Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (110989)	8/11/2003 5:41:55 PM
From: aladin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Jacob, Supporting every despot, Emir, King, tyrant, warlord, who will call himself pro-American. And looking the other way, at their torture, autocracy, their suppression of every freedom of expression. What exactly are you discussing here? Apart from Afghanistan and Iraq - tell me a county where we have deposed a leader, supported a despot etc. as achange in policy from previous administrations. Or are you discussing Liberia? Do you really want Charles Taylor in power? A review of any newswire reports would show that we are applying direct pressure against tyrants in Zimbabwe, Liberia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Afghanistan. Some are just further along than others. As far as Kuwait and the Saudi's go - they have lots to do to be free societies, but they are not Cuba or North Korea by any means. Show me the mass graves. On Israel - I agree we could be more even handed, but I also think you are buying into a lot of Palestinian propoganda. Lots of claims and no video - hard to believe in this day and age. John

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (110989)	8/11/2003 5:43:25 PM
From: Chas.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You say... "I measure against the standard of civilisation set by the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions. That's the standard I expect from my own country, and from any country my nation is going to support (with blood and/or money). And I find both Israel and the USA fall far, far short of those ideals. My standard is not the (extremely low) standard set by Arab nations." I say.... If America doesn't meet your standards why don't you pack it up and move on to one of your "higher standard countries" that you are so enamored with. You don't because you are free here, free to badmouth the President, The Administration and our standards.The very freedoms you despise of for our great country providing you with. Your ilk lives off the blood and sweat expired by others before you, the Doers not the complainers.

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (110989)	8/11/2003 6:14:37 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Islam in France Times of India, AUGUST 10, 2003 by DILEEP PADGAONKAR Though more than 80 per cent of its population calls itself Catholic, and Catholicism permeates its history and culture, France resists the 'majoritarian' impulse with a vigour that has seldom wavered over the past 100 years. With the exception of the pro-Nazi Vichy regime during World War II, successive governments have adhered to the letter and spirit of a 1905 law which erected an impenetrable wall between the state and the church. Under the provisions of this law the state is expected to maintain strict neutrality vis-a-vis all religious communities. No religious instruction is allowed in state-run schools and no religious signs or symbols are permitted in official buildings. Religion is restricted to the private domain. The 1905 law also expects the state to safegu ard the freedom of conscience of all citizens. Any attempt to violate this freedom, through intimidation, coercion, propaganda, violence or proselytising zeal, invites penal action. Indeed, no citizen, or group of citizens, can act against the country's 'republican' traditions inherited from the Enlightenment thinkers and the 1789 Revolution: democracy, defense of human rights, respect of elementary freedoms, especially the freedom of expression, equality of races and genders and also of opportunity. All citizens are subjected to the same laws. This is the prime requirement of citizenship. But it is not enough. To be French also means adopting the language and culture of France. Throughout the 20th century Catholics, Protestants and Jews internalised this brand of secularism and identity if only in fits and starts. But the precipitate growth of the Muslim population, estimated to be between 3 to 5 million, in recent decades has stirred a major debate on whether or not it can be integrated into the Republican mainstream. For many French thinkers Islam is intrinsically inimical to democracy, human rights, women, to freedom of expression and hostile to non-believers and to dissidents within its own ranks. Its deep-seated belief in the ummah, or the unique and indivisible community of believers, is also regarded to be incompatible with the modern idea of the Nation-State. With more and more young, educated, French-speaking Muslims lending a sympathetic ear to radical Islamic preachers, fears have been expressed that France's republican traditions can no longer be sustained. Another school of thought contends, however, that Muslims can and do come to terms with these traditions. In Tunisia, for example, Islam is not a state religion. Citizens are equal in the eyes of the law. Gender equality has been guaranteed. Polygamy stands abolished. Democracy is striking roots in more and more Muslim countries. Muslim women have headed governments in Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia. Meanwhile, Muslim reformists are also making their voices heard. They assert that while the Koran cannot be tampered with, the sharia and other theological texts must be seen in their historical contexts. These can be so interpreted as to enable Muslims to fully adhere to the humanist demands of the modern world. As of now the reformists are on the defensive. Last April the first ever elections were held for the general assembly and the central committee of the French Council for the Muslim Religion which the government has created along the lines of a similar bodies for the Catholic, Protestant and Jewish communities. It justified the move on the grounds that a representative body of French Muslims can be persuaded or cajoled to fall in line with the country's republican ethos. This appears to be no more than wishful thinking at present for, to the chagrin of the secular establishment, it is the hardliners, some of them affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood, who won the elections to the new body hands down. timesofindia.indiatimes.com

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (110989)	8/11/2003 7:40:50 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Why, every time I bring up something evil the Israelis are doing, do you counter by talking about the Arabs? Do you think that Israeli policies occur in a vacuum? That the creation of Israel wasn't contemporaneous to the arbitrary creation of numerous other Arab states, all involving the subjugation (and often oppression) of various tribes and peoples? What I'm tired of is how people of your ilk spend inordinate amounts of time discussing Israeli responsibility for this and that, but seldom wish to criticize Arabs when they engage in similar, or even more brutal, activities. The consequence of this ommission of objectivity is that it feeds the impression that somehow Israelis are cruel racists victimizing those enlightened, spiritual Arabs.... Not that it matters that NONE of these Arab states are democracies.. That the press constantly remind of us Sabra and Shatila, but never mention Hama, or Black September.. It is precisely because loyalties are based on religion and tribe, that these experiments in nation-building, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are going to be failures. Hmmm... So Western societies can successfully make the transition from clan/tribe, as well as aristocratic and monarchy, but the Arabs and muslims are incapable of this? Now who's implicitly guilty of cultural racism? I guess you probably still think the same thing about Africans, don't you? They are tribal/clan based as well... But not those Arabs, nope.. They can't manage to handle democracy, or even liberalized society.. Don't try and encourage them.. Don't try and make it possible for freedom of speech and other liberal values to establish themselves in a manner where no future government can risk denying them... Nope.. just sit on our dead @sses and let all of those young people become brainwashed by unaccountable power elites, to fight for various petty causes... or even worse, to wage Jihad at the urging of Wahhabist militants. What a wonderful defeatist attitude Jacob.. Thanks goodness people of your ilk did not make up the majority of the US population in 1776... We'd still be an English colony.. Hawk It effectively excuses People with your views If one lives in a tough neighborhood, one tends to adopt the rules of the locals.

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (110989)	8/11/2003 11:31:33 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

What the Israelis are doing, I measure against the standard of civilisation set by the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions. That's the standard I expect from my own country, and from any country my nation is going to support (with blood and/or money). And I find both Israel and the USA fall far, far short of those ideals. My standard is not the (extremely low) standard set by Arab nations. Israel and the Arabs are neighbors, acting and reacting to each others' behavior. Why, by your own admission, do you judge them by such different standards?