Arab societies are and will continue to be civilized societies.
Sure they are.. and this is reflected in the way many of them celebrate every special moment with a hail of automatic AK-47 rifle fire into the air (not caring where the bullets eventually land).
Or how Arab men have the right to kill their spouse, or children, should they ever "dishonor" them...
Or how the Arab society which lies at the heart of Islamic culture permits the beheading of people for adultery, or chopping off the hands of those who steal.
Or how they force their women (primarily in Egypt) to be circumcized..
Or how they permit their highest religious leaders to espouse the killing and destruction of non-muslims (or even "heretical" muslims such as Shiites).
And I could go on...
Their own socieities are civilized enough to purge themselves of radical elements.
And if there is so much progress taking place in Arab society, then how do you explaing the growing level of militancy (and lack of opposition to it).
They have a culture and a very rich history.
Sure they do (seriously).. But much of that seemed to stop several hundred years ago, IMO. Some Arab societies have taken on the limited "cloak of appearance" regarding modernization and moderation, but the institutional and cultural foundations required to perpetuate and sustain these changes have been lacking, or occurs only political pressure.
The Bushies and their cronies are flooding the media with accusations that SA is funding the terrorists. Dead wrong. There is a faction in SA who oppose the terrorists tooth and nail.
LOL!!! Which is it Chinu? Bush and his daddy trying to protect the Saudis and their interests in Carlyle Group, or trying to beat up on the Saudis?
There is MORE THAN SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE to reflect that Saudi royals were directly, or indirectly funding militant causes, and in some cases, terrorists themselves (ask Prince and Princess Bandar where his donated money went).
atimes.com
There is a faction in SA who oppose the terrorists tooth and nail.
Unfortunately it does not include Prince Nayef, the head of Saudi internal security (as the FA article I posted asserts). Nayef likes to use the militants as a threat against the Saudi Shiites.
Anyone who understands how non-democratic societies work recognizes that state security and intelligence directors hold incredible power in those societies. Without the backing of state security (or the ability to "manipulate" it into a position where they are politically required to support the moderates (such as militant bombings against Muslims), there is little chance of making significant changes.
Hawk |
