|
Link color codes:
Britannica Wikipedia Project Gutenberg Questia The Teaching Company FindArticles News: The Economist Depesjer Sploid Music chart: 
Worth reading
From the archives: Remember, remember 11 September; Murderous monsters in flight; Reject their dark game; And let Liberty's flame; Burn prouder and ever more bright - Geoffrey Barto "Bjørn Stærks hyklerske dobbeltmoral er til å spy av. Under det syltynne fernisset av redelighet sitter han klar med en vulkan av diagnoser han kan klistre på annerledes tenkende mennesker når han etter beste evne har spilt sine kort. Jeg tror han har forregnet seg. Det blir ikke noe hyggelig under sharia selv om han har slikket de nye herskernes støvlesnuter."
2005: 12 | 11 | 10 | 09 | 08 | 07 | 06 | 05 | 04 | 03 | 02 | 01
|
Egeland's stingy remark
Many have been offended by the Norwegian Humanitarian Chief at the UN, Jan Egeland, who after the tsunami hit Asia criticized rich countries for being stingy with their relief efforts. As tends to happen, this quote has taken a life of its own, and strayed a bit from what Egeland actually said. It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really. .. Christmas time should remind many Western countries, at least, [of] how rich we have become. Egeland denies that he criticized the US for its response to the tsunami - what he meant was that rich countries in general don't give enough to poor countries unless there's a big crisis to prod them. "The United States has consistently been among the most generous in disaster relief and humanitarian assistance .. It is by far our biggest donor worldwide for humanitarian relief, disaster relief." But the U.N. humanitarian chief, an undersecretary-general, said it was also his job to point out that the wealthiest countries are making too little effort to meet goals adopted by all 191 U.N. member states at the Millennium Summit in 2000 to reduce poverty and illiteracy and improve health care. I believe him. I don't think Egeland intended this as a slap in the face of Americans. Guilt over third world poverty is a permanent part of the UN worldview, which most Norwegians subscribe to. Saying that the rich give too little to the poor, and that we should increase taxes to fix this, is like saying the sun is bright and the earth is round. Doesn't matter how much you give, or how effective your aid is, it is always too little, (for the poor are still poor). And it is always safe - among like-minded people - to say so. No particular thought or offense necessarily lies behind it. I can see why this would be strange to a culture where charity is more of a private matter. Where individuals give, and not the state, it is individuals who are accused of being "stingy", and individuals who get offended. Try it yourself. Tell someone you know that their government is stingy with foreign aid. Then tell them they're stingy. See which makes them angrier. Of course, it helps when they believe the person who accuses them is part of a corrupt and/or inept bureaucracy. So this is partly a cross-cultural misunderstanding, where a sentiment that is normal and automatic in one culture comes off as offensive in another. I'm not defending Egeland. There's a very good reason to disagree with him, aside from faulty interpretations of a soundbite. Egeland's problem is that he asks for more money, when he should be spending what he has in a better way. I don't have a problem with tax-funded development aid, as long as I am assured that it is spent wisely. I am not assured that Egeland, the UN, or the Norwegian Agency for Development are good at that. This is not about helping the victims of a catastrophe. Disaster relief is technically easy to provide. All you need to do is show up, and provide food, medical aid and a place to stay to whoever seems to need it. The more money you throw at it, the better aid you provide. But repairing or building an economy is nothing like that. The goal is concrete, but the means are vague. You need to spend wisely, or you undermine your own efforts. And if you do it wrong, more money will make the problem worse. I like what Norway's Progress Party said about this recently. Vårt Land summarizes:
I've posted a full translation of their views on a separate page - it should be interesting to anyone who's interested in the state of UN dogma in Europe. I believe Egeland's home country is in the early stages of an overdue debate about development aid. Orthodoxy reigns, but a clear alternative is forming. As for the tsunami, Norway was hurt like everyone else. Some 20 confirmed casualties, 400+ missing, including a coworker and his daughter who were on one of the hardest hit beaches in Thailand. I fear most of them are dead. There is only one place to go missing when the ocean falls onto you. But Norway can take care of its own - millions of Asians can't. Amazon is a good place to give donations, and make your own statement about stingy Westerners.
Sean (California) | 2004-12-31 03:37 |
Link
Can we, at least in this one tragic case, not turn this catastrophe into some kind of referendum on the US? This is a general question and has nothing to do with you, Bjorn. I just read Clare Short who's taken this as an opportunity to attack Bush. I'm no Bush fan but for god's sake can we just do what needs to be sans politics for the good of the people whose lives will never be the same? Arid Faklan, Oslo | 2004-12-31 08:17 | Link Bjorn - I think you are confusing two issues here, that of emergency relief aid and that of development aid. Or more probably, you're not confusing them but digressing from one to the other, and the end result is an article that confuses them. Emergency relief aid aims to help people faced with a catastrophe. The tsunami in south asia is a current example, as are draught, hunger, wars and refugee crises. The effectiveness of emergency relief aid can be measured by how many people it reaches, whether they survive, and whether they manage to re-build their society. Emergency relief aid flows even into very rich countries when they are faced by catastrophe, as for example happened to the US with 11/9/2001 or with the aid sent between Turkey and Greece when these countries where faced by earthquakes in 1999. It is not an indication that these countries need to develop, but a sharing of the burden when catastrophes do occur. Emergency relief aid implies building temporary hospitals, erecting refugee camps, rebuilding previously existing infrastructure, sending qualified personell, medicines and food. This is not particularly difficult to do, nor is it particularly difficult to measure the effectiveness of the operation. And unlike development aid, which invokes a bunch of controversial economic and political issues, Emergency relief aid is a pretty straight-forward moral duty, at least if you subscribe to any branch of humanist, confucian or judeo/christian/islamic ethics. It's also practical : rub my back, I'll rub yours. If there is an international climate of solidarity surrounding major catastrophes, it will benefit the next victims of catastrophe no matter who they are. Egeland was, in the current situation, talking about emergency relief aid. Development aid, on the other hand, is intended to help countries develop economically IN THE LONG RUN - by building infrastructure, developing business, and solving basic needs affecting economic output - health and education being the foremost of these. There are different approaches to how this may be accomplished: direct state-to-state transfer of money, foreign state agencies (like NORAD) directly involved in the recepient states, cheap loans (World Bank / IMF approach) earmarked development, giving money to foreign development NGOs (like CARE) and giving money to local NGOs with worthy projects. Norway uses, as most Western countries, several of these approaches. Their efficiency is far more difficult to measure than emergency relief aid, since there are many more factors involved - including how the other approaches affect a situation. If a newly democratic country is crippled by paying back IMF loans taken by the previous dictator, a pittance of state-to-state aid does not make a large difference. A bunch of successfull NORAD-funded agricultural programs make little difference when the country is devastated by war. And while there are certainly tales to be told about miserably failed development aid, there are also success stories like India, whose economic boom is fuelled precisely by the grassroots-level infrastructure (water, shools, machinery and roads) that development aid tends to promote, and which recently announced it didn't need development aid any longer. A perspective you and the Progress Party seem to overlook is the way some countries (_especially_ Norway) use development aid as a way to buy diplomatic clout. Call it bribes, if you wish. This can be especially true of state-to-state aid, and it's success is thus measured not in actual development but in WTO negotiations or votes in the UN general assembly. Were the Progress Party to come to power, they might find the disproportionally high diplomatic status bought by development aid so alluring that they'd keep the 1%GNP target anyway. Sure, the western approach to third-world development is flawed, to say the least, and I am angered (to say the least) that leftie Norwegian politicians have claimed to be doing good when giving state-to-state aid to the military budgets of African dicators. But development is not a simple either-or. And arguments regarding development aid are inappliccable to emergency relief. Bjørn Stærk | 2004-12-31 10:44 | Link Arid Faklan: I think you are confusing two issues here, that of emergency relief aid and that of development aid. Well, I was actually hoping to separate them, but perhaps I was unclear. I agree with all you say about emergency relif aid - tried to say the same thing myself, in fewer words. But: Egeland was, in the current situation, talking about emergency relief aid. He was not. From the second quote: "But the U.N. humanitarian chief, an undersecretary-general, said it was also his job to point out that the wealthiest countries are making too little effort to meet goals adopted by all 191 U.N. member states at the Millennium Summit in 2000 to reduce poverty and illiteracy and improve health care." Reducing poverty and illiteracy, and improving health care, is not a goal of emergency relief aid, but of development aid. Emergency relief can only save lives - not reduce poverty, which is a long term project. Sure, the western approach to third-world development is flawed, to say the least, and I am angered (to say the least) that leftie Norwegian politicians have claimed to be doing good when giving state-to-state aid to the military budgets of African dicators. But development is not a simple either-or. I agree. I am undecided about how exactly we should carry out development aid - I just believe that the way we do it today is questionable. The top priority is to discuss it, to get all the counterarguments of for instance the Progress Party out in the open. Abandon the ad hominem defense of development aid, ie. that anyone who disagrees doesn't care. Sensi, Paris | 2004-12-31 12:09 | Link @ George "can we just do what needs to be sans politics for the good of the people" or "quake relief coalition"? Best regards, Sensi, Paris | 2004-12-31 12:33 | Link @ http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041228-122330-7268r.htm btw nice piece of article, quoting « Spain, Germany, Ireland and Belgium — each pledged about $1 million yesterday. » but not France and their $20 and now $56,17 millions? The Washington Times => News World Communications, Inc. => Reverend Sun Myung Moon (Bush senior's 'friend') Best regards, Gerry Tandberg, USA | 2004-12-31 19:02 | Link Bjorn, I’m American born of Norwegian descents on both sides of my family. The vast majority of my family remained in Norway after my grandfather immigrated in 1909. I watched news footage of Jan Egeland’s comments on Fox News, and read the complete transcript on-line in an American newspaper on December 28. Needless to say, I was greatly offended. This morning I read your blog on your website and appreciate your response. Before I comment on Mr. Egeland statement I’ll tell you a little about myself. I was born in 1944, served in the US Navy for three years, spent nine months in the Mediterranean aboard an aircraft carrier, attended college but did not graduate because of finances, but mostly because I was not ready to go back to school after being in the military. I’m politically conservative, a bible believing Christian, and a student of history. My interest and knowledge of world history runs far deeper then the average American, or European. That knowledge is broad based, but generally I focus on Western Civilization, and occasionally find the study of Eastern Civilizations vitally important in understanding our Western Cultures. As a student of history I believe no man, dead or alive, has a broad enough based knowledge of history to satisfy my curiosity. For the most part, I support President George Bush. To understand my use of the word “most part” you need to be a student of politics as well as history. Back to Jan Egeland. Your assessment of Egeland statement is likely correct when you alluded to the differences and generosity of individuals vs. governments of nations. As for Americans, if you take the number of dollars that the United States government supplies in relief aid, you can safely assume it will be matched by individual donations through a network of charitable organizations. What you probably are not aware, because it is often suppressed and/or discounted in the media both here and abroad, is a very large percentage of those matching funds come from Christian Churches across this great nations. By now I’m sure Mr. Egeland realizes he spoke without clearly thinking about what he had said. Like so many, he simply does not understand Americans. The United States of America is without question the most generous, magnanimous, and merciful nation in the history this world. We rebuilt Japan and much of Europe after World War II, and poured countless billions of dollars into nations on a worldwide scale, without repayment or even a thank you, in the form of Marshall Plan, foreign aid, the Peace Corps, etc. When natural disaster strikes anywhere on earth, American agencies, both public and private, rush to the scene to offer aid and assistance. When you hear of suffering and starving people in Ethiopia, Somalia, Rwanda, Iraq, etc., it isn't long before the USA rushes to render aid. Keep into perspective we are completely aware of many dark periods in our history for which we have, and will continue to pay dearly. This world would be a grim place if Americans were not such a benevolent people. We are generous to a fault. In return for our generosity we are frequently repaid with anti-American slogans and policies. Americans see this, but simply go on giving anyway. We can't help it; because that generosity is imbedded in the same genes that descend from Joseph, son of Isaac. In spite of what Europeans think of Americans, we are not all ignorant, boastful, arrogant, and stupid. If that were true, why was my grandfather and countless other, so anxious to give up their citizenship to become one? What is a never ending struggle here is a world trying to change Americans to suit their own agenda, and I for one will resist that agressively. I'm not pleased with the current philosophy of the United Nations and support the USA removing itself as a member. I would say that is a view held by 50% of all American citizens. Keep tuned...when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Don't listen to what you hear from Hollywood as they are a minority and media supported. If you want to feel the pulse of America read the Wall Street Journal or go on-line at www.wnd.com. If you want to understand Americans open your bibles. I hope Norway always remains a friend to USA. Best Regards, martin | 2004-12-31 20:52 | Link Why do I get the sneaking suspicion that much of this money will end up in Swiss banks... I also note that the worst-hit part of Indonesia, Aceh, seethes with anti-American and anti-Western radicals who will no doubt use this money to kill and wound Westerners You can be sure the Muslim world will blame this incident on America, and will take revenge accordingly Sean | 2004-12-31 22:21 | Link Martin, I have no doubt that what you say is true. But what are we (the US) supposed to do? Not come to the aid of people in need? Yes, many of these people wish us death. Were they happy on 9/11? Probably. But not the kids. And we need to think of nothing else but them. Pete, Paris | 2005-01-01 02:01 | Link A note to wish everyone here a peaceful and fruitful New Year 2005. Best wishes Pete Alexander | 2005-01-01 10:53 | Link Great comment, Gerry. (And I suspect the world knows more than it lets on regarding American generosity and positive influence in the world. Certainly propaganda (Islamic and socialist European for forming a great part) plays a great role in how the world generally views America, but the propagandists know the truth. The psalmist says: they turn our glories into shame. But, as you say, Americans keep giving. It's in our blood to know there will be shameless lies and opposition when you stand with God.) Bjørn Stærk | 2005-01-01 14:11 | Link Martin: I also note that the worst-hit part of Indonesia, Aceh, seethes with anti-American and anti-Western radicals who will no doubt use this money to kill and wound Westerners Congratulations. With just three hours to go, you managed to post the single most moronic blog comment of 2004. Sean: Martin, I have no doubt that what you say is true. But what are we (the US) supposed to do? Not come to the aid of people in need? Yes, many of these people wish us death. Were they happy on 9/11? Probably. But not the kids. And we need to think of nothing else but them. What's the matter with you? Martin is either pulling our legs, or he has unsubscribed from civilization. By agreeing with him but making an exception for "the children", you add to the offense by being hypocritical. If the parents have been made such monsters by their culture, so will their children as they grow up. What's the difference? It's the whole premise here that is perverse. The value of human life is a constant, and exceptions are individual, not cultural. martin | 2005-01-01 16:17 | Link What's the matter with you? Martin is either pulling our legs, or he has unsubscribed from civilization. Hah, why don't you take a look at USENET Accusations are already flying around that this was an Israeli bomb We can be *sure* the Muslim world will blame this disaster on the west Gerry Tandberg, USA | 2005-01-01 18:13 | Link The comments regarding the possibility of relief funds falling into the wrong hands are a valid concern. The greedy opportunist along with factions representing Islamic terrorism began scheming within minutes of hearing of this disaster. This occurs everywhere there is suffering, and opportunity knocks, manifesting itself in the form of looting all the way up the food-chain to scandals like the UN Food-for-Oil. Possibly the most overlooked opportunist maybe the media itself. And how about those politicians who are scrambling to be heard? Can't you hear them asking "My agenda, where’s my agenda?" Have you ever noticed history is constantly repeating itself? Do we ever learn from history, as George Santayana, a Spanish-born American author of the late nineteenth century asked, "or, are we condemned to repeat it?" Politics and history are cause and effect. To become absorbed in one you’d better be prepared to be immersed in the other or risk being half informed. Unfortunately disaster demonstrates both the best and worst in mankind. We can not ignore the need for help, because the vast majority of those funds will address the genuine needs of both young and old. Our compassion is best served when we keep both eyes open and remain alert and informed. Bjørn Stærk | 2005-01-01 18:15 | Link Martin: Accusations are already flying around that this was an Israeli bomb We can be *sure* the Muslim world will blame this disaster on the west I was not talking about that, but your idea that emergency relief aid to Indonesia and other countries with Muslims in them will be used to kill Westerners. I've gotten to used to hearing paranoid accusations against Muslims, (they're all Islamists, they all hate us, we must fight them before they destroy us), but this was an unexpected low. Hence the award. Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-01 20:05 | Link
Amy Chew reporting from Banda Aceh wrote the following as part of her report : "If the bodies need to be burnt, so be it," he said, urging Aceh's ulama to issue a fatwa approving such disposal of bodies in these times of emergency......" "We need to clear the bodies in order to save the living," he said. article on singapores response to tsunami disaster: http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=26877 browse the opinion page re: tsunami disaster vis a vis islamic shariah on helping non muslims etc.: HERE'S A FATWA ON 'WHETHER MUSLIMS ARE ALLOWED TO RECEIVE AID FROM NON MUSLIMS lol ' O.K. Oeyvin et alias apologize for this one haaah ! -->http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=104464
Sean | 2005-01-01 20:25 | Link Bjorn, you're unfamiliar with the concept of "blameless children"? And what they might one day become I think depends to some extent on our US behaviot. In any case, how likely do you think it is that aid will get to children but somehow manage to passby the adults? Eh? I'm not a hypocrite. I'd just rather not see my hard-earned dollars (which I sent days ago) going to, say, the guy in Sri Lanka wearing the Osama bin Laden t-shirt, assuming you've seen the pic. Crazy, huh? And perhaps your just deaf, but I counseled against punishing all because there are some who may hate us. Gerry Tandberg, USA | 2005-01-01 20:42 | Link Kim has address what should have been predictable. Yes, there is going to be a backlash of paranoid accusations against Muslims, but Kim's eyes appear to be wide open, she is alert, and she appears to be well informed. But, what would an "old" dumb blond yankee male living 10,000 mile away know! Bjørn Stærk | 2005-01-01 21:20 | Link Kim Sook-Im: Singapore was not affected directly I know - got it mixed up. Corrected. OH YES BJOERN, CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE ALREADY ABREWING IN THE ISLAMIST/MIDDLE EASTERN CYBER SPACE AND THE ARAB STREET Indeed, I'm sure they are. That was, to repeat myself, not at all what offended me in what Martin wrote, but the condemnation of Indonesian Muslims as a group we may want to avoid helping, as they will only repay us with terrorism. The only blog comment I recall coming close to this in its level of islamophobia was the one that called for Russian authorities to use terrorism against Chechen civilians after Beslan. This is the ugly face of Islam criticism, and I have no more respect for an Islam critic who makes apologies for such statements than I have for an imam who makes apologies for terrorism. Sean: Bjorn, you're unfamiliar with the concept of "blameless children"? No, I'm not. Martin, however, and to the degree that you agree with him, you, seem unfamiliar with the concept of individual responsibility. Of course the Muslim children of Indonesia shouldn't be punished for the beliefs and actions of adult Islamists. But neither should the Muslim adults of Indonesia. And if you do believe it would be right to punish those adults by withholding relief aid to certain areas, then it makes no sense ethically to make an exception for the children. Those adults and children are equally innocent - the reason you make an exception for children is your own squeamishness about seeing them hurt, like an animal rights activist who only cares about cute animals. And that is hypocrisy. It's either individual responsibility or collective responsibility. Make your choice. Sean (California) | 2005-01-01 22:17 | Link Let me tell you what I believe: children are all blameless always. If Osama bin Laden himself were left destitute in Sri Lanka, he too would be blameless. That doesn't mean that I have to help him out with a buck. To the extent that there are islamists among the victims, I would distinguish them from islamists who wish me dead. In order to somehow deprive the islamists who wish me dead of my country's or my personal aid, which can only ever be voluntary, I would not injure everyone. I only specified children because apparently they are a disproportionate number of the victims. Re-read my post and you will see that I only agree with part of what Martin said. Indeed I appealed to Martin to overcome it. How you make me out to be a hypocrite is fascinating. martin | 2005-01-01 22:34 | Link I was not talking about that, but your idea that emergency relief aid to Indonesia and other countries with Muslims in them will be used to kill Westerners. Bjorn, which do you think the Muslim masses will believe - a) That Allah deliberately destroyed the most devoutly Muslim nation in the entire Asia-Pacific region b) That "The Jews" (that's us folks, clipped or not) let off a bomb to slaughter lots of pious Muslims If (b), what do you think the Muslim survivors of this disaster are going to do to avenge such a diabolical act of mass-murder? Bjørn Stærk | 2005-01-02 00:06 | Link Sean: Let me tell you what I believe: children are all blameless always. Of course they are. But what about the adults who are only guilty of being Muslims? I only specified children because apparently they are a disproportionate number of the victims. Re-read my post and you will see that I only agree with part of what Martin said. Indeed I appealed to Martin to overcome it. How you make me out to be a hypocrite is fascinating. Here's what you wrote: Yes, many of these people wish us death. Were they happy on 9/11? Probably. But not the kids. And we need to think of nothing else but them. Seems to me this proves my point. You don't object to the way Martin wants to hold all Indonesian adult Muslims responsible for the views and actions of terrorists, you just want to spare the adults for the sake of the kids. But I don't see any way to separate them ethically - either they're all innocent as individuals, or all guilty by association with Islam. To have two standards is inconsistent. Maybe it came out wrong, but that's what I read out the words you chose. Martin: If (b), what do you think the Muslim survivors of this disaster are going to do to avenge such a diabolical act of mass-murder? "The Muslim survivors"? Get their lives back as they were before, to the best of their limited ability. Or are you thinking of "the Islamist terrorists"? Drop the defensive sarcasm, please, and just state plainly, in detail, what you mean, and how exactly you believe we should act about it. Markku Nordstrom, New York/Helsinki | 2005-01-02 00:18 | Link Gerry: thank you for your excellent posts. Your point of view I think rarely gets heard in Europe expressed so eloquently. Bjorn: while I understand why you must be miffed at Martin's comments, I did agree with the gist of what he was saying. Of course some of the money will go into undeserving hands, and that is something to be concerned about. Blind charity is, after all, what we accuse the Saudis and the EU of committing. If we can avoid it, we should not be giving money to people who will still kill people at random in terrorist acts. I just don't think we can avoid it, in this case... However, I thoroughly enjoyed Kim's Sook-Im's rejoinder! So the Islamists are already going into conniptions about receiving Western aid! That was a kicker! Thank you, Sook-Im. You really made me smile for the first time in thinking about this awful tragedy. It will be interesting to see how things pan out in Sri Lanka. The NY Times published a map which showed the most devastated areas: all of them were on the eastern coast of Sri Lanka, exactly where the Tamil separatists are most active. The central government has promised aid to all regions. Let's see what happens.... martin | 2005-01-02 01:07 | Link how exactly you believe we should act about it. Well the most urgent and important thing at the moment is to STAY OUT OF INDONESIA Many of the Aussie/American do-gooders currently flooding into the country to "help" are going to be killed by Muslim mobs, Fallujah-bridge style Most of these fools will die without even understanding why they were attacked We can deal with the financial issues later Øyvind, Bergen | 2005-01-02 12:52 | Link Nice of you to excuse Singapore, Kim. It's the same trick many undemocratic Muslim countries use. The fact remains, Kim: Singaporeans can not change their government democratically. Malians can. According to Freedom House, a source somewhat more trustworthy than your regular links. Sometimes I do something truly outrageous. I read what Islamists write. And here is what some Islamists think of the catastrophy. And this is what Islam Online writes about it. Looking around I could not find many conspiracy theories, those I did find came from conspiracy nuts like Lucy Xien and some shortwave kooks. It's the usual Bilderberger business. I'm sure there are conspiracy theories cooking in the Islamic world as well, but in this spesific case I do not think they are more severely attacked than the West. The anti-Islamist professed by some posters here seem somewhat desperate. In this context it is also seems somewhat sickening. Øyvind Øyvind, Bergen | 2005-01-02 13:19 | Link Let me quote from this fatwa, since you are linking to it, Korea: There is nothing wrong for the Muslim to cooperate with non-Muslim relief organizations for helping the needy people, Muslims and non-Muslims, everywhere, if these organizations are working only for the purpose of relief and they don't have a different agenda that infringes on the Islamic faith. What is it you are trying to prove? And the article from Amy Chew, which is found in the New Straits Times, does not say anything about conspiracy theories, now does it? Is it merely the word fatwa that makes you go insane..? Ah. Øyvind Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-02 17:45 | Link Herrrooo Ø-Wind, "....Topic Of Fatwa Relations with non-Musims ..... notice "non muslims"..." ..purely for the benefit of fellow Muslims?..." excusez-moi mister myopia extraordinaire...which part of muslim versus non muslims do you not understand ? duuuuuuuh ! I find the topic of this questionaires obscene , to put it mildly...when humanity is suffering from Allah induced ( :) ) catastrophe and you have sectarian cultists discussing cult members versus non cult member..isn't that a stab in the eye revelation about the nature of this theocratic fascism masquerading as religion.??? Do you recall the british journalist who was shot in saudi arabia having to wave his Quran and declaring aloud that he is a muslim to passerby's hoping to receive succour by virtue of his religious affilition ( ex christian take note of your blondness and swedish blue eyes if you ever go on the Hajj and is injured , i pray to Allah that you have a big dog-tag identifying you as a bona-fide muslims lest you be denied aid on account of your nordic appearance, lest you be accidentally identified as a pagan worshipper of Odin and be left to bleed to death on the plains of Arafaat LOL )..... the very notion of asking this tremendously rude and obscene segregationist question is itself an indictment of the moral turpitude of the whole islamist movement and if you should come up with some vacous leftist apologistic excuse to defend the subject of this fatwa you shall surely incurr the wrath of princess minnehaha in which case a powerful shot of capsicum laced kimchee tea should be administered to you to awaken you from your chronic mental stupor !!!! ( smile ). At any rate, would everyone ( especially our friendly mr. OhVind of Bergen here )should read the following white paper by Singapore: For the sake of social harmony the state of singapore has to vigorously and with vigilance separate church, mosque and temples from the secular state. Singapore is a micro-cosm representing the larger world and this paper is most instructive to democratic and secular states world-wide. http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-EPT/khun.htm o.k. if you did not click the link here is a 2nd chance: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-EPT/khun.htm p.s. everyone have a safe new year- selamat hari tahun baru ! Sandy P | 2005-01-02 22:26 | Link I did my part for developmental aid on Thursday. I bot new jeans for the family. Kenya, Hong Kong, Guatemala, Mexico (of American fabric). That is the best developmental aid we can give. Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, jobs! --- Sean: Let me tell you what I believe: children are all blameless always.-- Unfortunately, Sean, you're going to have to define the age of the "children." 15-18 y.o.s? Canada just lowered the age of sexual consent to 14, IIRC, and I think Holland is around there, too. Are they children or not? I'm not going off-topic and I understand what you are saying, but....there's a few more variables which we have to throw into the mix. Happy New Year, everyone! Egeland was on FoxNews today, what a jerk. Now the military hardware we sent is worth its' weight in gold. Uh, huh. Start reading The Diplomad for UN updates. Their committee meetings are going strong, but if we have to wait until their meetings have come to consensus, I wonder how many more people would die? That's what happens when a bureaucracy runs the show. Sometimes it's a good thing when we don't consider ourselves the (moral) equal of North Korea and Iran. We could have just made a token response. Sandy P | 2005-01-02 22:28 | Link And what are the muslim nations coughing up in aid for their muslim brothers? Anyone paying attention? Or are they sending clerics? Sandy P | 2005-01-02 22:33 | Link And a very apropo(?) post from Winds of Change: http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/006109.php How soon will SEA be seeing their version of the Toyota Taliban - we need a better label. I've often seen the term "Toyota Taliban" used to refer to non-governmental 'aid' agencies and U.N. bureaucrats. I've even used it myself on occasion. What does it mean, and where does it come from? Here's an excerpt from U.N. Insider's June 04 summary:
Which also explains the screaming when our military starting dishing out the aid and stepped on their turf. Sandy P | 2005-01-02 22:40 | Link Seems Jan is also ummm, some would say lying:
Tomorrow, we will have to set up a camp for relief workers - 90 of them - which is fully self-contained, with kitchen, food, lodging, everything, because they have nowhere to stay and we don't want them to be an additional burden on the people there.
Gerry Tandberg, USA | 2005-01-02 22:49 | Link Markku: I appreciate the kind words. I have an advantage over most of the other folks posting on the website...age. I’ve had to change my opinion and frequently amend my justification for a particular view many times over the course of years. The one thing that has not changed is my core values; they have only been strengthened. I’ve learned to understand why I believe as I do. For example, in my 2004-12-31 19:02 post I indicated the vast majority of my relatives remain in Norway. I communicate with two second cousins twice annually. Both would be considered politically left of center in the USA. This is understandable given the structure of the Norwegian government. However, I find a great deal of merit, even envy, in the Norwegian constitutional monarchy; a rather profound statement coming from a strict US Constitutionalist who pledges alliance to a republic. To have a kind, benevolent, and just king is a blessing indeed. However, such is not generally the case throughout world history, and that is precisely why the USA Constitution and Bill of Rights exists. It is written to protect the rights of all. Instead of a sitting monarch, all fifty-five constitutional framers (thirty-nine actually signed the Constitution) acknowledged the existence and divinity of the “King of Kings”, Jesus. That is where the struggle here in the United State continues. Without that acknowledgement this nation will crumble. Even as I write many Americans, as well as outsiders, who do not understand that concept scheme to change (amend) our rules of governance (constitution). In 1800 the French Revolution tried to emulate the American Revolution and failed. Now you can tell my why…I already gave you the clue. My interest in history has served me well. To understand US History I found a need for a better knowledge of European History, which lead to Middle East History, and ultimately the links between Biblical and secular, or rather His Story. Alexander: Maranatha my friend. Kim Sook-Im: I enjoy reading your posts and I logged onto the recommended website in an effort to understand the ethnic diversity of Singapore. Your enthusiasm is commendable, but difficult to comprehend through your choice of colorful expression. You correctly identified Islam as a predator Cult. Sean and Martin: Try to be patient and listen carefully before responding. Bjorn: Thanks for creating this website, officiating as webmaster, and policing the spammers. I was extremely pleased to see Jan Egeland squirm as he backpedaled. Mission accomplished. Monday, brings us the first working day of 2005, and promises to keep me busy for the next two years until retirement. I’ve enjoyed reading all the posts on this webpage. I will occasionally drop in to see how ya’ll are doing. Best Regards, Totoro, U.S. | 2005-01-03 00:28 | Link I sensed a disturbance in the force today. I sensed that the UN is not long for this world. Maybe it will continue as a rump organization for a while, but I think its days as the World Organization du Jour are over. I've been reading Diplomad and Belmont Club intently for the past few weeks. Is there any reason to think that their points of view are wrong? Does the UN do any good, or does it just charge money for yakking, liquoring and whoring? Sandy P | 2005-01-03 01:37 | Link Listening to Beyond the Beltway, topic is donation response. SA - $10 mill, Kuwait, $2 mill, and for some other muslim countries, also low. Sandy P | 2005-01-03 05:08 | Link Kofi's going down - an "intervention" was staged, via Instapundit and now Drudge has the link: It seems Kofi sat and listened to an all-star panel of persons "who care deeply about the UN" and are concerned about the effectiveness of the UN when it's in constant conflict with the U.S. The friendly advice was given at the meeting which was held at the home of Richard Holbrooke, (Clinton UN Amb.) . "He sat in silence and made no effort to defend himself," the onlooker said. "He was taking it all in. It wasn't a conversation, it was much more of a 'here is the situation, here are the choices on what you can do'." Holbrooke said that the talk, while unalloyed, was not confrontational. "There was nothing adversarial about it," Holbrooke said. "Kofi knew he was in a meeting with people who cared deeply about him and about the institution.". One of the members of the group had prepared for the session by finding out if the Bush administration was siding with those in Congress who were calling for Annan's resignation or whether instead they supported his resolve to stay in office until the Jan. 31, 2006, end of his term... ----- Where's Allan when you need him?????? David Roetman, South Dakota | 2005-01-03 07:55 | Link Insightful posts with thoughtful commentary. I have quoted you and linked your blog, assuming your gracious permission. Contact me if you do not approve, please. On that note, I think it best if Annan stays. His replacement would be no better and would lend the illusion of change without actual reform. Øyvind, Bergen | 2005-01-03 10:32 | Link Kim Sook-Im: Korea, I do not know who asked that question, whether it was a moderate Muslim, an extremist or perhaps a non-Muslim. On the other hand, I do know who answered. I do not regard that person a moderate, but hey - the answer was still pretty clear, don't you think? Ø. Sean (California) | 2005-01-03 11:19 | Link Gerry: "Sean and Martin: Try to be patient and listen carefully before responding." ??? I've got a few years under my belt, too, Gerry. I didn't realize I had been rash or controversial. Thomas, Switzerland | 2005-01-03 13:02 | Link Many students of which countries have been affected by the Tsunami are studying in the first world countries. They are discriminated in many ways while staying abroad. The same people from the same affected countries are also the people who work for the first world countries in different Sweatshops under slavery like working conditions. Moreover, the same people from the same countries affected by the Tsunami are hosting millions of tourists every year, which are coming mostly from the first world countries. Though, most of their hotel owners, tourist guides, tour agencies are from the first world countries as well. In short, first world countries owe a lot of money to the natives of the affected countries. Second, when first world countries think about armed forces, they spent rather many billions (to decrease peace) than a few millions (to increase peace). Finally, when first world countries spend many billions for military purposes, people do not hurry to see how this will affect the stock market; though, many are very impatient to see whether the Tsunami disaster does. In conclusion, anyone is free to believe or not why the word “solidarity” may connote “money and help are provided to people in need according to how much they are worth from the perspective of the donators”. Regards, Thomas Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-03 15:12 | Link Yes Thomas/switzerland, i wholly agree with you on that one. It is sad but true that billions are spent by so called industrialized country in the name of defense..but that is spawned in part by the military-industrial complex. I agree with Oeyvind that the Iraq war was probably not a good idea...but for many other reasons was probably the best of a selection of bad choices . The mistake that the Bush administration made was in not putting sufficient manpower into the early phases of the war and to wrap it up quickly so that it does degenerate into an urban warfare. The prior desert storm success gave them a false sense of overconfidence! Also poor countries are spending too much of their national budget on weapons of mass destruction - purchased from so called 'industrialized' countries like the US, G.Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China( hardly democratic), North Korea ( @#^** 악마의 김il-jung.. 아들!..best left untranslated LOL ). This war on terrorism and the resurgence of islamist militantism cannot be won wholly on the battle-field.........it is best that so called first world countries expend a goodly portion of their defense budget in aiding those affected countries improve their economy, education and infrastructure. Pakistan for example is a breeding ground of islamist radicalism of all sorts. The pakistani govt is expending their national budget on weaponries vis a vis india while their educational infrastructure is a shambles..and the saudis have literally usurped the pakistani education system to produce wahabist clones. Perhaps there is a way that US and other countries can assist the pakistani govt. to overhaul their educational system - expose their students to a more balanced view of the world and the advantages of freedom, liberty and the democratic ideals , more science, math, history, literature, geography, comparative religions ....other than per rote memorization of quranic texts which are not very marketable skills except to increase the population of fanatical islamist ideologues ( thank you ..we have enuf of them to last another century).......sounds easy on paper , pretty idealistic...how do you implement that ?.....that is the million dollar question. I invite Oeyvind to comment on this ( Oeyvind , despite our animated chats, i think we both occasionally have concurring views...LOL ) Kim Sook-Im Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-03 17:25 | Link Herrrooo Øyvind, O.k. in your above post you wrote :"Nice of you to excuse Singapore, Kim. It's the same trick many undemocratic Muslim countries use. The fact remains, Kim: Singaporeans can not change their government democratically. Malians can. According to Freedom House, a source somewhat more trustworthy than your regular links. " O.k. here is your much vaunted Freedom house link: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:wRcDehH5QB8J:www.freedomhouse.org/research/freeworld/2002/akessay.pdf+islamist+threat+in+Mali&hl=en .....please note that the 'democracy experts' are concerned about a real islamist take over of algeria, and even mali...sure, we commend Mali on their attempts at establishing a viable democratic system..but there is always the danger that through the mechanitions and coercions of islamist radicals and fundamentalists they may well gather enuf majority to usurp the reigns of government thro the democratic process. In fact this aweful nightmare is playing itself out in Kuwait -- remember our erstwhile ally? whose skin we saved from Mr. Saddam Hussein -- your Salahuddin wannabee LOL...well your much vaunted 'freedom house democracy' has now allowed for the islamist rednecks to take over the governance of this erstwhile liberal emirate and enforce the draconian shariah on the hapless populace. The trouble with your thinking Oeyvind is that you are enamoured with the purist ideology of 'democracy' ..yours is a ONE SIZE FIT ALL DEMOCRACY.....any thing deviating from your artificial construct of leftist-apologist( perhaps even faintly neo-marxist?) power of the majority version of DEMOCRACY IS FAUX-DEMOCRACY and not worthy of consideration. Notice how you snortishly accuse me of 'excusing' Singapore ! Well ,if i may be permitted to read your thoughts , i would surmise that you are somewhat enamoured with the singular inherent 'characteristic' of 'purist democracy' and that is the ability to 'change the government' by fiat of the 'majority' .........but see how fallacious and inadequate your line of reasoning can be !!! it is this very obsession with the majority that can also be Democracy's achilles heel. In particular , the case of Singapore would be instructive to social-democrats(?) like you who are infected with leftist ideologies: the paternalistic, or guided form of "democracy a la singapore" is probably the one that works best for that particular socio-cultural milieu. One that the PAP had carefully crafted , nurtured and found most successful ( and which majority singapore citizens, yes docile by norwegian standards) approve of, are happy with and do not seem to register any major malcontent( except perhaps for long distance agent-provocateurs of your genre??LOL LOL ). But no, what irks you most is that ..should there arise among singaporeans a most vociferous leftist-leaning, "islamist-atrocity-disavowing',perhaps even'neo-marxist-hell-bent-on-government-changing' ideologue he would have the most difficult time unseating a popular government that is working overtime to ensure prosperity and social harmony for the micro-cosm of the world-at-large = a republic called Singapore. Nay, Mr. Øyvind StrØmmen of Freedom House Democracy Incorporated is most displeased with the Singaporeans because their 'confucianist-social-harmony' version of modified 'Democracy' does not meet the freedom house artifical indices of 'democracy' per se...to hell with the other more cogent issues of social harmony, emphasis on standard of living, stability, investment capital,high literacy rate, respect and tolerance for others of a different creed,race and culture= other perks of a free society-- and more importantly the extreme vigilance in maintaining strict separation of MOSQUE, TEMPLE, CHURCH AND STATE !( incidentally if you read that white paper i quoted ,Øyvind, you will note that the singaporean authorities are equally concern and monitor with vehemence all religiions , not just the muslims in particular..but of course since Islam is such a 'non proselytizing','tolerant' , and ' oh so a-political' religion the singaporeans are especially attentive to all the imams , muftis , mullahs and the rest of the ilk of islamdom ( just to be doubly sure they are not up to some mischief) . In contrast , Norway ( salaam alayha wasalaam, praise be upon her) and the United States ( s.a.w.s./praise be upon her too) face the very daunting prospect of major mischief among its islamist population, by virtue of its high 'freedom-house-criteria-fulfilling' version of democracy. The islamist-fundamentalist ( pretty much the whole Ummah to be blunt..cos by definition a moderate or liberal muslim is an oxymoron )citizens of democratic societies in the west harbor nefarious desires to establish a caliphate and to cannibalize their host country, if not immediately, surely but slowly in the foreseeable future by all means at their disposal..high immigration, high birth rate, furious proselytization efforts, intermarriage with local citizenries, engagement in the political , legislative, judiciary , political machinery of the host country to insidiously and boldly insert islamist values and eventually islamic laws and the hateful shariah to reign supreme in their host country...if you think the Borgs are bad, the islamo-borgs are worse in theory ( soon in practise )....resistance is futile. Already they have inserted their Shariah into canadian civil judiciary, and in france, and the western countries -- count on the pre-eminence of the shariah in time to come. 5% is enuf to cause social upheaval in holland , denmark, sweden..france is a lost cause, the spaniards are dhimmis in transition. Coming back to Mali...what is there to prevent a takeover of the fledgling Mali-an democracy by a coerced islamo-sympathetic majority? Perhaps the fledgling Malian democratic governmemt would do well to emulate the singaporean model and constrain any nascent democracy-hating-puritanical-islamist cells which may be masquerading as bona-fide opposition parties? Any political party that bears the cancerous seeds of islamonazi-fascist totalitarianism should be vigorously constrained/quarantined, because like a cancerous cell it will destroy the larger body of democratic ideals if allowed to breed...sorry, drastic circumstances dictate drastic measures...and if you don't think the singaporeans find themselves in a dire circumstance (being surrounded on all sides by potential islamism turn radical) then you have not lived in their island and walked in their shoes.
Mr. Tandberg - glad you like my posts... i do get colorful at times (smile) Have a great new year ! Kim Sook-Im Sandy P | 2005-01-03 17:38 | Link You know, you guys really have to get over your white guilt, Thomas. First world this, first world that, socialism kills, free markets feed. What indigenous items made by locals can they offer the world to improve their lot? What does their culture have to offer that I want to buy? Giving them handouts makes them resentful over a long period of time. Look at VietNam and Nike. The peasants are buying cars 15-ish years after Nike went in. They're going to need parts, garages, mechanics. I see goods made in countries I never saw as a child. Take a look at the labels in your clothes. Poverty is falling, and when did the living on $1/day now go to $2/day? Have you noticed how the goo-goos have upped the bar? Liberty-democracy-private property rights-rule of law. This is what they need in the long run, not handouts. --Second, when first world countries think about armed forces, they spent rather many billions (to decrease peace) than a few millions (to increase peace). -- Right. Not from my vantage point. And it's not about Iraq. Sandy P | 2005-01-03 17:40 | Link Pure democracy is nothing more than mob rule. Of course when it's your mob in charge....what happens when the tide turns? Sandy P | 2005-01-03 17:44 | Link one of the first things Swedish Foreign Minister Laila Freivalds did upon learning of the tsunami was to go to the opera. She did not show up for work until 31 hours after the earthquake. The Swedish government estimates that more than 20,000 of its citizens were in Thailand when the tidal wave struck. In addition to the 60 confirmed dead, 3,559 Swedes were still missing as of last night. ?????? --- Via David's Medienkritik. Sandy P | 2005-01-03 19:23 | Link Via The Conspiracy to Keep you Poor and Stupid: because it explains part of my comment better than I ever could: STARTING THE NEW YEAR HALF RIGHT An Arthur Laffer op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. It's key message is simple stuff, really, but it bears repeating, and it explains why the handwringing about America's trade deficit is really just another version of "blame America first." Rather than seeing rising overseas purchases as lazy Americans "borrowing" from hard-working foreigners to buy their goods, look at it as foreigners urgently trying to get their money invested in America, and willing to sell us their goods at a discount in order to do it: The only way the U.S. can have a trade deficit amounting to 5.6% of GDP is if foreigners invest that amount of their capital in the U.S. It's a matter of simple accounting. But once you realize that the trade deficit is, in fact, the capital surplus you would clearly rather have capital lined up on our borders trying to get into our country than trying to get out. Growth countries, like growth companies, borrow money, and the U.S. is the only growth country of all the developed countries. As a result, we're a capital magnet. Laffer has it right on trade -- but sadly, by the time the op-ed ends, he's wandered into the weeds on the trickier subject of domestic inflation. It's one thing to say (correctly) that the falling dollar has nothing to do with the trade deficit (true) -- and quite another to say it has nothig to do with inflation (false). Oh well... nowadays, I'll settle for half right. Sandy P | 2005-01-03 19:27 | Link And Tim Blair: Don D'Cruz points out the disadvantages of the former, and the benefits of the latter: Setting aside the emergency relief being rushed to tsunami survivors, which is vital and absolutely necessary, foreign aid has, in general, not been very effective. Indeed, if the aid industry's effectiveness was judged by its success in poverty alleviation, it would have been shut down years ago. For example, according to World Bank figures, despite spending $US100 billion in aid in sub-Saharan Africa between 1970 and 1999, about 17 countries experienced a decline in real per capita gross national product. There is a disconnect between how effective the public thinks its aid contributions are and the reality of aid. Western governments, which to a degree evaluate their own aid funding, are aware of its frequent failures. This explains, in large measure, the donor fatigue felt by Western governments. They are not just aware of aid's ineffectiveness; they are also aware of how aid, even emergency relief, when channelled into conflict zones, serves to feed armed conflict and undermine the ability of local economies to recover ... The true insignificance of aid is revealed by the fact that trade contributes almost $US1.7 trillion to the developing world, making free trade an imperative -- hence the emergence of the slogan "trade, not aid". ---- Totoro, U.S. | 2005-01-03 20:02 | Link Kim Sook-Im . . . Thanks for keeping up the good fight against Oyvind's surprising thickheadness. I gave up arguing with him long ago, but you have such a wonderful store of facts and languages--so keep at it! Sandy P and others . . . It's good to see you continuing to bash against the statists (formerly known as socialists, but what does that mean anyhow?) and also the self-haters like Thomas of Switzerland, who doesn't seem to know where money actually comes from. Maybe he thinks the stork brings it. OK, sorry, I'm being sarcastic. But really, people, don't you think it's time to study Economics 101, at least, where you learn about supply and demand, the law of comparative advantage, transfer payments, and other simple concepts. It's amazing how many people think that the U.S. is wealthy because it stole the money. No, it doesn't work that way. However, Switzerland may be wealthy because it stole the money--but that's another story, not relevant to this discussion. Anyway, as some of you may have guessed, my supply of self-hating liberal guilt is running on empty. Norway's Mr. Jan Whatsizname, even though he may have been misquoted, opened up a can or worms when he opened up his trap. He crossed a line, and the results, like the tsunami, will be noticed. Totoro, U.S. | 2005-01-03 20:09 | Link "can of worms" BTW, Kim Sook-IM . . . A friendly suggestion--after you write out your posts, go back over and add paragraphs. On the internet, short paragraphs are much easier to read than normal length or long paragraphs. As you may have noticed, I have many one sentence paragraphs--a no-no in printed writing, but IMO much easier to read in posts like this one. Sylvia, Denver | 2005-01-03 21:58 | Link Thank you to Kim Sook-Im for the interesting commentary. I think Thomas may be confusing Capitalism with Colonialism. The US doesn't "owe" a country like Thailand or India anything. The US isn't rich because India is poor. The *British* did indeed exploit India, and became richer by controlling the production of Indian goods. Some European countries got richer through colonization. The US gets richer through expanding it's economic base, mutually advantageous trade and reinvestment. The two systems are in fact diametrically opposed. (which is maybe why the EuroElites don't like it). India gets colonized by GB (probably one of the more benign countries)and at best stays just as poor. Do business with US and now India is described as having a vibrant and expanding economy. Hmmm. While it might not seem too apparent there is a huge difference between colonial Indians toiling away in a carpet factory and Thais working in a shoe factory, because the two systems end up going in completely different directions. The old European colonial system controlled production and took all the profits. Few if any market forces here. The system was static, with only that reinvestment and infrastructure that was necessary to keep the system going. The Thais in the shoe factory however are making a product for *general export*. They can sell their shoes to whomever will buy them, and the bulk of the wages,profits and taxes stay in the country, with a relatively small portion going to the parent company (if there is one), where those profits are also taxed. It's the beginning of an industrial base, and looks much like the US at the turn of the last century. Without those "sweatshop" industries, many of the people - especially women - would be forced into prostitution, slavery, or that old populist standby "indigenous" trinkets for the yuppie tourist. But, unlike the colonial sweatshop, these goods are taxed at the local/national, level providing the beginning of a consumer tax and industrial base. Do-gooders who demand that the "worker prolotariat" or whatever get bennies like in a developed base drive these nascent industries into bankrupcy or force them to move. Leaving the locals with nothing. They consider that a victory. (as if they were dealing with a colonial system, not a nascent capitalistic one). The fact that these people can't/won't see the difference speaks volumes for the power of leftist propaganda. What's interesting to me here is the faux corellation between America's wealth and European colonialism, i.e, the US is the worlds biggest economy, ergo it is the biggest exploiter. Therefore it owes the third word countries the most. Except that the US arrived at it's wealth in a completely different way. This faux corellation does a number of things - it is a good example of European projectionism. And, it conveniently manages to pass the buck, so to speak, for Europe's exploitative colonial past by placing the burden on the US. How convenient that the bill for third world reconstruction and aid lands in the lap of the US, with a whole chorus of recriminations and impossible expectations that should fall on EU ears, not American ones. Better to bring countries like India to public shame - and accountability - for not having tidal bouys and a warning system. Good for the Progress Party - I think that they are on the right track. Totoro, U.S. | 2005-01-03 22:26 | Link Another wonderful aspect of the blogosphere is that the world is now hearing directly from Americans. erik nicolaysen US | 2005-01-04 01:18 | Link After reading alll your comments, Jan Egeland's comments are to be expected as normal from much of Europe. Reading the Norweigan Times, The Guardian etc. one notes that from the view of foreign leaders the only acceptable source of aid is one that is government controled and from government to government. One rarely reads of the end of the fighting in the Balkins or the aid that flows today from NATO on American aircraft because the aid is not handled by so called mainstream agencies. The US has about 6% of the world population but gives over 50% of the world's food aid and numerous other development projects. But aid from non-government sources such as the Red Cross, Doctors without Borders, US Military, Church based groups, etc. are ignored as if they never existed. No other country in the world has so much donated to charity but since it does not go through the so called proper groups it does not exist. Complaining will do little to change the mindset at a place like the UN which has corruption as its middle word. The best way to handle the problems in the Indian Basin is to work with non-government sources and to ignore the Egelands of the world. Sandy P | 2005-01-04 03:41 | Link Don't forget to keep an eye on the NGOs and how they spend your money - NGO Watch. I think it's Is this a good or bad time to mention an article posted at Bros. Judd last week(?) comparing (former) colonial Brit/french colonies and how much better the Brit-controlled ones are doing? --- Thanks, totoro. Some Europeans might want to add Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics to their reading material. Gerry Tandberg USA | 2005-01-04 04:46 | Link Erik Nicolaysen: Well said. There are many good private organizations capable of getting the necessary funds and aid to disaster victims. Few can match the resources of the Convoy of Hope at: http://www.convoyofhope.org/. These folks do a fantastic job of making sure your contribution gets used for the purpose you intended. Convoy of Hope is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization home based in the United States, but is strategically located in areas around the world to provide disaster relief. The UN can not even come close to matching the effectiveness of the COH. My contribution will be given to COH to be used as they see the need. Sean: I went back and read your posts. I don’t mean to offend, but I still sense a greater need to carefully consider before responding. Sandy P | 2005-01-04 04:59 | Link Oh, and Thomas??? Where's yours? By ours? Via Patrick Ruffini: A "War Machine" Brings Hope and Comfort The rest of the world constantly claims the US spends too much money on its military and not enough on humanitarian aid. This evening, thousands of Indonesians would be starving had it not been for a $4 billion US aircraft carrier and its fleet of helicopters bringing supplies where the civilian aid workers will take weeks to reach. Don't hold your breath for the world's opinion leaders to say "thank god there is a U.S. Navy" But dammit, they should.
Totoro, U.S. | 2005-01-04 06:33 | Link Imagine a society that believed that the Sun moved around the Earth. (That's the society that believes that Peace is Love and the U.S. Military Is a Nasty War Machine.) Then imagine that some insightful people discovered that the U.S. Military freed more people and brought life and health to more people than did all the so-called pacifists of the world. That's where we are today, folks, this day of January 3/4, 2005. The world is turned upside down. Sean (California) | 2005-01-04 07:43 | Link Gerry, you are moved to criticize my posts, which is fine. But you choose to be vague in your criticism. Then when asked to be more specific, you repeat yourself. Please forgive me for being impolite, but if you can't be bothered to articulate yourself properly, then I won't be bothered to go back and reread what I wrote--for which there is really no need because I remember what I've written and stand by it. Gerry Tandberg, USA | 2005-01-04 15:12 | Link Sean: Ten thousand pardons. My brain temporarily disengaged on both occasions when I made the comment: “carefully consider before responding” I had in fact gone back and read your posts and found common ground. My comment was meant for another and I compounded that initial typo by making reference to you twice. So now I must heed my own advice. In my embarrassment I’ve now decided to take higher ground not to mention whom I originally directed my remark. There is one distinct disadvantage to advancing age...memory. Will you accept my apology? Markku Nordstrom, New York/Helsinki | 2005-01-04 16:34 | Link Kim: I may be in the minority here, but I think that the US has more than enough troops in Iraq. The onus for the security of Iraq must be borne by the Iraqis themselves. As brutal as it sounds, it's up to them to take responsibility to stop the violence. It is a lesson in self-sufficiency and democratic self-determination. And it is a costly lesson, in terms of the Iraqi lives lost. Yet security should not be handed on a silver platter, by an occupying force. The Iraqis are going to have to deal with it sooner or later, so learning to take responsibility for security sooner, while the US still has the willpower to maintain a core force, seems to be the way to go. Americans will not stay there in the numbers that are there now. Eventually, the American electorate will grow tired of it, and demand change. So Iraqis better learn to take responsibility fast for their own security. And the faster they do that, the sooner the Americans can leave. Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-04 18:39 | Link Hi Markku, Yes , now we do have a lot of men/women on the ground in iraq. I was referring to the initial phase of the operation. I think, senator McCaine, a decorated war vet, and certainly a smart strategist himself ,felt that Rumsfeldt may have erred in his initial assessment. The problem is democracy works great in a literate and open society. Iraq has been in a state of feudalism since time immemorial, you cannot just foist 'democracy' on a tribal society (especially one infused thoroughly with islamism -antithesis of democracy ) overnite....the infra-structure or foundations for a strong democracy is not there ( maybe a super-modified form of democracy..whatever that is? short of a dictatorship...a benign paternalistic socialism?). Ooooh and then you have Mr.Øyvind, my good friend , all enamoured with the Mali-an form of democracy....in the case of Mali, a primitive form of democracy is possible because Mali is in the periphery of islamdom... actually, the arab-core of pan arabism, pan-islamism are the central die-hard agitators for a return to a fairy-tale Caliphate ! Aaaah ( to use Mr. Oeyvins' apologymnastics)...but Mr. Oeyvin and the western apologentsias and leftists who artfully dismiss islams mischief and seek to prove the 'viability' and ' acceptability' of islamism points gleefully to Mali, Turkey eetc and exclaims deliciously that yes ...we can have our islam and our turkeys too(democracy too)...to which i would say phooey ptuuuiii...bull-thit ( naughty me)..Islam is not compatible with democracy period...in all the states that espouse democracy, they are in the periphery of islamdom or else the government monitors closely the practise of the religion, or as in the central ex soviet states, there are informants scattered among the ummah ( china likewise) to maintain vigilance...so you do have a form of 'faux-islam'........herein is the paradox, if you want to practise pure pristine unadulterated islam then go for a Caliphate...if you want Democracy ( a workable democracy , not the pure pristine leftist libertarian apologistisk version of theoretical 'demkØrati' a la Øyvin then you must practise ' faux Islam'. Osama bin Ladin is a good muslim, Atatuerk is a bad/or faux muslim ...make sense?
How you stand, the angle of your hands in prayer, how you ablute/wudhu , wash yourself before prayer,...how you have sex ( yes some pious muslims are enjoined to exclaim 'allah akbar' during climax ..i kid you not... i swear in the name of Odin, avalokitesvara, krishna and the goddess athena...there are fatwas regulating every aspect of your lives) more on that later . Totoro -- yes, i do need to do better with paragraphs..ohhh i am so paragraph-challenged. I'll be a good muslimah and blame it on someone else -- its my computer, its made in japan, those damn japs..conniving to unravel my blogs , my japanese is not very good, but i have some choice imprecations for them 悪い日本コンピュータ.....japanese dogs は....wicked の資本家...... ha ha ha の後をつける..there bakka.sushi-face ...take that and that ... wooohee that feels good now that i have appropriately blamed those infidel japanese , i can go back to praying to Allah. Kim Sook-Im 금발 머리 한국 첩보원 Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-04 18:49 | Link HI TOTORO,GERRY TANDBERG, SYLVIA MY COMMENTS TO YOU WAS IN THE PRIOR POST TO MARKKU...SORRY..I NEED TO BREAK THINGS UP INTO SMALLER PARAGRAPHS ..YOU'RE RIGHT TOTORO ( NICE NAME ) Kim Sook-Im Suzanne, California | 2005-01-04 20:33 | Link Bjorn: You chastized Martin for the following comment... "I also note that the worst-hit part of Indonesia, Aceh, seethes with anti-American and anti-Western radicals who will no doubt use this money to kill and wound Westerners." While I am not defending the particulars of Martin's comments, one can look at the history of Sumatra and Indonesia after the eruption of Krakatoa 100 years ago resulted in tsumani deaths similar to what we have today. This event triggered a resurgence of Islam - the belief that the tragedy was someone the result of a lack of faith. This was exploited by radical elements of Islam. This resulted in attacks on Westerners in the region. I believe that this event will repeat the above scenario in the months/years to come. Indonesia does not practice the strict form of Islam and I can see the extremists exploiting this "failing" just as they did 100 years ago. Yes, the region was colonized which could have been a motivation for anti-Western attitudes...but some hard hit regions were popular western tourist attractions - complete with binkins and bars. Therefore, Martin's comments are not that unrealistic if one considers the history of the region and it's proclivities.
Sean (California) | 2005-01-04 21:46 | Link Absolutely, Gerry. And I can relate to the memory problems. I wish they'd come up with something for it...once they find a cure for hairloss. Gerry T, USA | 2005-01-04 23:10 | Link I’ve noted most of the discussion have drifted from Jan Egeland’s comments regarding tsunami relief funds, to a discussion of the effects of the Islamic Cult on civilization. Sounds like Bjorn should extend the discussion on “Anti-Muslim attacks in the Netherlands” and/or change it to “Muslim Influence Worldwide” Markku: I whole hearted agree. The sooner Iraq can transition to democratic self-determination the better. However, that maybe an oxymoron under Islamic leadership, and the reason is as Kim states, “Iraq has been in a state of feudalism since time immemorial, you cannot just foist 'democracy' on a tribal society (especially one infused thoroughly with Islamism)”. I don’t see much hope for Iraq, but I support the intent of the Bush mission. Kim Sook-Im: (Princess Minnehaha of the Korean tribe and 'faux-islam' platinum blonde korean agent provocatrice, and paragraph challanged): Yep, I’m a real blond. However, the years have not been so kind to my goldie-locks and they are now more mousy-brown and sparse to boot. Similarly, age has robbed me of the buff and the only muscle remaining is between my ears…although Sean may disagree. Actually the dumb blond syndrome has served my family quite well…the element of surprise. I do have two politically conservative daughters one may not want to tangle with. Both are in the arts, with one graduating from UCSF. She may hold the distinction of being the only politically conservative grad in many moons. I’m just doing my part so the world will not run short of the real McCoy. I know Norway and Sweden are both doing their part; unfortunately their “now generation” is frequently of conflicting political persuasion. In the event you find yourself at a loss for words (not likely) to describe your contempt (?) for the Islamic religion, feel free elevate you sprit by referring to it as an a ingeniously fabricated lifestyle with the intent to deceive; a cult created to enlist soldiers for battle to perpetuate lies, devoid of compassion to those inside the cult as well as outsides, who’s followers are so hopelessly betrayed nothing short of a miracle will open their eyes. Wow, was that was colorful? On gosh, I fear I may have opened a can of worms. Sandy P | 2005-01-04 23:35 | Link --And I can relate to the memory problems. I wish they'd come up with something for it...-- V*i*agra, IIRC. Gets the blood rushing to more than one brain. Blood is rushing to more than 1 place. Or you can have your carotids roto-rooted.
Sandy P | 2005-01-04 23:40 | Link Via Econopundit: UPDATE: Here's another angle on why everything is now different. The ability to aid 150,000 disaster victims has to do not with your per capita wealth, but with your degree of modernity. Indeed your willingness to do so may also depend on your degree of modernity: The view that wanton behavior provoked the quake was the subject of Friday sermons in Saudi Arabia and of other religious commentaries. "Asia's earthquake, which hit the beaches of prostitution, tourism, immorality and nudity," one commentator said on an Islamist Web site, "is a sign that God is warning mankind from persisting in injustice and immorality before he destroys the ground beneath them." Walid Tabtabai, a member of the Kuwaiti Parliament, said the earthquake was a message. "We believe that what occurs in terms of disasters and afflictions is a test for believers and punishment for the unjust," he wrote in a column in the newspaper Al Watan. Sandy P | 2005-01-04 23:59 | Link Via The Diplomad: Well, dear friends, we're now into the tenth day of the tsunami crisis and in this battered corner of Asia, the UN is nowhere to be seen -- unless you count at meetings, in five-star hotels, and holding press conferences..... ...A couple of EU planners have shown up to begin making arrangements for an assessment team to arrive, etc., etc., you know the rest. Meanwhile, people die.... But all is not lost. The Dutch, who on occasion show the great common sense for which they were once justifiably famous, have signed up with the Aussiyankeebushowardian Core Group. Thanks to a European Diplomad (Yes, The Diplomadic insurgency has gone international!) we have in our possession a short situation report circulated by the Dutch at the most recent EU meeting here in this corner of the Far Abroad. This January 2 report is written by local Dutch diplomats who traveled to Aceh and saw the reality on the ground. We will cite the two principal paragraphs, and leave them unedited in their original rather charming Dutch-English, The US military has arrived and is clearly establishing its presence everywhere in Banda Aceh. They completely have taken over the military hospital, which was a mess until yesterday but is now completely up and running. They brought big stocks of medicines, materials for the operation room, teams of doctors, water and food. Most of the patients who were lying in the hospital untreated for a week have undergone medical treatment by the US teams by this afternoon. US military have unloaded lots of heavy vehicles and organize the logistics with Indonesian military near the airport. A big camp is being set up at a major square in the town. Huge generators are ready to provide electricity. US helicopters fly to places which haven't been reached for the whole week and drop food. The impression it makes on the people is also highly positive; finally something happens in the city of Banda Aceh and finally it seems some people are in control and are doing something. No talking but action. European countries are until now invisible on the ground. IOM staff (note: this is a USAID-funded organization) is very busy briefing the incoming Americans and Australians about the situation. The US, Australia, Singapore and the Indonesian military have started a 'Coalition Co-ordination Centre' in Medan to organize all the incoming and outgoing military flights with aid. A sub-centre is established in Banda Aceh."
Sandy P | 2005-01-05 00:11 | Link LGF has opened its Idiotarian of the Year 2004 award for voting. Vote early and often. Sandy P | 2005-01-05 05:08 | Link OT, but from the IHT's interview w/the french reporters who were hostage: ..."His jailers' references to bin Laden were frequent, he said. A guard insisted to Malbrunot that it was the Christians who were waging war against the Muslims. "Our objective," the jailer went on, sketching a European map of the future that squares with Al Qaeda's notions, "is to overthrow all the Arab rulers, and to return to the caliphate [Islamic rule] from Andalusia [Spain] to the border with China."... They keep telling you and you guys just refuse to listen. Gerry Tandberg, USA | 2005-01-05 06:03 | Link Sandy P: I love your Zest for truth. Keep up the enlightenment. One of these days the rest of west will eventually come around to realizing the darling Islamic cleric are spewing exactly what they really intend on having, a significant presence and influence in every country globally...peferably by force, allowing them to demonstrate the strength of their god, what’s his name. Sandy P | 2005-01-05 07:11 | Link Something else to blame the US for, via Rantburg:
(From MIT)
Sandy P | 2005-01-05 07:13 | Link Yup, Gerry, and it's going to be a very rude awakening, when they realize "traditional muslim lands" includes up to Vienna. Staring them right in the face, they don't pay attention to their own history. We are the enemy and must be stopped at ALL costs. Sandy P | 2005-01-05 08:05 | Link The Stingy List - $301 MILLION and counting - that's not from our government, that's from our people/religious groups/corps. http://blog.simmins.org/td.pdf That obviously does not include approx $4 Billion worth of military hardware/soldiers sitting off their shores at a cost of about $5 million/day. Nor our government contributions. Sean (California) | 2005-01-05 09:58 | Link Sandy P., I don't know if you read the same article I did, but in the Guardian the french journalists also said that one of the main interrogators ("fatso", he was called) was a former Saddam intelligence officer. And like you pointed out, every other link seems to point to al-Qaeda. No indigenous freedom fighters to be found. Sandy P | 2005-01-05 17:53 | Link I read the IHT, Sean. --- Read Rantburg - rough place, need to know your stuff for war info. And Winds Of Change is good, too. Gerry T, USA | 2005-01-05 18:59 | Link Friends, especially our European cousins, I only wish I could say I wrote the “An open letter to Europe”, written by Herbert E. Meyer on November 11, 2004. With such accuracy and eloquence he has hit the nail on its preverbal head. Please take a few moments to read this excellent article by using the link below. I have a significant number of relatives living in Norway and can attest to the fact they DO NOT understand why so many of us think as we do. Mr. Meyer identified the genuine “Heartbeat of America”, and it isn’t made by General Motors. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4006 Arid Faklan, Oslo | 2005-01-06 08:23 | Link Gerry T: that "open letter" is wrong in so many ways... Seriously: I wish those of you who complain so much about Europe not understanding you and giving in to irrational hatred, make at least a minimum effort to understand Europe. And the first step in that is in getting the facts right: Abortions are not at an all-time high, they are at an all-time low. Northern and Western European abortion rates are lower than in the US. France has a large, expensive military with global reach just as does Britain. The historical reasons behind Germany and Italy's anti-militarism should be pretty obvious. And those four are the big, wealthy states of Europe. What, you expect Norway, Luxembourg and Portugal to match America's military? Perhaps if your government stops opposing the drive to dissolve NATO and build an EU army, it would help. Besides, your good pal Britain wouldn't be your good pal Britain if the British people actually had a say. Attitudes against US foreign policy are stronger there than in most other European countries. But they have the same kind of dysfunctional winner-takes-all "democracy" as the US. Few children, fewer marriages. Sure. But the "healthy mom+dad household" remains an ideological construct. Studies here have show that children of gay parents, or children of single mothers or of divorcees , do not grow up any more unhealthy than those from a mom+dad household. That may not apply to the US, though, since the general permissiveness in society towards "untradional" family structures is a pretty important factor. Lots of nobel prize winners, lots of good universities. Absolutely. But they don't help us understand why Americans voted for Bush (or in general support that kind of rhetorics and foreign policy), since for the most part the American acedemic community is as mystified as we are. Neither does your wonderfull economic enginge, since that resides largely in the states that very clearly did not vote for mr. Bush. There is not one America. And there is even less one Europe. Hand pick critical facts all you want, but they do not apply to all of Europe. Germany is experiencing an economic recession, but in Scandinavia it's going rather well (and we're the ones with the highest taxes and biggest wellfare states). Those very Catholic South Europeans are the same ones who are doing the most to bring down the birth rate. Your "coalition of the willing" pals in Eastern Europe are the ones with the large abortion rates, and they are also the Sandy P: No, you're not the enemy, you're just the guys we thought were friends and allies but who these days make it damned hard to confront the enemy in a sensible way. Thanks a lot, by the way, for radicalizing all those new Iraqi jihadis in our back yard. We really didn't have enough on our hands with the Afghans, Saudis and Iranians. But I suppose it's all our fault, for "ignoring" them. all the best, Øyvind, Bergen | 2005-01-06 12:02 | Link Could you perhaps inform me, Kim Sook-Im, about what makes Mali a "primitive democracy"? Is it the free elections? The open debates? The freedom of speech? The many political parties? The (too) many presidential candidates? You must truly possess a strange worldview, Kim Sook-Im, when you manage to make Singapore a more or less ideal democracy (an island of it amidst undemocratic countries, you say, although they are about as undemocratic as Singapore itself, in fact). Singapore you can excuse... of course you can excuse Singapore - it is not a predominantly Muslim country and as such different standards apply. Always different standards. Would you excuse a Muslim country having a "somewhat paternalistic democracy" (i.e. lacking the possibility for the people to actually choose their leaders), too? Somehow I doubt this. Islam and democracy is incompatible you say. Mali is a Muslim country. It has democracy. Those are the facts. Mali might be peripheral (the Islam of Mali, though, is quite representative of much of the Islam in Africa, the country is hardly peripheral historically and it is strategically placed in Muslim Africa. I do not wonder why the US uses some energy there, and the work they do - for any of you who bother to check this article out - is also one of the best ways they are fighting terrorism anywhere in the world). Hail to America for that one! Mali is one of the countries where the true battle is fought. This is not a battle between Islam and democracy, it is a battle within Islam - a battle about the very soul of the world religion. Its a battle fought by people you include in what you constantly refer to as a cult of death-and-I-do-not-know-what-else. Alas, you choose to support Osama bin Laden - saying that he is the one with the right interpretation of Islam (oh, I could list a hundred why-nots, here, but I will refrain, I will refrain). Of course, you are welcome to do that, we both live in free country. You are also wrong to do it. For the jihadis and their friends having your kin as enemies is worth more than any ally. But your foolishness increases. Firstly you manage to equalize two trends that are distinct and at many times conflicting: panarabism (often secularist) and panislamism (hardly secularist). You seem to forget not only that four fifths of Muslims are not Arabs, but also that militant Islamists often come from countries just as 'peripheral' as Mali. And Kim Sook-Im, Kemal Ataturk was a secularist. Osama bin Laden is a bad Muslim. Badshah Khan, one of Gandhis allies, was a good one. Oh, the poor Badshah Khans of the world that will have to fight your kin on one side, the concervatives on another side and Osamas kinsmen on the third. Øyvind Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-06 14:38 | Link Oeyvind wrote: And Kim Sook-Im, Kemal Ataturk was a secularist.
Sandy P | 2005-01-06 17:31 | Link --...he was a lip service muslim... -- You mean like the muslim who's a big investor in (US Indian) casinos? Or is it just splitting hairs - since he doesn't gamble, it's ok? I would love to see the numbers out of the casino in Jericho. Sandy P | 2005-01-06 17:40 | Link Sensible way? Please. Your insight would be very valuable at Rantburg. Should have let US finish the job in 91 - but "stability" is much more important....
Sandy P | 2005-01-06 17:52 | Link -- But they have the same kind of dysfunctional winner-takes-all "democracy" as the US.-- That statement shows you should make a minimal effort to understand America. The Constitution spells out how we work, the only office w/winner take all is the President - and only if the Congress - me allows that position to have said power. The President doesn't have the power you think that position does.
Irrational hatred? Check out No Pasaran and David's Medienkritik. Or the BBC. Sandy P | 2005-01-06 19:16 | Link And you wonder why we don't listen, via EURSOC: Another media outlet which seems set to keep delivering its patented rubbish well into the future is the Guardian. Reporting on the US secretary of state Colin Powell's visit to the devasted Aceh region yesterday, the Guardian couldn't resist wheeling out a couple of nameless NGO managers, who described his visit as "atrocity tourism." A number of NGOs moaned that Powell's presence held up arrivals of aid to Aceh - though Indonesia's welfare minister, who is co-ordinating aid efforts in the region - was delighted to have the secretary of state there. NGOs taking time out from their aid efforts to criticise Americans is nothing new, but the media's inability to confront a global disaster that it cannot blame on the US definitely is. This time, the press has had to attack America's 'stinginess' for not promising enough aid cash at the outset. When Washington dipped deeper into its pockets, the US was blamed variously for not sharing the technology which may have given warning of the tsunami and not having sent equipment early enough. Even when aid and money began to arrive, the US found itself criticised for using the disaster as a PR opportunity to rebuild its image post-Iraq. Once again, the US finds itself in a no-win situation. Can you imagine the reaction of the press if the Pacific fleet had steamed uninvited to the Indonesian or Indian coast? Or if US transport planes had arrived at Indonesian airports (once US troops and engineers had secured a landing area?) However, if you want the real wacky stuff, you can always rely on the Arab world to come up with the goods. An AP report looks at Arab media reaction to US aid, citing the predictable "cynical PR exercise line" alongside claims that America "knew about the tsunami in advance" and moved its bases in the area before the disaster. --- But don't worry, Jacques rides to the rescue, hopefully not in that radiation-leaking hunk of junque De Gaulle, via No Pasaran: Meanwhile, Roger Cohen adds that Jacques Chirac, the French president, sees a chance to place the United Nations, rather than the United States, at the center of an international initiative that plays to the image he seeks to cultivate of Europe as peacemaker and donor. His government has proposed the creation of a global civil protection force to intervene in such emergencies, a form of intervention that could scarcely be more distinct from that of American forces in Iraq. The United Nations, hurt by the oil-for-food scandal, battling the image of ineffective talk-shop, sees an opportunity to demonstrate its ability to coordinate an emergency relief operation. Its bureaucrats have become loquacious, indulged by European television networks with on-air time to fill. Not all of this is edifying. …
We're almost at $400 million in private/corp/Not-for-profit donations. That would cover the bulk of the proposed EU. Kim Sook-Im,US | 2005-01-06 21:59 | Link Sandy, I'm curious if you perchance have figures for donations from the muslim countries..let's see how they compare. Further have you all noticed that all those muslim sites ex Islam-on-line to which Oeyvind is a loyal subscriber almost invariable talks about charity to muslims... accepting aid is permissible if it 'further the cause of muslims '( i infer that as bigotry at its worse during a time of natural disaster...if you are an infidel good luck to you). I had reminded Oeyvind about the case of a british journalist who was wounded in the streets of Saudi arabia, and as he lay writhing in pain on the ground, he had to wave his little green book/ Quran to passers-by declaring himself to be a muslim and for the muslim public to help him lest he bled to death...well he was blond haired and blue-eyed and so needed a dog-tag to identify his muslimness in order to receive charity....isn't this an eye-0pener about the nature of this Cult. Further, i guess the local natives will have to call the local imam to the scene of the wounded journalist and if they are not sure if he really is a card-carrying muslim, they may have to initiate him into the Cult, urge him to say the shahadah/declaration of the faith ( la ilahi ila allahu, wa mohammad rasoolulah etc) - and now that he is in God's computer data-base and promises to perform all the rites and rituals, bowing, bending scraping in the right direction facing Mekkah ( mind you not more than 5 degrees off tolerance level from true North ), promises to pay the country club fee/zakat, practise misogyny ( an almost universal requisite of this all-boys club), pray 5x/day.. and it better be in classical arabic , which most arabs can't speak, and since God is monolingual and only comprehends classical arabic -- reminds you of another ecclesiastic idiot, that guy in france who wanted to celeberate the tridentine mass in Latin only..oh dear , OY VEH...now God only speaks Latin ..don't you love this religious goofies? and to think they have l plus billion customers willing to tithe to the various mosques and churches of stooopidity) .....o.k. now that he has been certified bona-fide muslim, only then will they call the ambulance and render him aid....that is if he has not bled to death by then. Regarding the islamists that have a finger in the pie (investment pie) in the local indian Casinos..i assume they are silent partners...but again , Sandy, I agree with you..technically a muslim is not to engage in gambling or anything that offends Allah ( and God knows, breathing too deep , probably would offend their Deity |
