Brothers in Alms
Well, no better place to start than the New York Times. This editorial was published on Jan 8/05 seemingly in response to claims of America being called "stingy" in their initial pledged relief amounts to the recent SE Asian tsunami disaster.
The author below goes to great lengths to portray some of the richer Arabic nations as being cheap and unsympathetic to their Muslim brothers in Indonesia and surrounding area. This is a typical psychological defense mechanism, where the guilty, when "caught" doing something perceived as unacceptable, immediately point the finger away from themselves and onto others as a way of diverting attention away from the initial incident.
The writer's job becomes even easier if the newly accused scapegoat is a nation of brown-skinned people somewhere "over there".
This paragraph starts out by telling us there exists a "common" perception in the Islamic world that Muslims are the "perpetual victims of Western and Zionist conspiracies".
He offers no refutation for this possibility, even though a vast amount of evidence suggests that it may well be true. What is more likely true is that they are not the victims of "conspiracies" but rather the deliberate "actions" of Western and Zionist interests. But it pretty much amounts to the same thing anyway.
All one needs to do is take a long hard look at what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan right now, and one can plainly see how the Arabic people are indeed the "victims" of the psychopathic war games played by the United States and Israel.
The author then goes on to list four very compelling reasons why this perception might exist. When each reason is examined individually, in the light of observable evidence, it seems quite reasonable that the Arabic people would feel that way.
1.) Torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. The photographs alone are evidence of observable fact. Had anyone seen photographs of thier friends and family being abused and humilitaed by an invading army, they's have every right to think that the invaders were "conspiring" against them.
2.) "Israel's inequitable treatment of the Palestinians", or so he calls it. This might be more accurately described as Israel's brutal occupation, including wanton murder, indiscriminate targeting of civilians, women and children, and relentess intimidation of the Palestinian people, whose land they stole. Again, the Muslims of Palestine might be forgiven in thinking that the Zionist government of Israel was "conspiring" against them.
3.) Finally he gets to the ever-rising body count in Iraq, including America's present day war on terror and all the deaths from sanctions imposed by the U.N. in the ten years preceeding. Notice how the author slying brings the U.N. into the equation. Wouldn't want to leave out Europe in this present round of Muslim-bashing.
Well, this one is pretty self-explanatory as well. The Muslims of the Middle East have been the targets of Western and Zionist hegemony over and over for generations, pretty much starting with the creation of the State of Israel after World War II.
The Red Cross estimates that over 100,000 Iraqi's have been killed so far, and millions lack the very basic minimums of sustaining life, such as shelter and clean drinking water. Their cities are reduced to rubble, their lives shattered and broken over two completely unecessary wars built entirely upon lies.
Yeah, it appears quite plain that the reason why it is "common currency" in the Islamic world feel that Western and Zionist interests are conspiring against them is because it's true.
They are.
However, this is not the end of the first paragraph, no. The author then finishes in fine form by invoking the name that all American's secretly fear, and by attributing such "conspiracies" to the greatest villan ever invented since Hitler, dismisses the entire Muslim problem into the ridiculous realm of fantasy and conspiracy.
Bravo, Mr. Bergen.
The editorial continues...
Baloney! If we are to take the latest disaster in Asia as an example, the U.S. government administration was slow and petty in their initial response to this enormous tragedy, whereas Dubya himself looked quite perturbed for having his Christmas holidays interrupted in order to respond to other people's suffering. Still, let's look at the examples this author provides to demonstrate how The U.S. often "takes the lead in helping".
Jeez, there are so many lies and assumptions inherent in this one sentence, that it difficult to know where to begin. First of all, what the author fails to mention about this so called "covert aid program" to the Afghan resistance, was that this money was given to a Islamic fundamentalist rebel leader named Osama bin Laden, and helped arm and train the very al-Qaeda that would later be blamed for 9/11.
Osama and al-Qaeda were created and funded by the CIA, and evidence suggests that this remains true to this day.
Curious, no?
Indeed, it was the United States that illegally invaded Afghanistan, after elements within U.S. and Israeli government intelligence orchestrated the Sept 11th attacks against themselves, and conveniently blamed their media-created enemy stooge for the event. Perhaps the reason why other more prosperous Muslim nations were reluctant to give aid to Afghanistan was because by doing so, it would legitimatize the entire invasion and in the eyes of fellow Muslims appear to give direct support to the American invaders and not to the common people of Afhanistan who really need it.
While this editorialist makes a point of comparing numbers in regards to dollars pledged as aid, he conveniently forgets to mention that the initial pledge offered by the American government was a paltry $400,000, which was only later increased, little by little, in response to being labelled as "stingy", and to match what other governments had pledged right off the bat.
It seems American government hypocrisy, repeated ad nauseum by their puppets in the mainstream media, knows no bounds.
Baloney! Had this author offered any kind of proof or evidence to support his rascist claims, other than parroting official lies and propaganda, perhaps we could take his words at face value. However, it seems this entire editorial is a thinly disguised attack on Muslims in general, that only serves to fan the fires of anti-Arabic sentiment that is so popular in America today.
After the multitude of evidence that clearly shows the brutal torture tactics of American soldiers against prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Mr. Bergen has the nerve to use Egypt as an example of States that sanction torture.
While it is true that Egypt has been known to torture prisoners, it is also true that the U.S. government routinely and secretly flies it's own prisoners to countries like Egypt and Syria, so that they can be tortured freely without interference from the ignorant American public, and away from the eyes of the world at large.
You tell 'em, Peter!
Yeah well, on a per capita basis, it appears that the U.S., despite being publicy forced to pledge over 300 million dollars, still ranks among the countries who overall helped out the least financially.
According to a recent report from the FreePress.org, the total amount pledged by the American government is roughly equal to what they spend in a day and a half fighting their bogus war in Iraq.
From this data, we can clearly see that the government of the United States's real priority lies in the business of exporting war, pain, death and terror, and will only help out during a real natural disaster if they grudgingly have to, or to gain some benefit for themselves.
Sad, but true.
Relic
The author below goes to great lengths to portray some of the richer Arabic nations as being cheap and unsympathetic to their Muslim brothers in Indonesia and surrounding area. This is a typical psychological defense mechanism, where the guilty, when "caught" doing something perceived as unacceptable, immediately point the finger away from themselves and onto others as a way of diverting attention away from the initial incident.
The writer's job becomes even easier if the newly accused scapegoat is a nation of brown-skinned people somewhere "over there".
By PETER BERGEN
Published: January 8, 2005
(New York Times)
Kabul, Afghanistan - AROUND the Islamic world it is common currency that Muslims are perpetual victims of Western and Zionist conspiracies. The bill of particulars includes the handling of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Israel's inequitable treatment of the Palestinians, and the deaths of thousands of civilians in Iraq - as a result first of United Nations sanctions after the Persian Gulf war, and more recently of the American occupation. The most articulate spokesman of such views is, of course, Osama bin Laden.
This paragraph starts out by telling us there exists a "common" perception in the Islamic world that Muslims are the "perpetual victims of Western and Zionist conspiracies".
He offers no refutation for this possibility, even though a vast amount of evidence suggests that it may well be true. What is more likely true is that they are not the victims of "conspiracies" but rather the deliberate "actions" of Western and Zionist interests. But it pretty much amounts to the same thing anyway.
All one needs to do is take a long hard look at what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan right now, and one can plainly see how the Arabic people are indeed the "victims" of the psychopathic war games played by the United States and Israel.
The author then goes on to list four very compelling reasons why this perception might exist. When each reason is examined individually, in the light of observable evidence, it seems quite reasonable that the Arabic people would feel that way.
1.) Torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. The photographs alone are evidence of observable fact. Had anyone seen photographs of thier friends and family being abused and humilitaed by an invading army, they's have every right to think that the invaders were "conspiring" against them.
2.) "Israel's inequitable treatment of the Palestinians", or so he calls it. This might be more accurately described as Israel's brutal occupation, including wanton murder, indiscriminate targeting of civilians, women and children, and relentess intimidation of the Palestinian people, whose land they stole. Again, the Muslims of Palestine might be forgiven in thinking that the Zionist government of Israel was "conspiring" against them.
3.) Finally he gets to the ever-rising body count in Iraq, including America's present day war on terror and all the deaths from sanctions imposed by the U.N. in the ten years preceeding. Notice how the author slying brings the U.N. into the equation. Wouldn't want to leave out Europe in this present round of Muslim-bashing.
Well, this one is pretty self-explanatory as well. The Muslims of the Middle East have been the targets of Western and Zionist hegemony over and over for generations, pretty much starting with the creation of the State of Israel after World War II.
The Red Cross estimates that over 100,000 Iraqi's have been killed so far, and millions lack the very basic minimums of sustaining life, such as shelter and clean drinking water. Their cities are reduced to rubble, their lives shattered and broken over two completely unecessary wars built entirely upon lies.
Yeah, it appears quite plain that the reason why it is "common currency" in the Islamic world feel that Western and Zionist interests are conspiring against them is because it's true.
They are.
However, this is not the end of the first paragraph, no. The author then finishes in fine form by invoking the name that all American's secretly fear, and by attributing such "conspiracies" to the greatest villan ever invented since Hitler, dismisses the entire Muslim problem into the ridiculous realm of fantasy and conspiracy.
The most articulate spokesman of such views is, of course, Osama bin Laden.
Bravo, Mr. Bergen.
The editorial continues...
Yet when Muslims are suffering, it is usually the West, and often the United States, that takes the lead in helping.
Baloney! If we are to take the latest disaster in Asia as an example, the U.S. government administration was slow and petty in their initial response to this enormous tragedy, whereas Dubya himself looked quite perturbed for having his Christmas holidays interrupted in order to respond to other people's suffering. Still, let's look at the examples this author provides to demonstrate how The U.S. often "takes the lead in helping".
For instance, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, Washington mounted its largest covert aid program since Vietnam to help the Afghan resistance; [...]
Jeez, there are so many lies and assumptions inherent in this one sentence, that it difficult to know where to begin. First of all, what the author fails to mention about this so called "covert aid program" to the Afghan resistance, was that this money was given to a Islamic fundamentalist rebel leader named Osama bin Laden, and helped arm and train the very al-Qaeda that would later be blamed for 9/11.
Osama and al-Qaeda were created and funded by the CIA, and evidence suggests that this remains true to this day.
Curious, no?
[...] when Somalis were starving in the early 1990's, President George H. W. Bush sent 25,000 American troops to help relief efforts; when Serbs were massacring Bosnian Muslims in the mid-1990's President Bill Clinton (belatedly) directed the United States Air Force to bomb Serbian positions, which led to the Dayton accords.
More recently, it was the United States that overthrew the tyrannical government of the Taliban, a regime recognized only by three Muslim countries: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates. Other than Turkey, no Muslim nation has sent troops to Afghanistan to help stabilize the poorest country in the Islamic world (a few Muslim states, including Jordan, offered token deployments but were turned down).
Indeed, it was the United States that illegally invaded Afghanistan, after elements within U.S. and Israeli government intelligence orchestrated the Sept 11th attacks against themselves, and conveniently blamed their media-created enemy stooge for the event. Perhaps the reason why other more prosperous Muslim nations were reluctant to give aid to Afghanistan was because by doing so, it would legitimatize the entire invasion and in the eyes of fellow Muslims appear to give direct support to the American invaders and not to the common people of Afhanistan who really need it.
Now the same pattern - action by Western countries and inertia from Muslim states - can be seen in the efforts to provide relief for those hardest hit by the Indian Ocean tsunami. While 100,000 of the victims are from Aceh, the most Islamic of Indonesia's provinces, Muslim countries are contributing a relative pittance. Oil-rich Saudi Arabia is contributing the most: a paltry $30 million, about the same as what Netherlands is giving and less than one-tenth of the United States contribution. And no Arab governments participated in the conference in Jakarta on Thursday where major donors and aid organizations conferred over reconstruction efforts.
While this editorialist makes a point of comparing numbers in regards to dollars pledged as aid, he conveniently forgets to mention that the initial pledge offered by the American government was a paltry $400,000, which was only later increased, little by little, in response to being labelled as "stingy", and to match what other governments had pledged right off the bat.
It seems American government hypocrisy, repeated ad nauseum by their puppets in the mainstream media, knows no bounds.
This anemic effort on the part of the richest countries is emblematic of a wider political problem in the Islamic world. For all of the invocations by Muslim leaders of the ummah, or the global community of believers, they typically do little to help their fellow Muslims in times of crisis.
Baloney! Had this author offered any kind of proof or evidence to support his rascist claims, other than parroting official lies and propaganda, perhaps we could take his words at face value. However, it seems this entire editorial is a thinly disguised attack on Muslims in general, that only serves to fan the fires of anti-Arabic sentiment that is so popular in America today.
Arab leaders and their toothless talking shops like the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference are excellent at denouncing problems in Palestine and Iraq, but most stood silent as a million died in the war between Iraq and Iran during the 1980's. When President Hafez al-Assad of Syria massacred some 20,000 people after an Islamist uprising in the city of Hama in 1982, there were no expressions of outrage from the Islamic Conference. Egypt routinely tortures political prisoners, untroubled by fears that other Arab leaders will seriously condemn such actions.
After the multitude of evidence that clearly shows the brutal torture tactics of American soldiers against prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Mr. Bergen has the nerve to use Egypt as an example of States that sanction torture.
While it is true that Egypt has been known to torture prisoners, it is also true that the U.S. government routinely and secretly flies it's own prisoners to countries like Egypt and Syria, so that they can be tortured freely without interference from the ignorant American public, and away from the eyes of the world at large.
Perhaps the generosity of Western countries will spur Islamic states to recognize that invocations of religious Muslim solidarity will do little to feed the millions of Muslims who remain acutely vulnerable to disease and starvation in the aftermath of this enormous natural catastrophe.
You tell 'em, Peter!
There have been a few positive signs in recent days. Spurred by criticism, Saudi state-run television organized a telethon this week that raised private pledges of more than $75 million, and the Islamic Development Bank has pledged $500 million.
Much remains to be done, however. The Persian Gulf countries that are reaping a bonanza from record oil prices should send a meaningful percentage of those windfall profits to their fellow Muslims devastated by the tsunami, rather than lining the pockets of their ruling families. After all, zakat, the giving of charity, is one of the five pillars of Islam.
Yeah well, on a per capita basis, it appears that the U.S., despite being publicy forced to pledge over 300 million dollars, still ranks among the countries who overall helped out the least financially.
According to a recent report from the FreePress.org, the total amount pledged by the American government is roughly equal to what they spend in a day and a half fighting their bogus war in Iraq.
From this data, we can clearly see that the government of the United States's real priority lies in the business of exporting war, pain, death and terror, and will only help out during a real natural disaster if they grudgingly have to, or to gain some benefit for themselves.
Sad, but true.
Relic
posted by Traveller at
2:56 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home