Study finds Islam political factions fan flames of anti-Americanism

Jul 12, 2012 By Kimber Williams

What feeds anti-American sentiment in the Islamic world? It’s a question that has grown in volume since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, generating policy debate and cultural assumptions, but few hard answers.

However, a new study by Emory political science researcher Drew Linzer and Lisa Blaydes, of Stanford University, offers fresh insight, suggesting that American animosity in the Islamic world may have more to do with the intensity of conflicting factions within local Islamic politics than individual attitudes toward American culture, policies and diplomacy.

Studying data collected from 13,000 Muslims in 21 Islamic countries through the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, the researchers found evidence to suggest the amount of heated rhetoric between political elites in secular and religious groups within Muslim countries plays a central role in cultivating anti-American attitudes.

The report also found anti-Americanism to be strongest in the least religiously observant Muslim countries.

The study, published in the American Political Science Review, notes that while negative perceptions of the United States are widespread in the Islamic world, they are by no means universal.

"People talk about Muslim anti-Americanism as if it’s this monolithic thing — that’s false," says Linzer, an assistant professor in political science who specializes in comparative public opinions, electoral systems and statistical methods. 

"There is a huge amount of variation in Muslim countries," he adds. "In Turkey, for example, it’s very high. In Senegal, it’s very low. Why the variations?"

The roots of animosity

For the past decade, pressure has been growing to understand why some Muslim countries kindle such impassioned anti-American attitudes. But to date, evidence has been largely anecdotal, Linzer notes.

"Policy-wise, this has been a major source of debate," he says. "In our view, there has been a clearly divided set of conventional-wisdom arguments about what is the source of this animosity that we see in survey research and the news."

"Some people want to know directly why there is this animosity; others just want to know what to do about it," he adds.

According to the Pew Center data, those anti-American opinions actually remain relatively stable across Islamic countries. "It’s not that it’s getting worse, it’s just that people are paying more careful attention to it," Linzer observes.

The researchers decided to take a closer, empirical look at the issue because they sensed something missing in the dialogue.

First, they recognized political opinions are formed, in part, by an electorate listening to the messages of local political leaders. "That helps shape views —and that’s what led us to this theory," he says. "It’s not a feature unique to the Muslim world; it’s how people form their opinions."

Historically, domestic political divisions within Muslim politics have fallen between secular elite and fundamental Islamic elite factions. And both groups have long laid claims to anti-American grievances, Linzer notes.

Examining the data, an interesting pattern emerged: As domestic political competition intensifies between secular and religious factions, anti-American sentiment arises, as respective parties attempt to exploit those attitudes for political gain.

"Competition between these groups heats up and they start using those claims to gain support," Linzer says.

Surprisingly, that competition appears most intense not in the most deeply observant Islamic countries, but where divisions between secular and religious factions are sharpest. There, competition between political forces — not religious fundamentalism — appears to spark the greatest anti-American sentiment, the researchers found.

Changing hearts and minds

While demonstrating that anti-Americanism in the Islamic world isn’t tied exclusively to U.S. foreign policy or cultural differences, the study underscores a practical reality:

 In order to change hearts and minds overseas, American diplomacy and public relations strategies must compete with local political environments with an established tradition of promoting negative views.

"In many countries, political factions will likely continue to use animosity toward America as an instrument of mobilization — citing grievances often fed by U.S. actions and policy.  As long as they do, there are segments of Muslim audiences who will be receptive to the message," Linzer acknowledges.

And while media outlets, such as Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, also play a significant role in spreading that message, competing national politicians remain the most potent component of the public opinion formula, the researchers assert.

"Any American-led effort to change the story in the most anti-American countries will have to find a way to counter the effects on Muslim minds of local politicians spouting anti-U.S. rhetoric in order to bolster their own positions and win supporters," the study asserts.

"What has been achieved? I would be happy if there was a better understanding of this phenomenon," Linzer says. "I think the current debate has stalled — particularly because it isn’t the whole story."

Explore further: Why do some Muslims hate America? Researchers offer an intriguing new answer

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Facing the future -- science in the Muslim world

Apr 01, 2010

Scientists in Islamic countries are often thought by those in the West to be languishing behind the rest of the world. Jim Al-Khalili tells Physics World readers what has been impeding scientific progress in the Islamic world ...

Recommended for you

New study offers insight into how to best manage workaholics

4 hours ago

(Phys.org) —Workaholics tend to live in extremes, with great job satisfaction and creativity on the one hand and high levels of frustration and exhaustion on the other hand. Now, a new Florida State University study offers ...

The tea party and the politics of paranoia

5 hours ago

Members of tea party claim the movement springs from and promotes basic American conservative principles such as limited government and fiscal responsibility.

The new retirement: No retirement?

5 hours ago

For growing numbers of Americans, the new retirement may really mean no retirement. That's the conclusion of an article in the current issue of the ISR Sampler, the annual magazine of the University of Michigan Institute ...

User comments : 107

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Claudius
2.8 / 5 (11) Jul 12, 2012
"For the past decade, pressure has been growing to understand why some Muslim countries kindle such impassioned anti-American attitudes"

I wonder how much money has been spent on this research. They can send all that money to me, I have the answer. Could it be that invasion, occupation, 90% civilian casualties, predator drones, etc. have created some negative impressions of Americans by the local populations? It is a real no-brainer, yet this research doesn't even mention these obvious factors.

Similarly, the French were a little annoyed when Germany invaded and occupied their country. Did the Germans need to do an analysis of why the French had an anti-German attitude? Sheesh. It is to laugh, as Bugs Bunny used to say.
COCO
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 13, 2012
Yes Claudius it is difficult for me and my unwashed brethern to imagine why the Arab world does not see the forces of liberation as the benign hand of culture
Modernmystic
3.9 / 5 (10) Jul 13, 2012
I agree that "Muslim attitudes" are more inflamed after the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. I also know that they were apparently quite inflamed before either of these events as well, otherwise they wouldn't have rammed jets into buildings.

I think it would be more helpful for Muslims to ask themselves why they are so angry no matter the circumstance. It would also be more helpful if we heard less about how angry they are and more from their spiritual leaders about peace, tolerance, and acceptance....

Just my two cents.
ryggesogn2
2.8 / 5 (13) Jul 13, 2012
Did the study find the current US president is anti-American?

competing national politicians remain the most potent component of the public opinion formula, the researchers assert.


How about the how the local press is controlled in these countries?
Most Islamic countries do not have a free press. Even in countries that do have a free press, it is still quite biased against the USA, even in the USA.
I think it would be more helpful for Muslims to ask themselves why they are so angry

They are angry because they keep getting their butts kicked by Jews and Christians.
Modernmystic
3.3 / 5 (7) Jul 13, 2012
They are angry because they keep getting their butts kicked by Jews and Christians.


As easy as that answer sounds, I somehow think the issue is deeper than that. As evidence it wasn't too long ago that they in fact were soundly trouncing Christians and Jews...and they were still angry...

ryggesogn2
3.6 / 5 (14) Jul 13, 2012
soundly trouncing Christians and Jews

Not economically.
Most of the Islamic world is quite poor.
Their 'leaders', like many in the West, try to blame it on the Jews when in reality it is their tyrannical socialist policies that keep them poor.
Modernmystic
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 13, 2012
Not economically. Most of the Islamic world is quite poor. Their 'leaders', like many in the West, try to blame it on the Jews when in reality it is their tyrannical socialist policies that keep them poor.


I'm talking more in the 750-1250 A.D. era.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (16) Jul 13, 2012
Could it be that invasion, occupation, 90% civilian casualties, predator drones, etc. have created some negative impressions of Americans by the local populations? It is a real no-brainer, yet this research doesn't even mention these obvious factors.
Due to the extreme reproduction rates of those religionist cultures, their constituents are guaranteed to be pissed off at someone because their children are starving. Fortunately their religions tell them that their suffering is the fault of the infidel, and this presents an effective Method of mitigating the problem.

Unfortunately, unless the cultures which CAUSE this problem can be destroyed, it will recur.

Religion remains the most effective Method of dividing the people up and setting them against each other with vicious, murderous, and wholly predictable and Controllable, intent. It may be too Useful a Tool to discard for the near future.
ryggesogn2
3.2 / 5 (11) Jul 13, 2012
Not economically. Most of the Islamic world is quite poor. Their 'leaders', like many in the West, try to blame it on the Jews when in reality it is their tyrannical socialist policies that keep them poor.


I'm talking more in the 750-1250 A.D. era.

After that the West proceeded to dominate, which would build even more resentment.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (14) Jul 13, 2012
I think it would be more helpful for Muslims to ask themselves why they are so angry no matter the circumstance. It would also be more helpful if we heard less about how angry they are and more from their spiritual leaders about peace, tolerance, and blah...Just my two cents.
It is maybe worth a little less than that?

Your implication is that there is something about that religion which makes it a little more dangerous than your currently dormant (here and there) one.

But if you open your books and compare them side by side you will see that they contain the same essentials for swelling populations and convincing them to destroy their counterparts.

As islam is a more recent Iteration, it is perhaps a little more Purpose-built; a little more Refined. You know, no trinity, no godman, no icon worship. That sort of superfluous muck. Its all 'us vs them'. It only includes nonsense like 'the prophet flew to jerusalem' to justify the Temple on the Mount.

Strategic superstition.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (10) Jul 13, 2012
But if you open your books and compare them side by side you will see that they contain the same essentials for swelling populations and convincing them to destroy their counterparts.


Only if that is what you want it to say.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (13) Jul 13, 2012
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (15) Jul 13, 2012
But if you open your books and compare them side by side you will see that they contain the same essentials for swelling populations and convincing them to destroy their counterparts.

Only if that is what you want it to say.
Really? And what would you want this to say?

"Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)"
http://www.evilbi...rder.htm

-Or this?

"35 Then Jesus asked them, When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?

Nothing, they answered.

36 He said to them, But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you dont have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." luke22

-A little more subtle but, in conjunction with his claim to be bringing not peace but a sword, pretty unequivocal.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (13) Jul 13, 2012
Looks like auto wants to talk only of murder and death.
His anti-religion cousins, the socialists, are expert at murder.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
"While in general it is a good principle to look at a Bible passage on its own before comparing it to the rest of the Bible, in this case the narrative continues later that night: when on of the disciples used a sword, Jesus rebuked him for doing so.

A rebuke is recorded in three of the four gospels: Matthew 26:52 ('"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.'), Luke 22:51 ('But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.'), and John 18:11 ('Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"'). Mark does not record a rebuke, but does note that while one disciple used a sword, Jesus allowed himself to be arrested peacefully (implying that he disagreed with the use of force)."

TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (13) Jul 13, 2012
"While in general it is a good principle to look at a Bible passage on its own before comparing it to the rest of the Bible...Mark does not record a rebuke, but does note that while one disciple used a sword, Jesus allowed himself to be arrested peacefully (implying that he disagreed with the use of force)."
Yesyesyes but as we are WELL aware, religionists will use verse, phrase, and even single word as ample justification for evil.

You xians Have a whole TESTAMENT full of explicit instructions on just what to so with transgressors. Thats WHY it was left attached. Jesus could remain the pristine little lovegod and leave the dirty stuff to joshua and gideon. Pretty clever eh?

As I say islam is only a little more efficient at getting the Job done.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
Looks like auto wants to talk only of murder and death.
His anti-religion cousins, the socialists, are expert at murder.
We are related only in the same sense that you are related to mickey mouse.
'"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.'
"24 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it." luke9
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
Here is a question you must ask yourself often:

"Does Capitalism Need to Be More Marxist to Survive?"
http://www.cnbc.c...48146038
Looks like auto wants to talk only of murder and death. His anti-religion cousins, the socialists, are expert at murder.
"The representation of private interests ... abolishes all natural and SPIRITual distinctions by enthroning in their stead the immoral, irrational and SOULless abstraction of a particular material object and a particular CONSCIOUSNESS which is slavishly subordinated to this object." -Marx, On the Thefts of Wood, in Rheinische Zeitung (1842)

-Sorry, as marx was wont to evoke the spirit and the soul (and consciousness - all in one sentence!) in his sales pitch, we can conclude that he was only selling another brand of religion. MARX WAS A RELIGIONIST.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
Marx was only as antireligious as you are against all religions besides your own. This means that you are at least as related to marx as I am to socialists.
http://www.youtub...8TuYDIcI
Modernmystic
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 13, 2012
It is maybe worth a little less than that?


Might be.

Your implication is that there is something about that religion which makes it a little more dangerous than your currently dormant (here and there) one.


Not at all. I think both could be equally dangerous, both are as inherently dangerous because they're both viscerally tribal. It is my assertion however that in fact, yes, Islam in its current iteration is far more dangerous (not a little more) than Judiasim or Christianity.

But if you open your books


I'm only saying this because I want to clear up a misunderstanding...they're not my books...

Purpose-built; a little more Refined. You know, no trinity, no godman, no icon worship.


Indeed, Muhammad created it exclusively for its military/logistical/organizational benefits.

Its all 'us vs them'.


It is, and human beings certianly don't require religious myths to be tribalists...as evidenced here.
Modernmystic
3 / 5 (8) Jul 13, 2012
You xians Have a whole TESTAMENT full of explicit instructions on just what to so with transgressors. Thats WHY it was left attached. Jesus could remain the pristine little lovegod and leave the dirty stuff to joshua and gideon. Pretty clever eh?


Indeed this is one of the reasons I'm no longer a christian. Certainly christianity could be taken to extremely dark places if the current emphasis on the new testament shifted to the old...
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 13, 2012
Islam in its current iteration is far more dangerous (not a little more) than Judiasim or Christianity.
And what iteration might that be? This one?
http://www.jpost....d=277409

-Or this?
http://allafrica....708.html

-Or this prerhaps?
http://www.nytime...yas.html

-This??
http://www.abc.ne...5692.htm

YOU want to lump all moslems together and call them one THING. I would lump all religionists together and call them one THING as well. But it is a wholly different THING.

Religions uniformly promise wish-granting and life after death, in return for service against opponents. This makes them ALL uniformly dangerous, as these are the 2 things that people will do almost ANYTHING to get for themselves and their loved ones.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
It is, and human beings certianly don't require religious myths to be tribalists...as evidenced here.
Tribes dont generally promise wish-granting and immortality. The tribal dynamic is only one of the many Tools that religions exploit in their quest to conquer the world. By Design.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
You xians Have a whole TESTAMENT full of explicit instructions on just what to so with transgressors. Thats WHY it was left attached. Jesus could remain the pristine little lovegod and leave the dirty stuff to joshua and gideon. Pretty clever eh?


Indeed this is one of the reasons I'm no longer a christian. Certainly christianity could be taken to extremely dark places if the current emphasis on the new testament shifted to the old...
I dont know MM you still talk like a xian...
I think it would be more helpful for Muslims to ask themselves why they
ALL
are so angry no matter the circumstance. It would also be more helpful if we heard less about how angry they are and more from their spiritual leaders about peace, tolerance, and acceptance....
Smells like... Team Xian... I remain unconvinced of your apostasy.

Islam is the religion of peace dont you know that??
http://tribune.co...ce-reign
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
Indeed, Muhammad created it exclusively for its military/logistical/organizational benefits.
Yeah in exactly the same way constantine did.

"According to Lactantius, Constantine was visited by a dream the night before the battle, wherein he was advised "to mark the heavenly sign of God on the shields of his soldiers...by means of a slanted letter X with the top of its head bent round, he marked Christ on their shields."Eusebius describes another version, where, while marching at midday, "he saw with his own eyes in the heavens a trophy of the cross arising from the light of the sun, carrying the message, In Hoc Signo Vinces or "In this sign, you will conquer"

SAME THING
Modernmystic
4 / 5 (6) Jul 13, 2012
YOU want to lump all moslems together and call them one THING


Please don't put thoughts in my head Otto. I'm talking about Islam not more than Muslims. I think individual Muslims should do some introspective thinking, but then again so should Christians and any and all religionists.

The thing about Islam is that it was, like you said, very tailor made. It's more of a heat seeking missile rather than a cluster bomb. It was designed to wage war with.
Modernmystic
4 / 5 (4) Jul 13, 2012
Yeah in exactly the same way constantine did.


Indeed, I couldn't agree more.

Otto I find it very difficult to communicate with you my man. You insist I'm a liar when I'm just trying to have some honest dialogue. You seem quite intent on taking my statements out of context and then interpreting them into strawmen to knock over. You are almost incessantly adversarial. I just don't understand it.

I think I could learn a lot from you (and you could probably learn something from me too), but when you take the stance you do then you make it difficult. It doesn't need to be at all.

Maybe we could take this to PMs and clear the air? I dunno...
ryggesogn2
3.2 / 5 (9) Jul 13, 2012
It's not just the USA, it is the west:
"36 percent of young British Muslims think the penalty for apostasy i.e., leaving Islam should be death. Had you asked the same question of British Muslims in 1970, I doubt the enthusiasts would have cracked double figures."
http://www.ocregi...rld.html
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (12) Jul 14, 2012
Please don't put thoughts in my head Otto. I'm talking about Islam not more than Muslims. I think individual Muslims should do some introspective thinking, but then again so should Christians and any and all religionists.
I just comment on the thoughts you express. Islam is a billion individuals and a hundred sects, many of them killing each other after much introspection.
The thing about Islam is that it was, like you said, very tailor made... It was designed to wage war with.
And in this respect they are ALL IDENTICAL. No difference. They delineate 'us vs them'. They make unbelief a threat to their immortality and favored status. They legitimize theft, persecution, and murder in the defense of their god as MORAL IMPERATIVES. Because their god claims to own morality.

They can afford to be magnanimous and ecumenical and tolerant during those times when their kids all have enough to eat. But their cultures ALL make this condition temporary. And conflict thus Inevitable.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 14, 2012
I think I could learn a lot from you (and you could probably learn something from me too), but when you take the stance you do then you make it difficult. It doesn't need to be at all.

Maybe we could take this to PMs and clear the air? I dunno...
Dude you have lost your edge. Polemicism is dirty business. MM is no fun any more. Please describe your fall from grace for the studio audience.
Modernmystic
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 14, 2012
many of them killing each other after much introspection.


Then I submit they need more introspection.

They can afford to be magnanimous and ecumenical and tolerant during those times when their kids all have enough to eat. But their cultures ALL make this condition temporary. And conflict thus Inevitable.


Quite correct. Conflict is never the problem though. In any honest dealing with another human being conflict is inevitable...it's how we deal with conflict that counts. Religions almost invariably take the wrong road here because it strikes DEEP fear into them when someone disagrees with them.

Please describe your fall from grace for the studio audience.


I grew up. That's as succinct as I can put it...
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 14, 2012
Religions almost invariably take the wrong road here because it strikes DEEP fear into them when someone disagrees with them.


What a bigoted statement!

Sounds like you are eager to create conflict with people of faith.

"then why is faith so hard...
Until we stop trying to prove God exists, we will not believe he exists....
Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; (Martin Luther)...
We think faith is for a specific incident or task. ...
Faith-talk has been corrupted by the prosperity-Gospel crowd....
people do stupid things in the name of God all day long. Most of them, at least most of the ones I know, are sincere in their stupidity. ...
We havent been taught to seek God in the impossible. ...
I stumble through this most of the time, taking two steps forward and three back on my good days...."
http://www.intern...-so-hard
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (8) Jul 14, 2012
The US Air Force had nuclear missiles in silos ready to launch when ordered.
The first time they ran an drill, a large percentage of them, educated officers, refused to push the button.
Why? It was an uncommon event and they had time to think about it.
Then the AF started regular training drills making the action of launching missiles routine.
Religion, and especially Islam with its multiple daily rituals, were designed to train ignorant bedouins to to have discipline washing themselves and establishing peer pressure to control their passions.
Is that not what the Vulcans did? They adopted the discipline, the faith of logic to survive as a society.
Organized faith groups, religions, attempt to create a framework of discipline to support their members.
In the broadest sense then, for the anti-religionists, any organized group of humans, any society, is a 'religion' as its purpose is to advance that society.
So the anti-religionists are anti-society, really true anarchists.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 14, 2012
Then I submit they need more introspection.
Which ones?
http://en.wikiped...branches

-And introspection about what? Which parts of their holy books to follow and which to ignore? And as ALL holy books say essentially the same things, why should only Moslems question their beliefs?

All religions are the same. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE in what they say and what they will do.
Conflict is never the problem though.
Well the point of any religion is to force conflict isn't it? And conflict of the most violent sort. Their books are all quite clear on this. Outgrow, Overun, and Obliterate.

Those religions which were better at this were the ones that survived; natural selection if you will. Cultures evolve in the same way life does.

Finklestein theorizes that judaiism was an artificial combination of the heroes and gods of 2 states, Judah and Israel. It was consciously fabricated, the most effective traits of many religions combined to best effect.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 14, 2012
What a bigoted statement!

Sounds like you are eager to create conflict with people of faith.
Faith, that being belief despite evidence, is very capable of generating its own conflict.

As far as bigotry goes, I am convinced that the basic structure of all superstition is the same, and all of it is bad.

Let's not bring up bigotry ryggy. You consider all liberals socialists and as such, vermin. And I only reject one more religion than you do. But I do it from reason based on evidence; you do it based only on faith.
E-dward
4 / 5 (5) Jul 14, 2012
The american support to Israel is the main source of trouble
to the United States . From september 11 to the wars on Iraq , Afghanistan, and so on , everything can be tracked back to "alliance" with Israel - I don't believe the zionists are sincere to the americans - more like Brutus to Julius Caesar .
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (8) Jul 14, 2012
The american support to Israel is the main source of trouble
to the United States . From september 11 to the wars on Iraq , Afghanistan, and so on , everything can be tracked back to "alliance" with Israel - I don't believe the zionists are sincere to the americans - more like Brutus to Julius Caesar .

What other nation in the middle east has an elected govt that protects individual rights?
ryggesogn2
2.8 / 5 (9) Jul 14, 2012
Let's not bring up bigotry ryggy. You consider all liberals socialists and as such, vermin.

No, it is evidence and reason.
Socialists are lower that the common thief. Common thieves have the courage to risk their lives to plunder property. Socialists are cowards creating gangs to plunder property.
This is not bigotry. It is truth.
Claudius
3.6 / 5 (7) Jul 14, 2012
I also know that they were apparently quite inflamed before either of these events as well, otherwise they wouldn't have rammed jets into buildings.


Well that goes back to what the Islamic people see as an erosion of their values by westernization. Coca Cola, miniskirts, etc. Again, not much study is required to understand their resentment.

As to who rammed jets into buildings, that is problematic.
Claudius
3.4 / 5 (10) Jul 14, 2012

What other nation in the middle east has an elected govt that protects individual rights?


I hope you are not implying that the apartheid government of Israel protects individual rights.

I can't think of any Middle Eastern government that protects individual rights. In fact, I can't think of ANY government, worldwide, that protects individual rights over the rights of the state. Free-speech zones, etc.
E-dward
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 14, 2012
The american support to Israel is the main source of trouble
to the United States . From september 11 to the wars on Iraq , Afghanistan, and so on , everything can be tracked back to "alliance" with Israel - I don't believe the zionists are sincere to the americans - more like Brutus to Julius Caesar .

What other nation in the middle east has an elected govt that protects individual rights?

What other nation in the middle east drops one tonne bombs over residential neighbourhoods ?
ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 14, 2012
The american support to Israel is the main source of trouble
to the United States . From september 11 to the wars on Iraq , Afghanistan, and so on , everything can be tracked back to "alliance" with Israel - I don't believe the zionists are sincere to the americans - more like Brutus to Julius Caesar .

What other nation in the middle east has an elected govt that protects individual rights?

What other nation in the middle east drops one tonne bombs over residential neighbourhoods ?

"The increase was prominent in the attacks emanating from Gaza Strip: 99 attacks in June, compared to 10 in May. This is a result of the recent round of violence, during which 197 rockets and 21 mortar shells were launched against Israel."
http://www.shabak...-en.aspx
ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 14, 2012
hat the Islamic people see as an erosion of their values by westernization.

How about the Western people who see an erosion of values by anti-religion socialists?
The current socialist regime in the USA is PROMOTING it as good thing to be on the govt dole. They are attacking those who want to be independent and the Interior Ministry (DHS) is adding individualism and independence advocates to there terrorist watch list.
ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (7) Jul 14, 2012
"When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons. (Statement at a Press Conference in London, 1969)"
"Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us. (Statement to the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., 1957)"
Golda Meir
freethinking
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 14, 2012
Peace will come when Progressives love truth more than lies, learn respect and peace, love reason over dogma.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (6) Jul 14, 2012
Peace will come when Progressives love truth more than lies, learn respect and peace, love reason over dogma.

Peace will come when 'progressives' eschew the power to force one man to live for the sake of another.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jul 14, 2012
The american support to Israel is the main source of trouble
to the United States . From september 11 to the wars on Iraq , Afghanistan, and so on , everything can be tracked back to "alliance" with Israel - I don't believe the zionists are sincere to the americans - more like Brutus to Julius Caesar .
Israel is a western bridgehead and a garrison state. Without it a caliphate and a nuclear-armed Islamic empire may already have formed, stretching from the levant to Pakistan. And the world would be in deep deep trouble. Because their god tells them they deserve to own the world, and their populations all grow at the maximum possible rate.
Peace will come when Progressives love truth more than lies, learn respect and peace, love reason over dogma.
Peace will come when religion leaves. Heaven on earth when god is finally gone.

TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jul 14, 2012
erosion of values by anti-religion socialists?
What values might they be? Special dispensation for those of your faith?

Religious morality is based upon maximizing the growth rate. Any alternative to procreative sex is thus evil. Any alternatives to women bearing and raising children is thus evil.

Only a few gens ago Xian women were covered from neck to toe in public and their hair was kept hidden. This is uniformly meant to reduce the chance for temptation, to strengthen marriage, and promote tribal cohesion.

Social mores now encourage independence for women. Why? Because it reduces the birthrate. Women are more apt to only bear children which they can support. The earth is filled to capacity and religion cannot abide reduced population growth.

Religious morality is the perversion. It forces growth to the point of suffering, instability, and conflict. And there is no way of separating this trait from any religion, as they all have survived into the present BECAUSE of it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jul 14, 2012
What other nation in the middle east drops one tonne bombs over residential neighbourhoods ?
Uh Syria? They are currently using cluster bombs and are staging chemical weapons. Saddaam used these against Kurds.

The Taliban routinely uses leftover bombs as IEDs against weddings and funeral processions and mosques and girls schools.

So many examples.
E-dward
3 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2012
The zionists triggered two world wars to rebuild the jewish state , killing about 100 million people , including 6 million of their own people . What else could someone expect from them ?
SatanLover
3 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2012
What other nation in the middle east drops one tonne bombs over residential neighbourhoods ?
Uh Syria? They are currently using cluster bombs and are staging chemical weapons. Saddaam used these against Kurds.

The Taliban routinely uses leftover bombs as IEDs against weddings and funeral processions and mosques and girls schools.

So many examples.

you mean taliban and saddam who recieved millions of dollars from the zionist cia... right.
PussyCat_Eyes
2 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2012
In this blog, the recurring theme, IMO, is that the Jewish journalist, Sam Kestenbaum, is friends with Palestinians who welcome him into their homes.
But on the other hand, each time he wants to enter Israel, he is viewed with suspicion and has to submit to an interrogation, even though he is a Jew and has the right papers.
This tells me that Palestinians are friendly people and are mostly accepting of individuals, even if they're Jews. If this wasn't true, Kestenbaum would not have lived to tell his story.

http://www.tikkun...tenbaum/

http://thepalesti...blr.com/

http://www.huffin...194.html

The above link proves that aberrant behavior crosses all lines and is present in all religions and in non-religious groups and individuals. It is the aberrant behavior that is the real enemy of humanity, whether religious or not. Genocide, no matter who does it, is aberrant behavior
ryggesogn2
3.3 / 5 (7) Jul 14, 2012
even though he is a Jew and has the right papers.

Believe it or not there are Jews who want Israel destroyed and there are US citizens who spied for USSR and spy for other nations that want to destroy the US.
ryggesogn2
3.3 / 5 (7) Jul 14, 2012
The zionists triggered two world wars to rebuild the jewish state , killing about 100 million people , including 6 million of their own people . What else could someone expect from them ?

Serbs were Eastern Orthodox Christians, no?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 14, 2012
Let's not bring up bigotry ryggy. You consider all liberals socialists and as such, vermin.

No, it is evidence and reason.
Socialists are lower that the common thief. Common thieves have the courage to risk their lives to plunder property. Socialists are cowards creating gangs to plunder property.
This is not bigotry. It is truth.
Well they need gangs because you guys have pinkertons and brownshirts, with machine-guns and armoured cars no less. Come on fair is fair.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 14, 2012
Pinkerton was hired to protect private property and brown shirts were socialists.
Had the brown shirts been in the US, Pinkerton could have been hired to protect property from the brown shirts or their equivalent, the 99%.
Claudius
2 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2012
Israel is a western bridgehead and a garrison state.


I think you have it wrong here. Your statement implies Israel is an instrument of American policy. Of course, the opposite is true.

Without it a caliphate and a nuclear-armed Islamic empire may already have formed, stretching from the levant to Pakistan.


Explain why American policy alone could not contain this, with no Israel present.

I really had difficulty figuring your statement out. Last time we discussed things, you were in favor of getting rid of 90% of human population on the planet (or was it 80%?) You had high praise for the virtue of war in accomplishing this task and seemed to have a very pro-German attitude toward it all. I imagined you marching about and singing Lieder. So why regard Israel as a good thing. It made no sense.
(continued...)
Claudius
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 14, 2012
Then I remembered Hitler had made an agreement with Zionist leaders in pre-war Germany to finance an emigration of Jews to Palestine. This program was actually put into operation. In fact, to be honest, you could say that Hitler was the founding father of Israel. It makes perfect sense when you see what Israel has turned into. It is the only country in the world that is engaged in an active program of racial genocide, if full view of the world, ignoring international law. So of course it falls right into place that you would regard Israel as an important ally in your quest to reduce world population.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 14, 2012
I remembered Hitler had made an agreement with Zionist leaders in pre-war Germany to finance an emigration of Jews to Palestine.

Wow, you were there?

But I thought Jews had all the money? How could Hitler have funded anything?

"German authorities were happy to see the Jews leave, but the Jews could take with them no more than ten marks ($2.50), and Jews were prohibited from sending merchandise to be sold abroad.

Jewish migrants from Germany and elsewhere in Europe took with them to Palestine their skills and entrepreneurship. Jewish immigration reached its peak in 1935, their number counted officially at 61,854 (around 19,000 more than Jewish immigration for the four-year period of 1920 to '24). Palestine became a place of economic vigor while economies were stagnating in France, Britain and the United States. "
http://www.fsmith...eru3.htm
ryggesogn2
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 14, 2012
"Hitler has never left the Middle East. For almost 70 years, the Arab world has been pickled in Nazi Jew-hatred. In the words of Matthias Kuntzel, author of Jihad and Jew-Hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11, "[i]f there is one theme ... which unites Islamists, Liberals, Nasserites and Marxists, it is the collective fantasy of the common enemy in the shape of Israel and the Jews, which almost always correlates with the wish to destroy Israel." Jew-hatred is indispensible to Arab leaders, from Egypt to Saudi Arabia to Iran to the Palestinian Authority, in their fight against democratic Western values.

Read more: http://www.americ...0evnLKOi
"
ryggesogn2
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 14, 2012
"Jew-hatred is so popular that it is possible that no Arab leader can speak out against it. It explains why the Palestinians have turned down a state of their own four times. They are holding out for Hitler's solution. Peace is the last thing they want. Otherwise, peace would be here today.

Obama is quite wrong. If desired by both sides, peace is easy. It is Nazi-Islamic propaganda that is so hard to solve."

Read more: http://www.americ...0ewdzSLX

truth4life
not rated yet Jul 15, 2012
Simply, a religious ideology of two different religions competing for world dominance; sadly but true, Christianity is not a works based system as all the other worlds religions including Islam. A religious war guised a rhetoric
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
"Following the rise of the Taliban in 1996, Massoud, who rejected the Taliban's and Al-Qaeda's extremist interpretation of Islam, returned to the role of an armed opposition leader, serving as the military and political leader of the multiethnic United Islamic Front (also known in the West as Northern Alliance).[2] In 1997, he helped end the civil war in neighboring Tajikistan urging parties to accept a United Nations peace plan.[3][4]

Massoud was assassinated by two Arab suicide bombers, allegedly belonging to Al-Qaeda, in Afghanistan's Takhar Province on September 9, 2001, just two days before the September 11 attacks that finally caused the US and NATO to intervene in Afghanistan, allying themselves with Massoud's forces. "
http://en.wikiped..._Massoud
So why the 'progressives' support the Taliban? The Taliban who assassinated a leader who opposed the Soviets?
"Taliban Rules, Decrees, Laws and Prohibitions" http://middleeast...80907c.h
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
"Immediately on taking over cities and communities in Afghanistan, the Taliban imposed its law, based on an interpretation of Sharia, or Islamic, law that was stricter than in any part of the Islamic world. The interpretation is at wide variance from that of most Islamic scholars.

With very minimal changes, what follows are the Taliban rules, decrees and prohibitions as posted in Kabul and elsewhere in Afghanistan beginning in November and December 1996, and as translated from Dari by Western non-governmental agencies. The grammar and syntax follows the original.

Those rules still prevail wherever the Taliban is in control--in vast parts of Afghanistan or in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas."
http://middleeast...907c.htm

Where is the outrage by the 'progressive' feminists?
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
"Socialism does not work Socialism in Europe and in this country always starts the same way promise people free health care and free retirement and free housing and whatever free stuff wins political favor. Some claim that the "rich" will pay for it all. But, the rich do not have enough money. They may have enough to pay for the very poor, but not for everyone. So, the socialists borrow the money. "
"at some point you can't borrow the money anymore because the people you are borrowing it from realize that they can never be paid back. "
http://www.ocregi...ple.html

Is this why the 'progressives' hate Jews? They won't lend them the money to support their socialism?
Claudius
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 15, 2012
"German authorities were happy to see the Jews leave, but the Jews could take with them no more than ten marks ($2.50), and Jews were prohibited from sending merchandise to be sold abroad.


"The agreement was designed to help facilitate the emigration of German Jews to Palestine. While it helped Jews emigrate, it forced them to give up most of their possessions to Germany before departing. Those assets could later be obtained by transferring them to Palestine as German export goods."

"Hitler's support of the Haavara Agreement varied throughout the thirties. Initially, Hitler criticized the agreement, but shortly reversed his opinion, and continued to support it, in the face of opposition, through 1939."

Res ipsa loquitur

https://en.wikipe...greement
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
"Jewish organizations outside of Germany had declared a boycott against German goods and hoped to delegitimate the Nazi regime." "The Haavara continued to function until World War II, in spite of vigorous attempts by the Nazi Party to stop or curtail its activities. "
http://www.jewish...075.html
Again, how did Hitler finance Jewish emigration?
First Hitler refused to allow Jews to leave Germany with THEIR wealth. Then he allowed a scheme that enabled the Jews to buy Germany capital goods (tractors?) and export to Palestine. Some of that money would then be transferred to the original Jewish financiers who escaped.
Sounds like a typical offset scam common today. The Saudis will buy so many airplanes if the airplane company builds a factory in Saudi Arabia.
Sounds more like Hitler blackmailed the Jews than financing their immigration.

TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (6) Jul 15, 2012
Hello claw-claw
Your statement implies Israel is an instrument of American policy. Of course, the opposite is true.
There are much bigger Things in this world besides Zionism and the US. the British monarchy considers itself the rightful heir of the throne of David. But there are much bigger things in this world than the British monarchy and the throne of David.
Explain why American policy alone could not contain this, with no Israel present.
Winning wars or chess games requires the successful application of strategy, that is, Planning for the Inevitable. The state of Israel is obvious Evidence of Strategy in play. The compartmentalization of the middle east by occupying Afghanistan and Iraq, is also Evidence. The calving of India and the nuclear-arming of both sides, is further such Evidence.

These Moves indicate that Someone anticipated inevitable Trouble in these regions, and sought to Prepare for it, by making continued western military involvement absolutely essential.
Claudius
1 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012

Again, how did Hitler finance Jewish emigration?


"The financing for Adolph Hitler's rise to power was handled through the Warburg-controlled Mendelsohn Bank of Amsterdam and later by the J. Henry Schroeder Bank with branches in Frankfurt, London and New York," wrote Gary Allen. "Chief legal council to the J. Henry Schroeder Bank was the firm Sullivan and Cromwell whose senior partners included John Foster and Allen Dulles."

Author James Perloff concurs, and reveals the role that the Council on Foreign Relations played in aiding the Nazis. He states, "In 1939, on the eve of blitzkrieg, the Rockefellers' Standard Oil of New Jersey sold $20 million in aviation fuel to ... I.G. Farben [and] even had an American subsidiary called American I.G." Describing the CFR's connection to the Nazis, he lists the directors of the American I.G. as "ubiquitous Paul Warburg (CFR founder), Henry A. Metz (CFR founder), and Charles E. Mitchell, who joined the CFR in 1923..."
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Last time we discussed things, you were in favor of getting rid of 90% of human population on the planet (or was it 80%?) You had high praise for the virtue of war in accomplishing this task
And the last time we talked you were sadly unsuccessful in categorizing me as a Nazi. You wish to fail again?

Groups and factions are busy getting rid of each other around the world as we speak. In 100 years or so everyone now alive will be dead. Given the natural propensity for violence and death among the tribes, shouldn't we expect that there may be Some who wish to Control it to Their advantage?

And wealth is not a Goal. Preservation of Stability, Progress, and our precious accumulation of Knowledge, is the only realistic Goal. What good is wealth if the world is collapsing around you?
and seemed to have a very pro-German attitude toward it all.
And I resent your disparagement of the great and honorable German people. Who, like Israel, are also a 19th century Fabrication. A Myth.
Claudius
2 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
And I resent your disparagement of the great and honorable German people.


Actually, I agree that public perception of the German people is a fabrication. Especially of the Nazis. The victors get to write the history books.

No, it was your advocacy of warfare as a solution to the world's ills that got me on the Nazi angle. Also your utterances such as "Blut und Boden."

I just couldn't figure out how you could support Israel, but it seems to fit with other statements you have made.

I am more than half German. But then, Germans have been educated to think poorly of themselves in post-war Germany.

And I don't think Hitler was quite as evil as the public perception. And I don't like tyrannical governments of any flavor. But I do think he was chosen and groomed and financed to be the trigger to form the U.N., after the failure of the League of Nations to form a world government following WWI, which was equally engineered.
Claudius
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 15, 2012
Groups and factions are busy getting rid of each other around the world as we speak. In 100 years or so everyone now alive will be dead. Given the natural propensity for violence and death among the tribes, shouldn't we expect that there may be Some who wish to Control it to Their advantage?


How could it not be so?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Actually, I agree that public perception of the German people is a fabrication. Especially of the Nazis. The victors get to write the history books.
You misunderstand. 19th century nationbuilding set the stage for the 20th century wars. Europe is mostly ALL Germanic, including western Russia. Germany, Poland, France, Italy, the Russian and British empires, and the US were all fabricated during this period based on Plans for the 20th century.

According to shlomo sand and many others, zionism created the myth of a Jewish people where none had existed. Exactly as the German people were created.
No, it was your advocacy of warfare as a solution to the world's ills that got me on the Nazi angle.
Wars are endemic to the tribal dynamic. Primates have always been at war. It was inevitable that Leaders would convert it into a Solution. A dire threat could reap unimaginable benefits if rulers on both sides could be convinced to wage it constructively.

This is called Diplomacy.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Also your utterances such as "Blut und Boden."
Hmmm.. And if I was to say 'Deutschland uber alles' would that alarm you? How about land of the free home of the brave? Egalite fraternite liberte? Go tigers?
I am more than half German.
And what kind of 'German' might that be? Prussian or Bavarian, who were at war in 1870? Silesian, which is actually polish at present? Sudetenlander? Swiss perhaps? Alsase Lorraine?

You perceive your roots along the lines of 19th century constructs.
Claudius
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Exactly as the German people were created.


By the Romans?

Primates have always been at war. It was inevitable that Leaders would convert it into a Solution. A dire threat could reap unimaginable benefits if rulers on both sides could be convinced to wage it constructively.


Carroll Quigley got part of it right when he identified Cecil Rhodes as one of the architects of the Anglo-American conspiracy, but he neglects to emphasize that Lord Rothschild, the other architect, and the older money, was most probably the originator of the plan. It has always been about money and power.

And now the U.S. government is the instrument of that power.

Wars are not necessary, unless you own a central bank or two that profits from them. This is not "Leadership," it is greed for money and power.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
And I don't think Hitler was quite as evil as the public perception.

Why not? Because he was a socialist?

BTW, Hitler did not finance German Jews that emigrate to Palestine. He extorted them. It was German Jews who financed Hilter's war production capacity so they could escape.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
I just couldn't figure out how you could support Israel,

How can anyone NOT support Israel?
Unless, of course, you are sympathetic to totalitarian tyrants who prefer murder and genocide over over democratic principles, life, liberty and prosperity.
Before the Jews returned to Palestine, under Turkish rule and the native Arabs, it was an unproductive desert.
With intelligence and capital, the Jews turned Palestine into a productive land.
"Israel is in a period of unprecedented prosperity, with an economy buoyed by high-tech startups, surging international investment and new discoveries of offshore oil and gas, "
http://seattletim...r7m.html
Why hasn't this happened in the Arab/Islamic world? Especially given their great oil wealth? Why has the Jewish economic culture dominated the Arab economic culture?
Claudius
3 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
How can anyone NOT support Israel?


Well, the sailors on the U.S.S. Liberty might have a problem with it. Or, let's see, Palestinians whose ancestral homes are being bulldozed. Or, say, the victims of 9/11 who were dying while a group of young Mossad agents were "documenting the event" by dancing and celebrating?

Claudius
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012

BTW, Hitler did not finance German Jews that emigrate to Palestine. He extorted them.


"On August 7, 1933, leaders of the Zionist movement concluded a controversial pact with the Third Reich which, in its various forms, transferred some 60,000 Jews and $100 million almost $800 million in 1984 dollars to Jewish Palestine. In return, Zionists would halt the worldwide Jewish-led anti-nazi boycott that threatened to topple the Hitler regime in its first year. Ultimately, the Transfer Agreement saved lives, rescued assets, and seeded the infrastructure of the Jewish State."

http://www.vetera...germany/

It was German Jews who financed Hilter's war production capacity so they could escape.


Hitler was financed by Jewish bankers (Warburg and others) during his campaign for Chancellor. There was no war production capacity to fund at that time.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
And now the U.S. government is the instrument of that power.
No, the US is another Tool in the application of that Power. Why do you think so small?

After the ottoman empire collapsed following ww1, it would have been reasonable to expect that the region would have formed political units based upon ethnic and religious affiliations; kurdistan, sunni arabs, shiia persians, etc.

But the brits and the french divided these natural nations up among artificial countries so as to Machinate exactly the kinds of conflict we are seeing today. Baathist sunni minority in charge in iraq. Baathist alawite minority in charge in syria. Kurdistan divided among iraq, turkey, and syria. Etc.

These divisions were FORCED upon the peoples of this region for the express Purpose of Orchestrating conflict among virulent religionist cultures, amongst which violence was absolutely unavoidable.

Wilson did exactly the same thing when he fabricated czechoslovakia.
cont>
Claudius
1 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
And now the U.S. government is the instrument of that power.
No, the US is another Tool in the application of that Power. Why do you think so small?


Instrument, tool, what's the difference?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Nation-Builders and Religion-Writers have been dividing the people up and setting these groups against one another for millenia. Rome was a loose agglomeration of constantly-warring and -revolting provinces, as was the greek empire before it.

Alexander said on his deathbed 'I leave my empire to the strongest', because he knew full well that it was Established to be fractured for the Purpose of waging Beneficial war.

He knew as they All did, that the people were the true enemies of rulers everywhere, and that this was absolutely the Only Way to prevail against them.

All of war is deception; but few can appreciate the Extents to which that deceit can be Applied.
http://en.wikiped...a_of_Fog
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
And now the U.S. government is the instrument of that power.
No, the US is another Tool in the application of that Power. Why do you think so small?

Instrument, tool, what's the difference?
THE instrument is different from A tool right? THINK BIGGER. Much bigger. You think that the US is the most powerful entity in existance but it is not. Not by far. The Thing which created it, and which will destroy it at the proper Time, is.

The Great Satan is only an ephemeral straw man, like constantinople. Or israel. Or the third reich. Purpose-built.
Claudius
1 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
Purpose-built.


To what purpose?
Claudius
2 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012

Why not? Because he was a socialist?


If the term socialist so offends you, why do you then support the socialist state of Israel? Or for that matter, the socialist state that calls itself the United States?

Socialism is just another kind of collectivism, devised by the rich to move wealth from the bottom to the top. This is true whenever you have big government. I can't think of any individualist states, the term is an oxymoron.
Claudius
1 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012

http://en.wikiped...a_of_Fog


Nice painting. Sturm und drang.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Hitler was financed by Jewish bankers
The 3rd reich was supported by many different Players including prescott bush and the british aristocracy. The war was Planned far in advance. Germanic europe was divided under the socialist sham and these entities set against one another to maximum Effect.

The great depression was an Operation created expressly to generate capital necessary to finance this war. If you look back into history you can see a rough correlation between overheated economic bubbles, profit taking and the collapse of these bubbles, and the wars which are financed with these profits.

The bubbles create the necessary economic and technological infrastructure which makes these conflicts possible. This is no coincidence. It happens EVERY TIME. We are seeing one play out before our very eyes.

The Cause occurs BEFORE the Effect. The Cause is the result of Planning. The enduring stability of post ww2 eurasia was the Purpose that the world wars were fought. NO COINCIDENCE
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Nice painting. Sturm und drang.

It was used for the cover of neitzsches 'thus spake zarathustra'. The preeminent Propagandist.
freethinking
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
For 4000 years, the most hated people in the world, Jews. For the last 2000 years, the most hated religion in the world, Christianity.

What would happen to the world if all the lies and hatred could no longer be focused on these two groups? I bet you would have 3 1/2 years of peace. One day soon, maybe all the christians will disappear and we could start this time of peace. I'm sure we could even find great progressive leader to usher us into this time of peace.
Claudius
1 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
The enduring stability of post ww2 eurasia was the Purpose that the world wars were fought.


Now, my reading on this is that the purpose of WWI was to establish the League of Nations as the kernel from which world government would grow. Also to destroy Germany as an economic competitor. When the League of Nations failed, Hitler was raised up by the same powers to justify another World War with the purpose of establishing the United Nations as the kernel from which world government would grow. Only this time it worked. Since WWII, it has just been mopping up operations.

I don't differ with you on the other points.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
For 4000 years, the most hated people in the world, Jews. For the last 2000 years, the most hated religion in the world, Christianity.

What would happen to the world if all the lies and hatred could no longer be focused on these two groups? I bet you would have 3 1/2 years of peace. One day soon, maybe all the christians will disappear and we could start this time of peace. I'm sure we could even find great progressive leader to usher us into this time of peace.

Yes, 'progressives' need to divide and conquer to stay in power. But any group, like Jews and Christians who believe in absolutes, like the inherent and unalienable right of every human to life, liberty and property, attack the 'progressives' need to plunder the wealth of others.
BTW, 'liberal' Christians, such as the Episcopal Church, are losing members while Christian groups that are not 'liberal' are growing.
Standards are important. Moral relativism is failing.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
For 4000 years, the most hated people in the world, Jews.
The Romans fought a multigeneration war against Israel. Afterword Jews were restricted in what they could do. Xianity was no doubt created as a backfire against Jewish proselytism that was sweeping the Mediterranean.

Jews in the west became the banker caste and were welcomed at the beginning of economic cycles because they had money to lend. As growth and prosperity ensued they were allowed to charge usury.

At the end of these cycles when inflation set in and collapse was imminent, they were blamed INSTEAD of the local govt. A very very clever System. But the kohannin had long since departed with their share of the profits to invest elsewhere, leaving the people to suffer pogrom.

Recognize the Theme? Leaders manipulating the people for Their own Ends. Very well described in the old testament.

Shlomo sand on the Zionist myth of the Jewish 'people'-
http://www.youtub...a_player
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
I can't think of any individualist states, the term is an oxymoron.

Socialism is state control of private property.
States created with limited power for mutual defense as discussed by Bastiat in The Law would not be defined as socialist as their authority is an extension of the individual right of self defense.
Socialism is not needed for anyone to become rich so it is not the rich who support socialism to increase their wealth.
Socialism is all about power. If is easier to plunder wealth than create it, some will attempt that route if not stopped. Others believe they are smarter than everyone else and want the power to force others to live the way they think is best.
There are many forms of socialism but all have state control of property at their core. They only differ in the justification and methodology for that control.
Some socialist govts are better at protecting property than others. Israel, USA, Sweden are better at it than China or DPRK.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Finkelstein on the myth of biblical Israel.
http://www.youtub...a_player

-Archeology tells us THERE'S NOTHING THERE.

Finkelsteins series is long and tedious but lots of pretty scenery. Ryggy won't watch it because he doesn't like being entertained. Too bad.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Socialism is not needed for anyone to become rich so it is not the rich who support socialism to increase their wealth.
And why is it necessary to become rich? Greed is pathology. People like mr Microsoft and mr apple did what they did because they seriously enjoyed doing it. They weren't interested in spending all that money - what a waste of time. Who wants to manage 20 houses around the world that you never get to see?

They ended up giving away most of their money. So did Carnegie and ford.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (4) Jul 15, 2012
BTW, 'liberal' Christians, such as the Episcopal Church, are losing members while Christian groups that are not 'liberal' are growing.
Ha like FLDS and the Amish. Because they ascribe to the most stringent religionist reproductive codes. Outgrow - Overrun - Obliterate. Gods Will.

Anabaptists tried this in Britain which is why they were thrown out. The Amish are FAR from benign.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
They ended up giving away most of their money. So did Carnegie and ford.

And it the 'progressive'/'liberal' that incites greed and envy into the voting base to acquire power.
The Hughes Medical Institute, Carnegie Foundation, etc. use that wealth to address serious issues. But that competes with the 'progressive' govt solutions so the wealth must be confiscated by the state.
Before FDRs Great Society, there were hundreds if not thousands of mutual aid societies that did what bloated govt bureaucracies do today.
Socialist states can't tolerate independent individuals long. Trouble is, without that independence, the state collapses when it runs out of other people's money as we are witnessing in Europe.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
So ryggy you ok with a president who believes in a prophet who says he spoke for god even though he forged hieroglyphics by replacing the animal heads of Anubis and Set with human heads so he could claim that they were really Abraham and Joseph? Huh? Hey the guy built a tabernacle so you have to give him SOME slack.

And your prez-to-be does believe in property rights. He says he left Bain but he was still in control of it all along. Property is forever isn't it?
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
So ryggy you ok with a president who believes in a prophet who says he spoke for god even though he forged hieroglyphics by replacing the animal heads of Anubis and Set with human heads so he could claim that they were really Abraham and Joseph? Huh? Hey the guy built a tabernacle so you have to give him SOME slack.

I do not support the current president that believes in socialism because that belief affects my life, liberty and property.

TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
Hughes Medical Institute, Carnegie Foundation, etc. use that wealth to address serious issues..
Indeed NSAs like clintons agency and the rockefeller foundation have the resources to accomplish all sorts of nefarious clandestine deeds, like supporting insurgents and assassin squads. And international family planning (1B ABORTIONS).

But state actors like Oliver north can do this as well so I guess it is a wash.
I do not support the current president that believes in socialism because that belief affects my life, liberty and property.
Wait - don't you mean '...and the pursuit of happiness'? Are you equating property with happiness? If so, the constitution is founded on the principle of providing adequate property for everybody, whether they can secure it for themselves or not.

Stuff is bliss eh ryggy? I demand my fair share according to the constitution of the united states of everybody. Just because I'm not as good as you at getting it, doesn't mean I don't deserve it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 15, 2012
So... I would like a guaranteed income whether I can find a job or not; and free medical care; and a little bungalow on a mountainside somewhere. And so many free air miles so I can visit my relatives whom free markets have unfortunately scattered all over the continent.

I am not happy without these things. Who would be?

What - you are saying that the constitution only guarantees the PURSUIT of happiness and not happiness itself eh? Well that's what socialism is isn't it? A way of pursuing happiness for those who cannot secure it for themselves?

I want my stuff. Cough up.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 15, 2012
I WANT my SHIT
http://www.youtub...a_player

Perhaps this is one post too many but I was inspired. So WHAT BITCH? Heeheee
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
"Regular officers and members of the "morality police" raided 87 cafes and restaurants in a single district of the capital Tehran on Saturday and arrested women for flouting the Islamic dress code, according to the Iranian Students' News Agency (ISNA)."
http://www.reuter...20120715
No cries of outrage from 'liberal' feminists?
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
"During her speech, Clinton said: "When we talk about supporting democracy, we mean real democracy."

"To us real democracy means that every citizen has the right to live, work and worship as they choose, whether they are man or woman, Christian or Muslim."

"Real democracy means that no group or faction or leader can impose their will, their ideology, their religion, their desires on anyone else.""
http://uk.reuters...20120715
That's not what Clinton's boss or her 'Justice' Department colleague, Holder, believe.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (2) Jul 15, 2012
"High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com...0kKQI5o9

Still, independent experts say there is no doubt that, in the 1980s, the Soviet Union helped Syria develop a chemical weapons arsenal as a strategic counter weight against Israel. Russia has never denied its role in this. Intelligence agencies now believe Mr Assad possesses one of the largest chemical weapons stockpiles in the world, including mustard gas as well as VX and sarin nerve agents."
http://www.ft.com...0kKFvCAt
Chemical weapons ARE weapons-of-mass-destruction.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (4) Jul 16, 2012
"Regular officers and members of the "morality police" raided 87 cafes and restaurants in a single district of the capital Tehran on Saturday and arrested women for flouting the Islamic dress code, according to the Iranian Students' News Agency (ISNA)."
http://www.reuter...20120715
No cries of outrage from 'liberal' feminists?
So it is true that you only research the things that bolster your preconceptions?
http://www.pbs.or...009.html
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (4) Jul 16, 2012
"To us real democracy means that every citizen has the right to live, work and worship as they choose, whether they are man or woman, Christian or Muslim."
-Of course this is the sort of freedom that offends hardcore religionists such as yourself isnt it? For there can only be one religion, and it just so happens to be yours. Heresy is a violation of gods property rights.
Still, independent experts say there is no doubt that, in the 1980s, the Soviet Union helped Syria develop a chemical weapons arsenal as a strategic counter weight against Israel. Russia has never denied its role in this. Intelligence agencies now believe Mr Assad possesses one of the largest chemical weapons stockpiles in the world, including mustard gas as well as VX and sarin nerve agents
WHAT is your point here exactly? India helped assad build his reactor which israel then had to destroy. The US helped israel get nuclear weapons which are also WMDs. So...?

More news stories

Striking a balance on taxes

Now that April 15 has come and gone, most Americans have turned their attention away from taxes. But MIT student Stefanie Stantcheva continues to ponder the trade-offs associated with taxation.

The new retirement: No retirement?

For growing numbers of Americans, the new retirement may really mean no retirement. That's the conclusion of an article in the current issue of the ISR Sampler, the annual magazine of the University of Michigan Institute ...