic—in Muslim lands, some of which are Western allies."

That you manage to reduce this viewpoint to "Muslims hate us" leaves little room for faith in your ability to draw useful inferences from expert sources. And that you do not even attempt to synthesize multiple viewpoints from different experts reduces the credibility of your assertions to near-zero.

That's your opinion which means very little to me. The fact that in the subheader of Bernard Lewis' article it says "Why So Many Muslims Deeply Resent The West, And Why Their Bitterness Will Not Easily Be Mollified" discredits Cyrus' bizzaro notion that every Muslim loves us and they're just waiting to hold hands with us in a peace circle. He didn't just say "a few" but "many." For god sake, they could nuke us tomorrow and the two of you in your safe headquarters would drink the kool aid and say "anyone who thinks they want to harm us is an idiot!" Like I said, right, whatever you say.

 

[quadraphonics]

The fact that in the subheader of Bernard Lewis' article it says "Why So Many Muslims Deeply Resent The West, And Why Their Bitterness Will Not Easily Be Mollified" discredits Cyrus' bizzaro notion that every Muslim loves us and they're just waiting to hold hands with us in a peace circle. He didn't just say "a few" but "many." For god sake, they could nuke us tomorrow and the two of you in your safe headquarters would drink the kool aid and say "anyone who thinks they want to harm us is an idiot!" Like I said, right, whatever you say.

Please show where Cyrus expressed the idea that "every Muslim loves us," or any of the other fabrications in your post. You seem to be going in search of a nemesis, and in the process creating strawmen by putting words in other people's mouths. Which is not going to impress anyone, nor end up validating your ideas in the way you seem to desire.

And, again, the Lewis article you linked explicitly states that most Muslims don't "hate" anybody, and that even among those who do, most do not direct that hate at the West.

There is a big difference between Al Qaeda ideologues hating the West (they hate pretty much everyone, after all) and "Muslims hating us." There are plenty of Westerners that hate Islam; are you prepared to subscribe to the conclusion "we hate them?"

 

[LightbulbSun]

Please show where Cyrus expressed the idea that "every Muslim loves us," or any of the other fabrications in your post.

What was the answer pushed by the repubicans? Because they hate our freedom. They hate our way of life. Um, no. Sorry. If you really think this, you ought to go watch some real news sources and listen to real people who know what's going on in the middle east.

If you want to say 'ideological retards', and 'they hate our freedoms' then you really know almost nothing about the problem at hand. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but its the truth. By all means, go listen to some experts.

You seem to be going in search of a nemesis, and in the process creating strawmen by putting words in other people's mouths.

Oh please, I am challenging his claim, and then you go and say I'm searching for a nemesis? Like I said, whatever you say.

And, again, the Lewis article you linked explicitly states that most Muslims don't "hate" anybody, and that even among those who do, most do not direct that hate at the West.

Then why in the subheader does it say "Many Muslims Deeply Resent The West"? Was he just purposely being misleading?

 

[quadraphonics]

Oh please, I am challenging his claim,

No, you are misrepresenting his (and others') positions, and so attacking strawmen. You seem to want to argue against the silly claim that "all Muslims love America," and seem determined not be be deterred by the fact that nobody holds such a belief.

Then why in the subheader does it say "Many Muslims Deeply Resent The West"? Was he just purposely being misleading?

"Many" is a different thing than "most," or even "an appreciable fraction." It only takes a handful of fanatics to perpetrate horrible crimes, after all. That there are enough haters to be worth worrying about, and writing an article on, does not mean that an entire religion is out to get us. Moreover, article subheads are usually reductive and salacious, as their purpose is to draw readership, not provide a nuanced understanding of the claims made inside. It's likely that the subhead was added by an editorial staffer, and not Lewis himself.

 

[LightbulbSun]

Well I am giving up this debate. I apologize to Cyrus and to Quadraphonics for the discussion getting so personal and heated.

 

[vociferous]

Just on an interesting sidenote, a lot of Muslims in the Middle East do not actually believe that Al Queada was responsible for 9/11. Conspiracy theories abound, and antisemetic conspiracy theories are some of the most popular. A lot of Muslims believe that MOSSAD was responsible and a lot of Muslims will insist that no Jews showed up to work at the World Trade Center on September 11th.

Conspiracy theories seem to be quite popular in the Muslim world.

 

[Cyrus]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=128988&highlight=charlie+rose

Watch this video LightbulbSun. Search Charlie Rose for many other videos like this by experts if you want to gain some background from sources like Generals, Sec. of State, world leaders, etc.

I don't watch FOX, msnbc, or other cable news outlets because the people on there are mainly no-bodies from newspapers or pundits. I prefer to get my news from credible sources.

 

[LightbulbSun]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=128988&highlight=charlie+rose

Watch this video LightbulbSun. Search Charlie Rose for many other videos like this by experts if you want to gain some background from sources like Generals, Sec. of State, world leaders, etc.

I don't watch FOX, msnbc, or other cable news outlets because the people on there are mainly no-bodies from newspapers or pundits. I prefer to get my news from credible sources.

Thanks Cyrus. I'll check those out.

 

[edward]

In a lot of ways that we just seem to accept. One is waiting forever at the airport. We used to surf the net, now the net surfs us

 

[Cyrus]

Thanks Cyrus. I'll check those out.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4926293608118312619&ei=_NbaSMH1DYaYrQLWhZmZCw&q=Thomas+Schelling

Another good MUST watch from a while back that I stumbeled upon again. Everyone should take note's while watching this one. It's a really really good discussion.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

President Bush is about to go on TV and ask Americans to assume the liability for as much as $1,000,000,000,000 of bad paper. We are told that this is a national and global emergency; that it could lead to a global depression. We are asked to assume this debt witthout proper oversight. We are told that there isn't enough time for proper consideration -that we must act quickly! We are told that the sky is falling.

But we are told this by the boys who cried wolf and attacked the wrong country. How are we to believe them now?

 

[vociferous]

President Bush is about to go on TV and ask Americans to assume the liability for as much as $1,000,000,000,000 of bad paper. We are told that this is a national and global emergency; that it could lead to a global depression. We are asked to assume this debt witthout proper oversight. We are told that there isn't enough time for proper consideration -that we must act quickly! We are told that the sky is falling.

But we are told this by the boys who cried wolf and attacked the wrong country. How are we to believe them now?

A lot of economists seem to agree with him. It is always good to be skeptical, especially of politicians' claims.

 

[mheslep]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4926293608118312619&ei=_NbaSMH1DYaYrQLWhZmZCw&q=Thomas+Schelling

Another good MUST watch from a while back that I stumbeled upon again. Everyone should take note's while watching this one. It's a really really good discussion.

(Post for Iraq thread?) I recommend Rick's very good book, though its horizon is limited by a pre-surge publication.

 

[wildman]

And I never said they were, but to rightfully deny that they hate us is baseless.

It is impossible to judge motives of people none of us have met.

However, 9/11 can be explained much more simply and reasonably by assuming that Al Qaeda only attacked us because we are the protectors of Saudi Arabia. The opinion of many experts is that Bin Laden desires to overthrow the Saudi King (see link below). Occam's razor would seem to favor that explanation over some idea that Al Qaeda would spend millions of dollars to attack us because they don't like us for some undefined reason.

See:

http://www.iasps.org/strategic/pmwbinladen.htm

 

[wildman]

Just on an interesting sidenote, a lot of Muslims in the Middle East do not actually believe that Al Queada was responsible for 9/11. Conspiracy theories abound, and antisemetic conspiracy theories are some of the most popular. A lot of Muslims believe that MOSSAD was responsible and a lot of Muslims will insist that no Jews showed up to work at the World Trade Center on September 11th.

Conspiracy theories seem to be quite popular in the Muslim world.

They are popular in the US too, even with some people that were fairly highly placed in former Administrations. See: http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070910_911.htm
That fellow was a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (maybe explains the mess the economy is in now).

 

[Cyrus]

Thanks Cyrus. I'll check those out.

Another interesting video:

Henry Kissinger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyPcBLAxtZo&feature=related

Edit: Had wrong video. This one is new.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

So NOW the Republicans don't believe Bush when he says this is a national crisis.

Talk about irony! The boy who cried wolf, indeed.

They had no problem rushing into a needless war. They believed Bush when he insisted that everything is rosey. But now, when we have a real crisis, asking for money is asking too much. So much for patriotism.

 

[turbo]

A lot of economists seem to agree with him. It is always good to be skeptical, especially of politicians' claims.

A lot of economists cut their teeth on Wall Street and have little appreciation nor understanding of the problems that ordinary citizens face, except in the abstract. When Greenspan and now Bernanke repeatedly cut the prime rate to free up money for Wall Street, did they give a damn about all of us who have saved all our lives only to watch the interest on our savings and money-market accounts turn to dirt? No. They are economists, and they take care of investment banks and speculators with no regard for people who did the right thing and saved for their retirements. They tinker with the market constantly and don't allow it to self-correct so that we can moderate crashes and booms.

 

[baywax]

So NOW the Republicans don't believe Bush when he says this is a national crisis.

Talk about irony! The boy who cried wolf, indeed.

They had no problem rushing into a needless war. They believed Bush when he insisted that everything is rosey. But now, when we have a real crisis, asking for money is asking too much. So much for patriotism.

Never cry wolf.

(unless it's a real wolf, of course!)

 

[rootX]

"Us" could mean in the US, the citizens of another country, or the global community.
...

There was something that caused 911. Maybe, US's (or just humans) own narrow (selfish) interests are leading it to the disaster.

I don't think we can blame US, Bush, terrorists, or anyone else but ourselves.