Activism Discussion: Thomas Friedman Wants A Blacklist For "Excuse Makers"

Thomas Friedman Wants A Blacklist For "Excuse Makers"
Posts: 94

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   Next  (First | Last)

Josh Dougherty
2005-07-30 04:51:57 EST
A New Blacklist for "Excuse Makers"
Those who think Iraq War sparks terror are "despicable," says Friedman
http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0728-03.htm

NEW YORK - July 27 - New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has
urged the U.S. government to create blacklists of condemned political
speech--not only by those who advocate violence, but also by those who
believe that U.S. government actions may encourage violent reprisals. The
latter group, which Friedman called "just one notch less despicable than the
terrorists," includes a majority of Americans, according to recent polls.

Friedman's July 22 column proposed that the State Department, in order
to "shine a spotlight on hate speech wherever it appears," create a
quarterly "War of Ideas Report, which would focus on those religious leaders
and writers who are inciting violence against others." But Friedman said the
governmental speech monitoring should go beyond those who actually advocate
violence, and also include what former State Department spokesperson Jamie
Rubin calls "excuse makers." Friedman wrote:

"After every major terrorist incident, the excuse makers come out to
tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq explains why the
terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch less despicable
than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When you live in an open
society like London, where anyone with a grievance can publish an article,
run for office or start a political movement, the notion that blowing up a
busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is somehow
'understandable' is outrageous. 'It erases the distinction between
legitimate dissent and terrorism,' Mr. Rubin said, 'and an open society
needs to maintain a clear wall between them.'"

The "despicable" idea that there may be a connection between acts of
terrorism and particular policies by Western countries is one that is widely
held by the citizens of those countries. Asked by the CNN/Gallup poll on
July 7, "Do you think the terrorists attacked London today mostly because
Great Britain supports the United States in the war in Iraq?" 56 percent of
Americans agreed. In a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll (7/7-10/05), 54 percent
said "the war with Iraq has made the U.S....less safe from terrorism." Since
they see a connection between Iraq and terrorism, a majority of Americans
are what Friedman calls "excuse makers" who "deserve to be exposed."

Friedman's column urged the government to create quarterly lists of
"hatemongers" and "excuse makers"--as well as "truth tellers," Muslims who
agree with Friedman's critique of Islam. Friedman's proposed list of "excuse
makers" would have to include his New York Times colleague Bob Herbert, who
wrote in his July 25 column, "There is still no indication that the Bush
administration recognizes the utter folly of its war in Iraq, which has been
like a constant spray of gasoline on the fire of global terrorism."

Leading members of the U.S. intelligence community might also find
themselves on such a blacklist, based on a report summarized earlier this
year in the Washington Post (1/14/05):

"Iraq has replaced Afghanistan as the training ground for the next
generation of 'professionalized' terrorists, according to a report released
yesterday by the National Intelligence Council, the CIA director's think
tank.... According to the NIC report, Iraq has joined the list of
conflicts--including the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate, and independence
movements in Chechnya, Kashmir, Mindanao in the Philippines, and southern
Thailand--that have deepened solidarity among Muslims and helped spread
radical Islamic ideology."

Though Friedman calls on the State Department to compile the "Top 10
hatemongers" list in a "nondiscriminatory way," it's doubtful that such a
list would, in fact, even-handedly include all advocates of violence. It
would not be likely, for example, to include someone like Thomas Friedman,
who during the Kosovo War (4/6/99) called on the Clinton administration to
"give war a chance," writing, "Let's see what 12 weeks of less than surgical
bombing does." In a follow-up column (4/23/99) he declared that "Like it or
not, we are at war with the Serbian nation," and insisted that "every power
grid, water pipe, bridge, road and war-related factory has to be targeted."
Despite the fact that by calling for attacks on civilian targets he was
advocating war crimes, Friedman should have no fear that he'll find himself
on a State Department list of "hatemongers."

Friedman's suggestion that those who seek to understand or explain
political violence are not part of "legitimate dissent" comes at a time when
calls for censorship are becoming more and more blatant. Bill O'Reilly
(Radio Factor, 6/20/05, cited by Media Matters, 6/22/05) made a chilling
call for the criminalization war opponents:

"You must know the difference between dissent from the Iraq War and
the war on terror and undermining it. And any American that undermines that
war, with our soldiers in the field, or undermines the war on terror, with
3,000 dead on 9/11, is a traitor. Everybody got it? Dissent, fine;
undermining, you're a traitor. Got it? So, all those clowns over at the
liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you have
that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains, because
they, you know, they're undermining everything and they don't care, couldn't
care less."

The call for the arrests of Air America Radio hosts was said as though
it were a joke, though O'Reilly is deadly serious when he says that the
commentators on that network are "undermining" the war--and that such
"undermining" is treason.

O'Reilly more recently (7/25/05) went after Herbert's column that
argued that the Iraq War fueled terrorism: "Bob Herbert is most likely
helping the terrorists, but his hatred of Mr. Bush blinds him to that. He's
not alone, but this kind of stuff has got to stop. We're now fighting for
our lives. And those helping the enemy will be brought to your attention."

"Attention," rather than arrests, is all that Friedman has threatened
"excuse makers" like Herbert with. But it's a small step, as O'Reilly's
rhetoric demonstrates, between marginalizing critics of U.S. foreign policy
as "just one notch less despicable than the terrorists"--and criminalizing
criticism itself.

ACTION:
Please let Thomas Friedman know that opponents of the Iraq War do not
deserve to be on a government blacklist--even if they oppose the war because
they believe it encourages terrorism.

Thomas Friedman
c/o New York Times Editorial Page
e*l@nytimes.com

As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you
maintain a polite tone.

Read Friedman's column here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/opinion/22friedman.html




Josh Dougherty
2005-07-30 04:56:31 EST
Here's the Friedman article itself:

Giving the Hatemongers No Place to Hide

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: July 22, 2005

I wasn't surprised to read that British police officers in white protective
suits and blue gloves were combing through the Iqra Learning Center
bookstore in Leeds for clues to the 7/7 London bombings. Some of the 7/7
bombers hung out at the bookstore. And I won't be surprised if today's
bombers also sampled the literature there.

Iqra not only sold hatemongering Islamist literature, but, according to The
Wall Street Journal, was "the sole distributor of Islamgames, a U.S.-based
company that makes video games. The video games feature apocalyptic battles
between defenders of Islam and opponents. One game, Ummah Defense I, has the
world 'finally united under the Banner of Islam' in 2114, until a revolt by
disbelievers. The player's goal is to seek out and destroy the
disbelievers."

Guess what: words matter. Bookstores matter. Video games matter. But here is
our challenge: If the primary terrorism problem we face today can
effectively be addressed only by a war of ideas within Islam - a war between
life-affirming Muslims against those who want to turn one of the world's
great religions into a death cult - what can the rest of us do?

More than just put up walls. We need to shine a spotlight on hate speech
wherever it appears. The State Department produces an annual human rights
report. Henceforth, it should also produce a quarterly War of Ideas Report,
which would focus on those religious leaders and writers who are inciting
violence against others.

I would compile it in a nondiscriminatory way. I want the names of the
Jewish settler extremists who wrote "Muhammad Is a Pig" on buildings in Gaza
right up there with Sheik Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, a Saudi who is imam of
Islam's holy mosque in Mecca. According to the Memri translation service,
the imam was barred from Canada following "a report about his sermons by
Memri that included Al-Sudayyis calling Jews 'the scum of the earth' and
'monkeys and pigs' who should be 'annihilated.' Other enemies of Islam were
referred to by Sheik Al-Sudayyis as 'worshipers of the cross' and
'idol-worshiping Hindus' who must be fought."

Sunlight is more important than you think. Those who spread hate do not like
to be exposed, noted Yigal Carmon, the founder of Memri, which monitors the
Arab-Muslim media. The hate spreaders assume that they are talking only to
their own, in their own language, and can get away with murder. When their
words are spotlighted, they often feel pressure to retract, defend or
explain them.

"Whenever they are exposed, they react the next day," Mr. Carmon said. "No
one wants to be exposed in the West as a preacher of hate."

We also need to spotlight the "excuse makers," the former State Department
spokesman James Rubin said. After every major terrorist incident, the excuse
makers come out to tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq
explains why the terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch
less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When you
live in an open society like London, where anyone with a grievance can
publish an article, run for office or start a political movement, the notion
that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is
somehow "understandable" is outrageous. "It erases the distinction between
legitimate dissent and terrorism," Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society
needs to maintain a clear wall between them."

There is no political justification for 9/11, 7/7 or 7/21. As the Middle
East expert Stephen P. Cohen put it: "These terrorists are what they do."
And what they do is murder.

Finally, we also need to shine a bright light on the "truth tellers." Every
week some courageous Arab or Muslim intellectual, cleric or columnist
publishes an essay in his or her media calling on fellow Muslims to deal
with the cancer in their midst. The truth tellers' words also need to be
disseminated globally. "The rulers in these countries have no interest in
amplifying the voices of moderates because the moderates often disagree with
the rulers as much as they disagree with the extremists," said Husain
Haqqani, author of the new book "Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military."
"You have to deal us moderates into the game by helping to amplify our
voices and exposing the extremists and their amen corner."

Every quarter, the State Department should identify the Top 10 hatemongers,
excuse makers and truth tellers in the world. It wouldn't be a cure-all. But
it would be a message to the extremists: you are free to say what you want,
but we are free to listen, to let the whole world know what you are saying
and to protect every free society from hate spreaders like you. Words
matter.




Roger
2005-07-30 05:06:31 EST
The damn liberal New York Times and its liberal columnists!


"Josh Dougherty" <jdoc1357b9@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:64ydnWj1tpQzonbfRVn-2Q@comcast.com...
> A New Blacklist for "Excuse Makers"
> Those who think Iraq War sparks terror are "despicable," says
> Friedman
> http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0728-03.htm
>
> NEW YORK - July 27 - New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has
> urged the U.S. government to create blacklists of condemned political
> speech--not only by those who advocate violence, but also by those who
> believe that U.S. government actions may encourage violent reprisals. The
> latter group, which Friedman called "just one notch less despicable than
> the
> terrorists," includes a majority of Americans, according to recent polls.
>
> Friedman's July 22 column proposed that the State Department, in
> order
> to "shine a spotlight on hate speech wherever it appears," create a
> quarterly "War of Ideas Report, which would focus on those religious
> leaders
> and writers who are inciting violence against others." But Friedman said
> the
> governmental speech monitoring should go beyond those who actually
> advocate
> violence, and also include what former State Department spokesperson Jamie
> Rubin calls "excuse makers." Friedman wrote:
>
> "After every major terrorist incident, the excuse makers come out to
> tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq explains why the
> terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch less despicable
> than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When you live in an
> open
> society like London, where anyone with a grievance can publish an article,
> run for office or start a political movement, the notion that blowing up a
> busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is somehow
> 'understandable' is outrageous. 'It erases the distinction between
> legitimate dissent and terrorism,' Mr. Rubin said, 'and an open society
> needs to maintain a clear wall between them.'"
>
> The "despicable" idea that there may be a connection between acts of
> terrorism and particular policies by Western countries is one that is
> widely
> held by the citizens of those countries. Asked by the CNN/Gallup poll on
> July 7, "Do you think the terrorists attacked London today mostly because
> Great Britain supports the United States in the war in Iraq?" 56 percent
> of
> Americans agreed. In a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll (7/7-10/05), 54 percent
> said "the war with Iraq has made the U.S....less safe from terrorism."
> Since
> they see a connection between Iraq and terrorism, a majority of Americans
> are what Friedman calls "excuse makers" who "deserve to be exposed."
>
> Friedman's column urged the government to create quarterly lists of
> "hatemongers" and "excuse makers"--as well as "truth tellers," Muslims who
> agree with Friedman's critique of Islam. Friedman's proposed list of
> "excuse
> makers" would have to include his New York Times colleague Bob Herbert,
> who
> wrote in his July 25 column, "There is still no indication that the Bush
> administration recognizes the utter folly of its war in Iraq, which has
> been
> like a constant spray of gasoline on the fire of global terrorism."
>
> Leading members of the U.S. intelligence community might also find
> themselves on such a blacklist, based on a report summarized earlier this
> year in the Washington Post (1/14/05):
>
> "Iraq has replaced Afghanistan as the training ground for the next
> generation of 'professionalized' terrorists, according to a report
> released
> yesterday by the National Intelligence Council, the CIA director's think
> tank.... According to the NIC report, Iraq has joined the list of
> conflicts--including the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate, and independence
> movements in Chechnya, Kashmir, Mindanao in the Philippines, and southern
> Thailand--that have deepened solidarity among Muslims and helped spread
> radical Islamic ideology."
>
> Though Friedman calls on the State Department to compile the "Top 10
> hatemongers" list in a "nondiscriminatory way," it's doubtful that such a
> list would, in fact, even-handedly include all advocates of violence. It
> would not be likely, for example, to include someone like Thomas Friedman,
> who during the Kosovo War (4/6/99) called on the Clinton administration to
> "give war a chance," writing, "Let's see what 12 weeks of less than
> surgical
> bombing does." In a follow-up column (4/23/99) he declared that "Like it
> or
> not, we are at war with the Serbian nation," and insisted that "every
> power
> grid, water pipe, bridge, road and war-related factory has to be
> targeted."
> Despite the fact that by calling for attacks on civilian targets he was
> advocating war crimes, Friedman should have no fear that he'll find
> himself
> on a State Department list of "hatemongers."
>
> Friedman's suggestion that those who seek to understand or explain
> political violence are not part of "legitimate dissent" comes at a time
> when
> calls for censorship are becoming more and more blatant. Bill O'Reilly
> (Radio Factor, 6/20/05, cited by Media Matters, 6/22/05) made a chilling
> call for the criminalization war opponents:
>
> "You must know the difference between dissent from the Iraq War and
> the war on terror and undermining it. And any American that undermines
> that
> war, with our soldiers in the field, or undermines the war on terror, with
> 3,000 dead on 9/11, is a traitor. Everybody got it? Dissent, fine;
> undermining, you're a traitor. Got it? So, all those clowns over at the
> liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you
> have
> that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains, because
> they, you know, they're undermining everything and they don't care,
> couldn't
> care less."
>
> The call for the arrests of Air America Radio hosts was said as
> though
> it were a joke, though O'Reilly is deadly serious when he says that the
> commentators on that network are "undermining" the war--and that such
> "undermining" is treason.
>
> O'Reilly more recently (7/25/05) went after Herbert's column that
> argued that the Iraq War fueled terrorism: "Bob Herbert is most likely
> helping the terrorists, but his hatred of Mr. Bush blinds him to that.
> He's
> not alone, but this kind of stuff has got to stop. We're now fighting for
> our lives. And those helping the enemy will be brought to your attention."
>
> "Attention," rather than arrests, is all that Friedman has threatened
> "excuse makers" like Herbert with. But it's a small step, as O'Reilly's
> rhetoric demonstrates, between marginalizing critics of U.S. foreign
> policy
> as "just one notch less despicable than the terrorists"--and criminalizing
> criticism itself.
>
> ACTION:
> Please let Thomas Friedman know that opponents of the Iraq War do not
> deserve to be on a government blacklist--even if they oppose the war
> because
> they believe it encourages terrorism.
>
> Thomas Friedman
> c/o New York Times Editorial Page
> editorial@nytimes.com
>
> As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you
> maintain a polite tone.
>
> Read Friedman's column here:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/opinion/22friedman.html
>
>
>



Randy Cox
2005-07-30 05:58:31 EST

"Josh Dougherty" <jdoc1357b9@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iI6dnRpEq6Zf3XbfRVn-tA@comcast.com...
."
>
> We also need to spotlight the "excuse makers," the former State Department
> spokesman James Rubin said. After every major terrorist incident, the
> excuse
> makers come out to tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq
> explains why the terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch
> less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When
> you
> live in an open society like London, where anyone with a grievance can
> publish an article, run for office or start a political movement, the
> notion
> that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is
> somehow "understandable" is outrageous. "It erases the distinction between
> legitimate dissent and terrorism," Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society
> needs to maintain a clear wall between them."
>

That is the most dangerous suggestion I have heard since the "War on Terror"
started. I already see patterns of behavior like this, only the black list
is written in ether rather than on paper. People have lost their jobs as
comics, singers, newspaper writers and editors. Once an idea like this
becomes accepted there is no mechanism to reverse it. Once the collective
mindset becomes the norm, then anyone recognizing the problems it creates
would be stamped out by those which were still part of the collective.

So no one could point out any negative result of Iraq. If one American is
killed in Iraq, the group mind would say this was a good thing which
prevents hate. If a thousand innocent Iraqis were killed, the group mind
would have to say this was a good thing which prevents hate. Everything
would have a foregone conclusion and not be open to readjustment. Once
error seeped into the collective mind.....there would exist no way to
correct it.

James Rubin is flirting with complete insanity. As a free man with free
flow of ideas and a sense of worth as an individual, I reject this as a
total absurdity.

Randy R. Cox



Toby
2005-07-30 07:10:02 EST
Welcome to McCarthyism II.

Toby

"Josh Dougherty" <jdoc1357b9@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iI6dnRpEq6Zf3XbfRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> Here's the Friedman article itself:
>
> Giving the Hatemongers No Place to Hide
>
> By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
> Published: July 22, 2005
>
> I wasn't surprised to read that British police officers in white
> protective
> suits and blue gloves were combing through the Iqra Learning Center
> bookstore in Leeds for clues to the 7/7 London bombings. Some of the 7/7
> bombers hung out at the bookstore. And I won't be surprised if today's
> bombers also sampled the literature there.
>
> Iqra not only sold hatemongering Islamist literature, but, according to
> The
> Wall Street Journal, was "the sole distributor of Islamgames, a U.S.-based
> company that makes video games. The video games feature apocalyptic
> battles
> between defenders of Islam and opponents. One game, Ummah Defense I, has
> the
> world 'finally united under the Banner of Islam' in 2114, until a revolt
> by
> disbelievers. The player's goal is to seek out and destroy the
> disbelievers."
>
> Guess what: words matter. Bookstores matter. Video games matter. But here
> is
> our challenge: If the primary terrorism problem we face today can
> effectively be addressed only by a war of ideas within Islam - a war
> between
> life-affirming Muslims against those who want to turn one of the world's
> great religions into a death cult - what can the rest of us do?
>
> More than just put up walls. We need to shine a spotlight on hate speech
> wherever it appears. The State Department produces an annual human rights
> report. Henceforth, it should also produce a quarterly War of Ideas
> Report,
> which would focus on those religious leaders and writers who are inciting
> violence against others.
>
> I would compile it in a nondiscriminatory way. I want the names of the
> Jewish settler extremists who wrote "Muhammad Is a Pig" on buildings in
> Gaza
> right up there with Sheik Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, a Saudi who is imam
> of
> Islam's holy mosque in Mecca. According to the Memri translation service,
> the imam was barred from Canada following "a report about his sermons by
> Memri that included Al-Sudayyis calling Jews 'the scum of the earth' and
> 'monkeys and pigs' who should be 'annihilated.' Other enemies of Islam
> were
> referred to by Sheik Al-Sudayyis as 'worshipers of the cross' and
> 'idol-worshiping Hindus' who must be fought."
>
> Sunlight is more important than you think. Those who spread hate do not
> like
> to be exposed, noted Yigal Carmon, the founder of Memri, which monitors
> the
> Arab-Muslim media. The hate spreaders assume that they are talking only to
> their own, in their own language, and can get away with murder. When their
> words are spotlighted, they often feel pressure to retract, defend or
> explain them.
>
> "Whenever they are exposed, they react the next day," Mr. Carmon said. "No
> one wants to be exposed in the West as a preacher of hate."
>
> We also need to spotlight the "excuse makers," the former State Department
> spokesman James Rubin said. After every major terrorist incident, the
> excuse
> makers come out to tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq
> explains why the terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch
> less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When
> you
> live in an open society like London, where anyone with a grievance can
> publish an article, run for office or start a political movement, the
> notion
> that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is
> somehow "understandable" is outrageous. "It erases the distinction between
> legitimate dissent and terrorism," Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society
> needs to maintain a clear wall between them."
>
> There is no political justification for 9/11, 7/7 or 7/21. As the Middle
> East expert Stephen P. Cohen put it: "These terrorists are what they do."
> And what they do is murder.
>
> Finally, we also need to shine a bright light on the "truth tellers."
> Every
> week some courageous Arab or Muslim intellectual, cleric or columnist
> publishes an essay in his or her media calling on fellow Muslims to deal
> with the cancer in their midst. The truth tellers' words also need to be
> disseminated globally. "The rulers in these countries have no interest in
> amplifying the voices of moderates because the moderates often disagree
> with
> the rulers as much as they disagree with the extremists," said Husain
> Haqqani, author of the new book "Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military."
> "You have to deal us moderates into the game by helping to amplify our
> voices and exposing the extremists and their amen corner."
>
> Every quarter, the State Department should identify the Top 10
> hatemongers,
> excuse makers and truth tellers in the world. It wouldn't be a cure-all.
> But
> it would be a message to the extremists: you are free to say what you
> want,
> but we are free to listen, to let the whole world know what you are saying
> and to protect every free society from hate spreaders like you. Words
> matter.
>
>
>



Roger
2005-07-30 07:12:57 EST
"Toby" <zdftokyo@gool.com> wrote in message
news:42eb5fb5$0$84125$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...
> Welcome to McCarthyism II.

Certainly what it would be.

And it's not like Congress is lacking in willing heirs to McCarthy.


>
> Toby
>
> "Josh Dougherty" <jdoc1357b9@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:iI6dnRpEq6Zf3XbfRVn-tA@comcast.com...
>> Here's the Friedman article itself:
>>
>> Giving the Hatemongers No Place to Hide
>>
>> By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
>> Published: July 22, 2005
>>
>> I wasn't surprised to read that British police officers in white
>> protective
>> suits and blue gloves were combing through the Iqra Learning Center
>> bookstore in Leeds for clues to the 7/7 London bombings. Some of the 7/7
>> bombers hung out at the bookstore. And I won't be surprised if today's
>> bombers also sampled the literature there.
>>
>> Iqra not only sold hatemongering Islamist literature, but, according to
>> The
>> Wall Street Journal, was "the sole distributor of Islamgames, a
>> U.S.-based
>> company that makes video games. The video games feature apocalyptic
>> battles
>> between defenders of Islam and opponents. One game, Ummah Defense I, has
>> the
>> world 'finally united under the Banner of Islam' in 2114, until a revolt
>> by
>> disbelievers. The player's goal is to seek out and destroy the
>> disbelievers."
>>
>> Guess what: words matter. Bookstores matter. Video games matter. But here
>> is
>> our challenge: If the primary terrorism problem we face today can
>> effectively be addressed only by a war of ideas within Islam - a war
>> between
>> life-affirming Muslims against those who want to turn one of the world's
>> great religions into a death cult - what can the rest of us do?
>>
>> More than just put up walls. We need to shine a spotlight on hate speech
>> wherever it appears. The State Department produces an annual human rights
>> report. Henceforth, it should also produce a quarterly War of Ideas
>> Report,
>> which would focus on those religious leaders and writers who are inciting
>> violence against others.
>>
>> I would compile it in a nondiscriminatory way. I want the names of the
>> Jewish settler extremists who wrote "Muhammad Is a Pig" on buildings in
>> Gaza
>> right up there with Sheik Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, a Saudi who is imam
>> of
>> Islam's holy mosque in Mecca. According to the Memri translation service,
>> the imam was barred from Canada following "a report about his sermons by
>> Memri that included Al-Sudayyis calling Jews 'the scum of the earth' and
>> 'monkeys and pigs' who should be 'annihilated.' Other enemies of Islam
>> were
>> referred to by Sheik Al-Sudayyis as 'worshipers of the cross' and
>> 'idol-worshiping Hindus' who must be fought."
>>
>> Sunlight is more important than you think. Those who spread hate do not
>> like
>> to be exposed, noted Yigal Carmon, the founder of Memri, which monitors
>> the
>> Arab-Muslim media. The hate spreaders assume that they are talking only
>> to
>> their own, in their own language, and can get away with murder. When
>> their
>> words are spotlighted, they often feel pressure to retract, defend or
>> explain them.
>>
>> "Whenever they are exposed, they react the next day," Mr. Carmon said.
>> "No
>> one wants to be exposed in the West as a preacher of hate."
>>
>> We also need to spotlight the "excuse makers," the former State
>> Department
>> spokesman James Rubin said. After every major terrorist incident, the
>> excuse
>> makers come out to tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq
>> explains why the terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch
>> less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When
>> you
>> live in an open society like London, where anyone with a grievance can
>> publish an article, run for office or start a political movement, the
>> notion
>> that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is
>> somehow "understandable" is outrageous. "It erases the distinction
>> between
>> legitimate dissent and terrorism," Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society
>> needs to maintain a clear wall between them."
>>
>> There is no political justification for 9/11, 7/7 or 7/21. As the Middle
>> East expert Stephen P. Cohen put it: "These terrorists are what they do."
>> And what they do is murder.
>>
>> Finally, we also need to shine a bright light on the "truth tellers."
>> Every
>> week some courageous Arab or Muslim intellectual, cleric or columnist
>> publishes an essay in his or her media calling on fellow Muslims to deal
>> with the cancer in their midst. The truth tellers' words also need to be
>> disseminated globally. "The rulers in these countries have no interest in
>> amplifying the voices of moderates because the moderates often disagree
>> with
>> the rulers as much as they disagree with the extremists," said Husain
>> Haqqani, author of the new book "Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military."
>> "You have to deal us moderates into the game by helping to amplify our
>> voices and exposing the extremists and their amen corner."
>>
>> Every quarter, the State Department should identify the Top 10
>> hatemongers,
>> excuse makers and truth tellers in the world. It wouldn't be a cure-all.
>> But
>> it would be a message to the extremists: you are free to say what you
>> want,
>> but we are free to listen, to let the whole world know what you are
>> saying
>> and to protect every free society from hate spreaders like you. Words
>> matter.
>>
>>
>>
>
>



Gaffo
2005-07-30 08:20:34 EST
Josh Dougherty wrote:


'and an open society
> needs to maintain a clear wall between them.'"



mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm- ya, whatever.

Feidman is a fruit. I wonder if he is a Zionist, he sure as shit has
sounded like one since 911.


He ans Sharon butt buddies?

--

It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the
other hand,presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still
both objects are within your power of decision.....you have a right to
take it upon yourselves to judge of both,and to determine the law as
well as the fact in controversy.

Chief Justice John Jay, Georgia v. Brailsford, 1794


Political Pagan
2005-07-30 08:22:18 EST
"Josh Dougherty" <jdoc1357b9@comcast.net> wrote in
news:iI6dnRpEq6Zf3XbfRVn-tA@comcast.com:

> More than just put up walls. We need to shine a spotlight on hate
> speech wherever it appears. The State Department produces an annual
> human rights report. Henceforth, it should also produce a quarterly
> War of Ideas Report, which would focus on those religious leaders and
> writers who are inciting violence against others.

Ever hear of the 1st amendment?


--
"It's interesting. I see all these political ads and all these
commentators say it's our job as Americans to vote. Let me tell
you something, with Bush in charge of the economy, this might
be the only job you have all year." -Jay Leno

Poor Man
2005-07-30 09:44:05 EST

"Josh Dougherty" <jdoc1357b9@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:64ydnWj1tpQzonbfRVn-2Q@comcast.com...
> A New Blacklist for "Excuse Makers"
> Those who think Iraq War sparks terror are "despicable," says
> Friedman
> http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0728-03.htm
>
> NEW YORK - July 27 - New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman has
> urged the U.S. government to create blacklists of condemned political
> speech--not only by those who advocate violence, but also by those who
> believe that U.S. government actions may encourage violent reprisals. The
> latter group, which Friedman called "just one notch less despicable than
> the
> terrorists," includes a majority of Americans, according to recent polls.
>
> Friedman's July 22 column proposed that the State Department, in
> order
> to "shine a spotlight on hate speech wherever it appears," create a
> quarterly "War of Ideas Report, which would focus on those religious
> leaders
> and writers who are inciting violence against others." But Friedman said
> the
> governmental speech monitoring should go beyond those who actually
> advocate
> violence, and also include what former State Department spokesperson Jamie
> Rubin calls "excuse makers." Friedman wrote:
>
> "After every major terrorist incident, the excuse makers come out to
> tell us why imperialism, Zionism, colonialism or Iraq explains why the
> terrorists acted. These excuse makers are just one notch less despicable
> than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed. When you live in an
> open
> society like London, where anyone with a grievance can publish an article,
> run for office or start a political movement, the notion that blowing up a
> busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is somehow
> 'understandable' is outrageous. 'It erases the distinction between
> legitimate dissent and terrorism,' Mr. Rubin said, 'and an open society
> needs to maintain a clear wall between them.'"
>
> The "despicable" idea that there may be a connection between acts of
> terrorism and particular policies by Western countries is one that is
> widely
> held by the citizens of those countries. Asked by the CNN/Gallup poll on
> July 7, "Do you think the terrorists attacked London today mostly because
> Great Britain supports the United States in the war in Iraq?" 56 percent
> of
> Americans agreed. In a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll (7/7-10/05), 54 percent
> said "the war with Iraq has made the U.S....less safe from terrorism."
> Since
> they see a connection between Iraq and terrorism, a majority of Americans
> are what Friedman calls "excuse makers" who "deserve to be exposed."
>
> Friedman's column urged the government to create quarterly lists of
> "hatemongers" and "excuse makers"--as well as "truth tellers," Muslims who
> agree with Friedman's critique of Islam. Friedman's proposed list of
> "excuse
> makers" would have to include his New York Times colleague Bob Herbert,
> who
> wrote in his July 25 column, "There is still no indication that the Bush
> administration recognizes the utter folly of its war in Iraq, which has
> been
> like a constant spray of gasoline on the fire of global terrorism."
>
> Leading members of the U.S. intelligence community might also find
> themselves on such a blacklist, based on a report summarized earlier this
> year in the Washington Post (1/14/05):
>
> "Iraq has replaced Afghanistan as the training ground for the next
> generation of 'professionalized' terrorists, according to a report
> released
> yesterday by the National Intelligence Council, the CIA director's think
> tank.... According to the NIC report, Iraq has joined the list of
> conflicts--including the Israeli-Palestinian stalemate, and independence
> movements in Chechnya, Kashmir, Mindanao in the Philippines, and southern
> Thailand--that have deepened solidarity among Muslims and helped spread
> radical Islamic ideology."
>
> Though Friedman calls on the State Department to compile the "Top 10
> hatemongers" list in a "nondiscriminatory way," it's doubtful that such a
> list would, in fact, even-handedly include all advocates of violence. It
> would not be likely, for example, to include someone like Thomas Friedman,
> who during the Kosovo War (4/6/99) called on the Clinton administration to
> "give war a chance," writing, "Let's see what 12 weeks of less than
> surgical
> bombing does." In a follow-up column (4/23/99) he declared that "Like it
> or
> not, we are at war with the Serbian nation," and insisted that "every
> power
> grid, water pipe, bridge, road and war-related factory has to be
> targeted."
> Despite the fact that by calling for attacks on civilian targets he was
> advocating war crimes, Friedman should have no fear that he'll find
> himself
> on a State Department list of "hatemongers."
>
> Friedman's suggestion that those who seek to understand or explain
> political violence are not part of "legitimate dissent" comes at a time
> when
> calls for censorship are becoming more and more blatant. Bill O'Reilly
> (Radio Factor, 6/20/05, cited by Media Matters, 6/22/05) made a chilling
> call for the criminalization war opponents:
>
> "You must know the difference between dissent from the Iraq War and
> the war on terror and undermining it. And any American that undermines
> that
> war, with our soldiers in the field, or undermines the war on terror, with
> 3,000 dead on 9/11, is a traitor. Everybody got it? Dissent, fine;
> undermining, you're a traitor. Got it? So, all those clowns over at the
> liberal radio network, we could incarcerate them immediately. Will you
> have
> that done, please? Send over the FBI and just put them in chains, because
> they, you know, they're undermining everything and they don't care,
> couldn't
> care less."
>
> The call for the arrests of Air America Radio hosts was said as
> though
> it were a joke, though O'Reilly is deadly serious when he says that the
> commentators on that network are "undermining" the war--and that such
> "undermining" is treason.
>
> O'Reilly more recently (7/25/05) went after Herbert's column that
> argued that the Iraq War fueled terrorism: "Bob Herbert is most likely
> helping the terrorists, but his hatred of Mr. Bush blinds him to that.
> He's
> not alone, but this kind of stuff has got to stop. We're now fighting for
> our lives. And those helping the enemy will be brought to your attention."
>
> "Attention," rather than arrests, is all that Friedman has threatened
> "excuse makers" like Herbert with. But it's a small step, as O'Reilly's
> rhetoric demonstrates, between marginalizing critics of U.S. foreign
> policy
> as "just one notch less despicable than the terrorists"--and criminalizing
> criticism itself.
>
> ACTION:
> Please let Thomas Friedman know that opponents of the Iraq War do not
> deserve to be on a government blacklist--even if they oppose the war
> because
> they believe it encourages terrorism.
>
> Thomas Friedman
> c/o New York Times Editorial Page
> editorial@nytimes.com
>
> As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you
> maintain a polite tone.
>
> Read Friedman's column here:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/22/opinion/22friedman.html
>
>
>




I*@yahoo.com
2005-07-30 10:04:40 EST

Josh Dougherty wrote:
> Here's the Friedman article itself:
>
> Giving the Hatemongers No Place to Hide
>
> By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
> Published: July 22, 2005
>
...
>
> We need to shine a spotlight on hate speech
> wherever it appears. The State Department produces an annual human rights
> report. Henceforth, it should also produce a quarterly War of Ideas Report,
> which would focus on those religious leaders and writers who are inciting
> violence against others.

WOW. Imagine... it's 2003. Among the top 10 inciters of "violence
against others" Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, Wolfowitz, Perlman, would all be
there! - I can't believe a person as smart as Friedman is so blinded by
our own propaganda that he can't see the great irony in his word!

>
> I would compile it in a nondiscriminatory way.

The State Department turning in members of the Administration of which
it is part? I don't see it. As for Mr Friedman, he's already shown his
inablility in this regard.

> I want the names of the
> Jewish settler extremists who wrote "Muhammad Is a Pig" on buildings in Gaza
> right up there with Sheik Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudayyis, a Saudi who is imam of
> Islam's holy mosque in Mecca. According to the Memri translation service,
> the imam was barred from Canada following "a report about his sermons by
> Memri that included Al-Sudayyis calling Jews 'the scum of the earth' and
> 'monkeys and pigs' who should be 'annihilated.' Other enemies of Islam were
> referred to by Sheik Al-Sudayyis as 'worshipers of the cross' and
> 'idol-worshiping Hindus' who must be fought."

How about the fundamentalists among the American Christians? You could
probably find quotes from the "Justice Sunday" campaign back in April
that referred to liberals in ways at least as bad as 'idol-worshiping
Hindus' who must be fought." Would Friedman include such comments,
along with those against abortionists and gays as well?

>
> Those who spread hate do not like
> to be exposed.

Hate is a walk in the park compared to war.

> The hate spreaders assume that they are talking only to
> their own, in their own language, and can get away with murder. When their
> words are spotlighted, they often feel pressure to retract, defend or
> explain them.

Well as far as pre-war propaganda, the media didn't do a very good job
in exposing things. Still we had eventual Bush administration
retractions (or at least slimy, incompetent backpeddling) on
"yellow-cake" and "unmanned ariel vehicles" and "mobile weapons labs"
and "mushroom clouds". These propaganda spreaders, they have their own
means by which, to quote Mr Friedman, they feel they "can get away with
murder."

> ...the notion
> that blowing up a busload of innocent civilians in response to Iraq is
> somehow "understandable" is outrageous.


We've done the same, in Iraq. And yes, there's no excuse. Still though,
others have tried to present contexts in which such, in Iraq, is
"understandable". To quote the Friedman piece, "These excuse makers are
just one notch
less despicable than the terrorists and also deserve to be exposed."

> "It erases the distinction between
> legitimate dissent and terrorism," Mr. Rubin said, "and an open society
> needs to maintain a clear wall between them."

There are those who want us to believe that there is a sharp
distinction between terrorism and war. But reality blurs that
distinction. War itself does that, by its nature. To invade another
country is to bring terror to that country. To do so without clear
justification is to put yourself on the same moral footing of
terrorists.

To point up that our president is a terrorist, and then condemn that
man, rather than being an "excuse maker" for his immoral murdering of
innocents, I guess Mr. Friedman and Mr Ruben would applaud any man for
doing that. I guess they would see that man has contributing to solving
the problem of terrorism in the world today rather than being an
inabler.

> There is no political justification for 9/11, 7/7 or 7/21.

And more and more Americans are becoming aware there was no
justification for March 19, 2003.

> Finally, we also need to shine a bright light on the "truth tellers."

Well, of course I'm just posting this in one corner of Usenet but...
(aw shucks... me, quietly beaming with the expectation that Tommy
Friedman will sing my praises in an upcoming NYT column.)

> Every quarter, the State Department should identify the Top 10 hatemongers,
> excuse makers and truth tellers in the world.

And there ought to be a provision that the State Department can only
appear on the "excuse makers" list twice a year.

Golitly, Just keepin' it real.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   Next  (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron