Palestinian persuasion

For years the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple have been taught by the rest of the world that vio­lence is an accept­able form of polit­i­cal dis­course. Every griev­ance they have with Israel results in attacks toward the Jew­ish peo­ple and world con­dem­na­tion of Israel for retaliation.

Why is it any sur­prise that what has been so suc­cess­ful for them in for­eign pol­icy will now be applied in domes­tic pol­icy? Until world lead­ers hold Pales­tin­ian ter­ror­ist lead­ers account­able for their actions, they will con­tinue to use blood­shed as polit­i­cal currency.

Categories: Islam, News
  1. June 18th, 2007 at 12:08 | #1

    The prob­lem, of course, is not that they are Pales­tini­ans, but that they are vic­tims of an evil, vio­lent ideology.

  2. Skep­tic
    June 18th, 2007 at 22:14 | #2

    Yeah, reli­gious, fun­da­men­tal­ist fanaticism.

  3. June 18th, 2007 at 22:25 | #3

    Of course, like many left­ies, you can’t tell the dif­fer­ence bewtween reli­gions — they’re all scary fun­da­men­tal­ists, aren’t they? Don’t for­get to include the fundy sec­u­lar­ists while you are at it.

  4. June 19th, 2007 at 00:40 | #4

    BTW, here’s a nice quote from Rod Dreher on the les­son of Gaza

    I think it’s abun­dantly clear that the Arabs of the Mid­dle East can’t gov­ern them­selves. Full stop. You wan’t proof? Pick up the news­pa­per. Read a his­tory book. It’s not genetic (so please spare me your “racist!” accu­sa­tions), but cul­tural. Every­body should get a copy of David Pryce-Jones’s “The Closed Cir­cle: An Inter­pre­ta­tion of the Arabs,” and read all about the dead-end of shame-honor cul­ture, which ren­ders any com­pro­mise with an oppo­nent — a neces­sity in democ­racy — into an occa­sion of dis­honor and an admis­sion of weak­ness.
    I see no hope of sav­ing Iraq from itself. Today Gaza, tomor­row Iraq. We should get out, and take as many Chris­tians and other reli­gious minori­ties, as well as Mus­lim Iraqis who helped us (and who will be mur­dered for that after we leave), with us as we can.

  5. Skep­tic
    June 19th, 2007 at 09:26 | #5

    Of course, like many left­ies, you can’t tell the dif­fer­ence between reli­gions — they’re all scary fun­da­men­tal­ists, aren’t they? Don’t for­get to include the fundie sec­u­lar­ists while you are at it.
    Vin­tage seeker. What is with you, any­way? When­ever any­one crit­i­cizes you, you squeal “ad hominem” attack, but you rou­tinely use the same tac­tics over and over again. In the above, you accuse me of all sorts of things. The “leftie” charge is just plain stu­pid. It’s noth­ing but intel­lec­tual lazi­ness employed to avoid actu­ally engag­ing with what I said. Are you actu­ally inter­est­ing in lis­ten­ing? I said that the “evil ide­ol­ogy” here is reli­gious, fun­da­men­tal­ist fanati­cism, not Islam or Chris­tian­ity. Fun­da­men­tal­ist fanati­cism is the true enemy of free­dom and the West. It’s espe­cially vir­u­lent in the Mid­dle East and Mus­lims, but it also has its strains (to a greater or lesser degree) in the West. As recently as the 1990’s Croat and Ser­bian Chris­tians were com­mit­ting geno­cide on Mus­lims. And, on a smaller scale, the on-going cru­sade fun­da­men­tal­ist Chris­tian­ity is wag­ing against gays is an ugly deba­cle.
    My main prob­lem is with reli­gious fun­da­men­tal­ists and fanat­ics, what­ever rock they crawl out from under.

  6. Skep­tic
    June 19th, 2007 at 09:34 | #6

    btw: I would include non-religious fun­da­men­tal­ists and fanat­ics in the above (e.g., the “Anar­chist” move­ment and E.L.F.).

  7. June 22nd, 2009 at 16:00 | #7

    Oxy­codone con­trolled releasse.

    Online pre­scrip­tion oxy­codone. Oxy­codone extrac­tion gel. Oxycodone.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
You must be logged in to post a comment.