If it's not Islam, it must not be terror?

[the hog]

Mike the Aust Govt has made it very difficult for ANY form of immigration to take place UNLESS you are a Wasp with an occupation in a shortage area in Oz. Yes, the anti muslim attitudes you quote have definitely increased in the last few years, especially since 9-11. I suspect a large portion of Australians would be dead against any form of muslim migration.

[mike777]

"...I suspect a large portion of Australians would be dead against any form of muslim migration..."

 

Any form wow ok...thanks for report.

 

Tens of millions of muslims live in abject poverty a short boat ride away that makes Mexico look like the promise land and yet you report this is a majority view in Aust? A country that is empty for the most part?

[Winstonm]

"Has anyone stopped and wondered why President Bush has singled out "Islamic extremists" as the de facto face of terror?"

 

Again Winston you hit the nail on the head. If you reject this theme than what Bush and his supporters are doing is insane, I think I said this before?

Even if you agree with this theme, you can agree that what Bush and his supporters are doing is just plain wrong...but not insane  :o

elections matter.

 

Just asking.

I do not think Bush and Cheney insane, so that rules out option 1. The big question is what are the motives behind option #2?

 

A hypothesis: warning, a little "out there".

 

Source: Dr. Francis A. Boyle is a leading American professor, practitioner and advocate of international law. He was responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, the American implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. He served on the Board of Directors of Amnesty International (1988-1992), and represented Bosnia- Herzegovina at the World Court. Professor Boyle teaches international law at the University of Illinois, Champaign. He holds a Doctor of Law Magna Cum Laude as well as a Ph.D. in Political Science, both from Harvard University.

 

"Dr Boyle described the heritage that the neocon elite are carrying on. Basically put they follow the doctrine of Chicago University political stalwart Leo Strauss. Strauss's mentor in Germany, before he emigrated to the United States, was Carl Schmitt. Carl Schmitt went on to become the most notorious Nazi law professor of that era, justifying every hideous atrocity that the Nazis inflicted on anyone.

 

Boyle continued,

 

"The Neocons, through Strauss, have been thoroughly schooled in Straussian and Schmittian theory, which is basically Nazi, and these people really are neo-nazis. We have to understand that, and I think people have a difficult time coming to grips with it because it seems so alien to our tradition."

 

Now, when you put that hypothesis next to these items:

 

"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly...it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over." -Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister

 

Al-Qaeda. War on Terror. Al-Qaeda. War on Terror.

 

I wonder where this constant repetition of a few simple points came from?

[Winstonm]

Mike the Aust Govt has made it very difficult for ANY form of immigration to take place UNLESS you are a Wasp with an occupation in a shortage area in Oz. Yes, the anti muslim attitudes you quote have definitely increased in the last few years, especially since 9-11. I suspect a large portion of Australians would be dead against any form of muslim migration.

Isn't it rather unnerving that an entire country - in this case, an entire continent can be so mesmerized by a perceived threat as to alter immigration policy? Has the U.S./Brittian propaganda machine worked so well as to affect the entire western world? Or is it simply fear of Australia becoming a Mulsim nation with Muslim laws?

 

Germany succeeded in vilifying the Jews; has America succeeded in vilifying Muslims?

 

Seems we are well on our way to a religious polarization that can only culminate in a another world war, only this time much bloodier and costly than all other wars in history combined. It is always so when the war is based on religion.

[the hog]

"...I suspect a large portion of Australians would be dead against any form of muslim migration..."

 

Any form wow ok...thanks for report.

 

Tens of millions of muslims live in abject poverty a short boat ride away that makes Mexico look like the promise land and yet you report this is a majority view in Aust? A country that is empty for the most part?

Mike, I said "a large portion", not the majority. (Mind you, I would not be surprised it it was a majority view).

 

This comment abut Aust for the large part being empty is a bit of a furphy. Our pop is about 20 mill at the moment and something like 90% of Austs live on the coastal belt. The interior is largely desert. In fact there are many informed views which suggest the max population we can support is no more than 30 million.

You may also be aware that we are currently suffering the worst drought ever recorded. Water storages in Melbourne are down to about 30% of capacity and the Govt has introduced severe water restrictions. All of this impacts on the population we can support.

 

Anyway, sorry that has dragged this off topic a little.

[mike777]

1) uggg what can I say when Winston quotes a prof from the greatest univ. in the world....no wonder I was on the debate team at 16:)

My Prof brings up Nazis...uggg who can argue against Nazies says AEP frat house.

2) uggggg....30 million.....in all of aust. OK I will bet my house and my family Aust. will find a way to support much more than 30 million in splendid comfort, betting on you tech guys again....:o

[helene_t]

Communism and liberalism suffer from a fundamental flaw: even tho on paper redistribution of wealth and enlightenment and such are noble goals, they both fail when the reality of human nature is factored into the situation.

 

Dwayne, you took the words almost from my mouth. Back in my ultra-liberal college days I said often that perfect, or pure socialism was probably the idea but could never occur due to the human factor that always ruins everything.

I used to be ultra-left when I was young. At 18, I went to Israel to work as a kibbutz volunteer. This taught me a lesson.

 

The kibbutz was an utopian society, closer to communism (everybody shares a common toothbrush) than to socialism (everybody works for the government but has his own house, car and toothbrush). I had learned that the only reason why socialism was not working so well in Eastern Europe was that the ruling class was more bussy sucking commodities out of the economy for their own priviledges than ruling the countries for the good of the "masses". Since there was no such parasit elite in the kibutsim, I expected it to be Paradise on Earth.

 

For some it was but for most it was not - two-thirds of the young people did not return to the kibbutz after military service and the vast majority of the "ulpanists" (new immigrants who were put temporarily in a kibbutz to learn Hebrew) were certain that they would not stay there.

 

The explanation is that there's simply no such thing as a one-size-fits-all ideal lifestyle. People are inherently different with respect to ambitions, priorities and taste. It's not so that our evil capitalist/sexist/racist society turn people different - they really are different, and the denial of that fact has cost a lot of missery, not only in Eastern Europe and China but also in the West, where postmodernistic thinking has had a lot of influence on education, child rearing, legal system, psychiatrics and probably other areas.

 

If you still, somewhere deep inside, have the feeling that communism was a beautiful but unfortunately unrealistic idea, you should read Stephen Pinker's "The Blank Slate - the modern denial of human nature".

[Winstonm]

If you still, somewhere deep inside, have the feeling that communism was a beautiful but unfortunately unrealistic idea

 

Not really. Back when I was young and idealistic and pondering the greater questions of life, it seemed the best form of government in my mind would have been socialism - but thinking back I was even then discounting capitalism due to man's nature of greed so my thinking even then was not accurate.

 

What I have since learned is that there is no Utopia, and that there are good and bad aspects of each, which is why I so strongly believe in the original U.S. Constitution's doctrine of limited federal government that must compromise to affect change, a method of checks and balances so no one man or group can infuse solely his ideals.

 

Which is the reason I am so strongly against the changes created by Bush and the Congress with the Patiot Act, the John Werner Defense Act, and the Military Commissions Act, in that these are sweeping changes that affect Constitutional safeguards and the types of powers that history has proven over and over should not be granted to one person or branch of government.

[Al_U_Card]

When did congress declare war on Iraq? That action is still needed in the US is it not?

 

The US system of government (when not subverted or perverted) is the closest to ideal that humanity has seen or can reasonably expect. It should and must be preserved as an example for all nations to follow.

[helene_t]

The US system of government (when not subverted or perverted) is the closest to ideal that humanity has seen or can reasonably expect.  It should and must be preserved as an example for all nations to follow.

Hmmmm .... there are certainly some good things in the US Constitution (the balance between state and federal domain) but personally I think the president has way too much power. I prefer something like the Swiss system. I guess it's just a matter of taste.

[keylime]

Let me preface my monologue with some underpinnings so I can aim at the proper perspective:

 

1. Many consider me a "traditionist".

2. I consider communism and socialism as being a self-limiting concept that has repeatedly failed due to the will of the individual wanting freedoms of choice, speech, and dissent.

3. I used to be believe it or not, liberal. I even had really long hair and listened actively to the Ramones (make sure you haven't fainted).

4. President Bush doesn't get a blank check from me.

 

The concept of capitalism - free enterprise, low taxes, high promotion of basic rights, and the emphasis of self-service over government control, to be is nearly unlimited. One of the "a-has" I had in my life was seeing how the mentality of zero-sum resulting simply falls flat when confronted with the irresistible thrill and joy that newly found freedom inspires. Communism could never succeed; nothing in this world can have longetivity when it does not evolve, promote positive change, and denies to the practioniers of such said idea to ability to say, "Why can't we?". This alone causes much passion with me.

 

Is capitalism perfect? Not even close. It's prone to greed, corruption and such, just because unlike other economic systems people have much more locus of control and therefore there is an inherent tendency to hoard assets if the character of the person is suspect. Unlike communism, capitalism I feel places a higher burden of morality upon the individual just because of the latitude given. However, if we are not willing to entrust each other with the basics of honesty and respect, then do we really deserve this much perceived and exercised freedom?

 

In essence this is the struggle that I face with daily with the legitimate threat of terror - it is a protracted battle between the concept of freedom and the concept of imposition. As aforementioned, I do have strong views of Islam that were shaped as a direct result of my experiences in the Middle East and in Indonesia. Religion by itself is an explosive topic; however I will say that the concept of kids and young men and women suicide bombing non-combatants for solely the sake of destructive means is beyond consciousable. To be completely fair, even us Christians have a very checkered history - remember, we did this to the Jews repeatedly in history; we just didn't use bombs to get out our "message". Frankly, this is one of the most shameful things we did as a faith: out of "love" and "friendship" supposedly...

 

I do believe the war is being won, because I try very hard to view it from a global view. I also look at it as the opening stanza of a long, grinding conflict. The Ethiopian actions are that of a skirmish compared to the pending long-term events that I feel will start happening. I look at the situation with Russia's energy muscle, Japan's metamorphasis, China's burgeoning growth, Africa's slow but steady movement forward into the 21st Century, and Western Europe's vulnerability as all indicators that things are a-changin'.

 

What surprises me is PM Howard is supposedly viled when he's been PM since 1996. Maybe being leader for 10 years has brought forth similar levels of criticism like Lady Thatcher's rule.

[pbleighton]

"I do believe the war is being won, because I try very hard to view it from a global view."

 

Fair enough, But:

 

What is the "war"?

 

Who are "we"?

 

Who are "they"?

 

What to "we" need to do to "them"?

 

FWIW, in my 'global view" societies will eventually be:

1. Secular

2. Democratic

3. Respect human rights, at home and abroad

4 Have a mixed economy - a capitalist base with a welfare state and regulations to sandpaper the evil underbelly of capitalism

5. Engage in free trade with other countries

6. Be (mostly) peaceful

 

This will take centuries, if not millenia.

 

The human race could screw it up.

 

There will be lots of violence along the way, but I don't consider this to be a "war". It's a process. Calling it a "war" is sloppy thinking, and leads to disasters/war crimes such as the invasion of Iraq.

 

Peter

[Al_U_Card]

Take the Peloponesian war...please. It lost favor quickly because it was too hard to spell.

 

Every society holds the key to enlightenment and given the time, and effort, could evolve into the ultimate human societal framework. The problem is that all societies, like political parties or other "organizations", are heavily laden with those elements that ensure their survival as well as their stagnification. Conservative, blinkered, greedy, specific objectivized thinking always rots the system away from within. Where are the "Think tanks" that are looking at sustainable development (or any other subject of interest) at the "expense" of their own sponsors? Neither power nor greed nor apathy corrupts us; human nature and its ingrained survival instinct does a way better job and is much more insidious and pernicious.

 

I like your idea Peter, and it says a lot for the potential that we have as human beings. Perhaps faced with the ultimate threat (extinction whether by natural or man-made means) may cause the supra-survival instinct to kick in....we can only hope so.

[pbleighton]

"I like your idea Peter, and it says a lot for the potential that we have as human beings. Perhaps faced with the ultimate threat (extinction whether by natural or man-made means) may cause the supra-survival instinct to kick in....we can only hope so."

 

Well, I've always been a short term pessimist and a long term optimist. In the short term, I seem to be right more than I am wrong :P

 

Our behavior as a species does improve over time, believe it or not. This isn't to gloss over the horrors of the last 100 years, but slavery, torture, long grinding wars, mass rape in the aftermath of wars, etc. used to be even more common.

 

This is partly due to wealth, democracy, science, etc., etc., but I do think we have some capacity to learn from history. It just takes a LOT longer than it should...

 

Peter

[Al_U_Card]

Our behavior as a species does improve over time, believe it or not.  This isn't to gloss over the horrors of the last 100 years, but slavery, torture, long grinding wars, mass rape in the aftermath of wars, etc. used to be even more common.

A sad commentary, all things considered, but the founding fathers whatever their own foibles and shortcomings, had vision, purpose and resolve....the three elements that always ensure the survival and endurance of what they create.

[Winstonm]

Good to see you back, Dwayne.

[Winstonm]

"MOGADISHU, Somalia, Jan. 9 — Somali officials said Tuesday that dozens of people were killed in an American airstrike on Sunday, most of them Islamist fighters fleeing in armed pickup trucks across a remote, muddy stretch of the KenyaSomalia border.

 

American officials said terrorists from Al Qaeda had been the target of the strike, which they said had killed about a dozen people. But the officials acknowledged that the identities of the victims were still unknown". (emphasis added)

 

So now we just kill everyone in a turban and sort it out later? Isn't there a term for killing people with whom you are not at war, not on the battlefied, and whose identities you don't even know?

[mike777]

Hmm didn't some country just attack and take over Somalia without declaring War?

Where is the UN? Where is Europe or Canada? Now the USA is sending in Gunships and shooting up the countryside? Is that even legal? Where are the Democrats? I heard no outrage or calls for impeachment today, did I miss them?

[pbleighton]

"Hmm didn't some country just attack and take over Somalia without declaring War?

Where is the UN? Where is Europe or Canada? Now the USA is sending in Gunships and shooting up the countryside? Is that even legal? Where are the Democrats? I heard no outrage or calls for impeachment today, did I miss them?"

 

Yes, Ethiopia invaded Somalia with our help, and we have killed people there.

 

Just a matter of priorities, Mike. Bush is now unilaterally sending another 24,000 troops to Iraq. That has everyone's attention right now, for some weird reason.

 

Do you support this?

 

Peter

[Winstonm]

"According to the Los Angeles Times, “corporate and scientific documents disclosed that the American companies are well positioned to pursue Somalia’s most promising potential oil reserves the moment the nation is pacified.”

 

I'm not sure if that was a military plane that opened fire - some reports suggest it might have been an Exon-Mobil Learjet equipped with cannons....

[Winstonm]

Bush is now unilaterally sending another 24,000 troops to Iraq. That has everyone's attention right now, for some weird reason.

 

As Commander-in-chief, Bush has the right to send troops - but Congress has the right to refuse to finance an escalation in the conflict, don't they?

 

 

Latest polls show 61% want the war to end now - where are the newly elected Democrats now?

[Al_U_Card]

I gather that the next Spring Break movie will be...."Republicans gone wild" and I don't expect to see much T&A.

[Winstonm]

I think I just had what the alcoholics call "a moment of clarity."

 

The U.S. backs the Ethiopian warlords - yes, the very same warlords who dragged around in celebration the bodies of 18 U.S. soldiers they had killed - to help overthrow the evil Somalia Muslim leaders, and now we send multiple airstrikes against the Muslims who were overthrown, killing 200, some British and Canadian citizens, while claiming to target 3 - count them 3 al-Qaeda leaders.

 

Israel is planning a bombing campaign against Iran, which happens to be a Muslim nation just at the time that the U.S. is sending another 21.500 troops to Iraq and deploying a second aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf. And who is out bestest buddy ally in the middle east? Wonder what the U.S. response would be if Israel attacked Iran?

 

Afghanistan had the evil Taliban - who are....Muslim.

 

Iraq had the.....well, they had something, else Bush wouldn't have invaded - oh, yeah...they had a lot of Muslims.

 

Oh, that moment of clarity? This isn't about terror or oil or whose bombs are bigger - this is plain and simply a holy war on Islam. American Jihad, by God.

 

Yippee-yo-kayay.

[mike777]

The Democrats are funding Ethiopia so oil companies can get rich?

More tax billions/money going to Haliburton in Iraq?

 

I knew the Republicans love to kill and get their oil buddies rich but where are the Democrats?

[Winstonm]

The Democrats are funding Ethiopia so oil companies can get rich?

More tax  billions/money going to Haliburton in Iraq?

 

I knew the Republicans love to kill and get their oil buddies rich but where are the Democrats?

The PAC money comes from the same sources, no matter which party, which means there is no real party separation.

 

Democans and Republicrats, all from the same cesspool.