If I were Afghan I would enroll as a Taliban just by reading the above posts.

"If I were Afghan I would enroll as a Taliban just by reading the above posts."

If the Taliban were still in charge, that would be your only choice. I'm not sure they're looking for spokespersons like you who call people Nazis... If they're like many Muslims, they don't gather political might by building sympathy for Jewish victims; for all I know, the Taliban may even deny the Holocaust, and "you nasty Nazi" may cut very little ice with them

If I were afghan and a Taliban you'd be my boss, don't you realize that ?

You'd be saying that the vast majority of the westerners are decadent, soulless people who want world domination (ah, no this is only valid for USA).

Some reading.

http://www.metronews.fr/info/nous-mu...lrDWQ.facebook

Fear is a great driver of news, what part of the internet do you not understand?

For instance look for the surveys on Muslim's love of apple pie, oh no, it doesn't exit, why, let me guess why not? I know, it doesn't drive clicks.

Head in hands.

To quote Trump "we are going to have to have a serious think about these apple pie haters, very serious"

Look, fear is contagious, especially when people gain by amplifying the fear.

This is really quite worth reading for people interested in understanding ISIS and the wrongheadedness of the French response to the Paris attacks:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...-equal-partner

"...we have to finally start treating the Muslim world as true partners..."

Todenhöfer is an idiot. Partners? That's not what they are looking for. We share little to nothing with these overzealous theocracies that seek only to dominate their own citizens and their "partners" with their religious beliefs, values, and 7th-century practices. We're not giving up our Constitution here.

We already have partners. If they want to be our partners, let them apply to NATO and conform to the requirements made of all NATO partners.

Ah painting all Muslims with the same brush - a slippery slope that will lead to more acrimony not harmony.

I've had Saudis live in my house and there could be no more decent folks around - a relatively few maniacs with a weird interpretation of the Qu'aran get all the attention.

Fuss is certainly part of the problem, not solution.

The Maghrebi countries are among the closest partners of France and they are an integral part of our culture. It's not for no reason that couscous is the second most popular dish in France.

PalenQ, I am not behind a single one of the terrorist attacks. The attacks are the problem.

"...a relatively few maniacs with a weird interpretation of the Qu'aran..."

It is DISGUSTING that we even attempt to partner up with most Muslim countries. Do you know anything at all about them?

So which Muslim countries would your partners be? You can choose Saudi Arabia, home to 29 million Muslims, where the Qu'aran-based punishments are nearly identical to what ISIS adheres to:

https://twitter.com/MiddleEastEye/st...769792/photo/1

So it's NOT just a few maniacs. And obviously you cannot judge a country based on a few dinners you had in your home with a dozen Saudis.

Maybe you want to cozy up with Malaysia. A few ounces of weed will get you the death penalty there. (They'd no doubt have executed Obama in college.)

Would Iran be your friend? You must appreciate stonings.

Several countries punish homosexual activity with whippings, prison time, or execution.

Tell me - based on your vast experience with Saudis in your own home, would you buddy-up with Saudis? Which other Muslim nation would you ask to be your partner?

None of them, I hope. You see, if you stand for human rights at all, you must oppose these countries' practices - not embrace them with partnerships.

Tss Ker, now some will say that we're anti US because we eat more couscous than hamburgers.

My preferred couscous (in that order) in Paris :
Marrackech Rue Amaillé 8e
Omar (chez) rue de Bretagne, 47 4e
Petit bleu rue Muller 18e

Petit bleu has good couscous but the owner is quite strange. Not rude, but gruff.

The biggest suppliers of arms to the Saudis are the US and France.

I'm sick of this bigotry against Muslims. If Fodor's editors were doing their jobs, they'd take it down, like they would were similar screeds against Jews to appear on the forums. Only consolation (and it is considerable) is that obviously most people reading it see it for the bigoted, closed-loop thinking that it is.

Anyway, for people who can deal with complexity, rather than hysterical finger-pointing at "THEM", this article is really rich in the complexities of the situation with ISIS in Europe and the global response to the Paris attacks:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n23/adam-sh...q_v=c900b2f699

fuzz - several Saudi students have lived in my home for a few years recently - I was only attempting to separate the Saudis from their govbernment - like the world should not blame me an American for the rather many illegal wars and even atrocities my government has committed. These Saudis I know deplore their government's endorsement of severe Sharia law =- they said in their town on Saturday mornings at the local shopping mall public beheadings took place and all were supposed to watch - even small kids who they said often burst into tears at the sight of the head being severed.

Saudi Arabia is at the root of the problem - rich Saudis funding ISIS and ilk in spite of their government's official stances (it's all a Sunni vs Shiite thing for them) and the Sunni Saudis absolutely hate Saudi Shiites - calling them scum of the earth, etc.

Anyway you missed my point about lumping all Muslims together as bad apples we should avoid - a few rotten apples indeed do ruins the barrel for you.

Countries we could work with include Morocco - instrumental in getting to the identities of the Paris terrorists - Algeria, Tunisia and Jordan. And before we wrecked their states and governmental/police structures Libya, Syria and Iraq. I think the UAE also could be a partner along with Kuwait.

All Muslim nations should be against the barbarity ISIS is doing to innocent people as the Qu'aran no doubt don't sanction that.

Genocide is being carried out by ISIS and my original point way us was it is no difference than Nazis or Turks with Armenians, etc - should be fought by every civilized country. You want to turn a blind eye - well the precedents for doing that are not good.

"I'm sick of this bigotry against Muslims. If Fodor's editors were doing their jobs, they'd take it down..."

Obviously, I read the Todenhöfer article that you posted, sandralist. Is it bigotry to disagree with him?

It's neither "bigotry" nor "hysterical finger-pointing" at all to refer accurately to codified laws of Sharia jurisprudence in Saudi Arabia or other Muslim countries - nor to read and pass on scientific polls of Muslim opinion; when Pew Research reports that 75% of Egyptians support Sharia (and courtroom practices in Egypt of weighing a woman's word at 50% of a man's word, for example,) that's just paying good attention to what governments and Muslims themselves believe. These cultures are radically different from ours. You can't blame the messenger for ugly but true realities in the message.

Todenhöfer is welcome to treat such societies as "partners" if he wishes. Will you "partner" with the Palestinians? Pew reports that 84% of them support stoning in cases of adultery.
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/t...andiner_201309

IMO we refuse to treat such people as we would our friends. That obviously includes the Saudis. That's not bigotry either - it's just being realistic and having a moral backbone.

Anyone who uses religion, any religion, as the reason and justification for his treatment of any other person or persons is a potential terrorist. The same argument applies to ethnicity, color, gender, age and size.

Those who treat others on the basis of their hierachic position, profession, vocation, hobby, culture, language, pronounciation, knowledge, intelligence, nationality, is a boor.
(I may have put myself in this category by this statement but I could not find a better way of saying it.)

Totally true.
One exception : Belgians. We are the best people in the world and should be the world's leaders.

The only reason we do not exercise what should be by birth our right is that among all our extraordinary qualities, we have been given by God himself the modesty as our prime quality.

I'll again join Sandra saying that there are fortunately very few racists on this forum, but those who are don't get that they should shut up.

Unfortunately FODORS mods don't do their job on this specific thread.

Speaking of "moral backbone", this is a wonderful cartoon, and the article that accompanies it is spot-on about why, if you are advocating a military response, you need something more than a "moral backbone". You need an army willing to fight, and a military strategy that defines what victory means:

http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/s...t-help-anyone/

"Anyone who uses religion, any religion, as the reason and justification for his treatment of any other person or persons is a potential terrorist. The same argument applies to ethnicity, color, gender, age and size."

If so, then a government that promotes race or gender preferences (affirmative action) or that allows senior discounts is terrorist?

Your statement at least shows some fondness for human rights and equal rights, which is what this is all about.

Sadly, Muslims in the Middle East would generally qualify as terrorists under your definition. According to Pew, only 1/3 of them think government should permit women to initiate divorce. Only 1/4 think women should have inheritance rights equal to those of men. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/t...iety-overview/

More sadly, Middle East governments tend to implement the misogynous, religion-based beliefs of their citizens.
In Egypt, it's a crime for a wife to commit adultery irrespective of where it happens. A husband has to get caught in the marital bed with his lover - anywhere else, and he's off the hook. A man is also off the hook if he catches his wife and her lover at home and kills them both. But a woman who does the same upon finding her husband and lover in the act faces a murder 1 charge.

I don't think this preferential treatment of men is terrorism, but it's certainly horribly, horribly wrong. And I think it's only right when Amnesty International and nations around the world identify and condemn the Muslim governments that perpetuate such injustices.

Sadly, Muslims in the Middle East would generally qualify as terrorists under your definition>

As would anti-abortionists who whip up zealous folks with the rhetoric about abortion being murder, etc? and then may contribute to other folks to shoot up abortion clinics - terrorists - they're everywhere!

Maybe even the Catholic church's anti-abortion stance contributes to this - thus under fuss' thinking all Catholics are terrorists? and they also treat women as 2nd class citizens - denying them being pope or priests.

Pal: "...under fuss' thinking all Catholics are terrorists?"

C'mon now. It was "otherchelebi" who insisted on labeling folks of all sorts "terrorists" - not me. For me terrorists have to meet the dictionary definition.

If the religious - whether Catholics or Muslims - began advocating the bombing of abortion clinics, then yes, they'd be instigating terrorism. It's not terrorism to call all abortions immoral or inhumane and to call for their abolition - that's misogynist.

"...they also treat women as 2nd class citizens - denying them being pope or priests."

I've no issue with Catholics or Muslims that do this because I live in a free society where you choose your religion. It's legal and punishment-free to hold stupid beliefs. I've got a huge issue with Islamic governments (or Catholic governments, whatever/wherever those might be!) that would codify gender-specific treatments.

What about Israel, which only accepts divorces initiated by the husband?

Yes !!!!!!!
Women should not even be allowed the right to vote ... as was the case in CH till 1971. and Portugal till 1974.

La place des femmes, c'est aux casserolles !!!
Et à torcher le cul des mômes !

"What about Israel, which only accepts divorces initiated by the husband?"

"Yes !!!!!!!"

I believe that women CAN initiate divorce but husbands must APPROVE it. Pretty stupid.

IMO government has no right or duty at all to approve or disapprove of marriages - that's just intervention into personal relationships. If a couple seeks approval from a religion to marry, that's their business. A government-issued marriage license serves only as a tool for discrimination against single people - people who choose not to marry or whose chances of finding a marital partner are, for whatever reason, very slim. A marriage license comes with tax breaks and other privileges that you can't get as an individual. So much for individual rights.

So I think you can look at even exceptional societies like the USA, Switzerland, etc. where human and civil rights are a big priority and still find discriminatory flaws that require review. But societies with a preponderance of basic human rights deficiencies should get the stink-eye and sanctions, not "partnerships." If you're putting people to death for changing their own religious views, you're a very, very sick place that merits the strongest sort of rejection.

Doesn't US put people to death ?
In Europe it is considered incompatible with democracy.

Ps : Fuess, you really believe all the sh1t you write ?

It is incredible how some people read what is not there when they are already prejudiced or biased against a person and/or his views.


I clearly wrote "Anyone who uses religion, any religion, as the reason and justification for his treatment of any other person or persons is a POTENTIAL terrorist." therebye exonerating or absolving me from exactly the same approach as some posters practice frequently on Fodors Lounge.

Once the prejudice is set and solid, words like "potential" loose their meanings.

I did not say "government" either.

And it is apparent that we are talking about curtailing rights and not preferential treatment because of empathy, social welfare, humanitarianism, compassion, love when I included "age" to mean children or the elderly.

I am already deeply disturbed because two egomaniacs are playing with each others' words (just as some fodorites do here) and act stupidly to bring Russia and Turkey to the brink of war with no sign of Tim Robins to step in and save the day.

Intellectuals, reporters, media bosses, artists, atheists, agnostics, Alevites, writers, thinkers are under a huge state of siege and threat in my country. Just today, an outspoken president of the bar association of a Southeastern city near the Syrian border was assasinated with one pistol shot to the head in a shoot-out between two terrorists and tens of police when the terrorists were running for their lives with no chance to use their rifles.

Two days ago two well-known journalists were arrested for headlining photographs of the government trucks carrying rockets and ammunition to Syria with crates opened by the unknowing police despite protests of the Turkish Intelligence agents who tried to say it was all humanitarian aid.

This has been public knowledge for almost a year but the government still used it against the journalists accusing them of spying, acting against the interests of the Turkish government and aiding terrorism.

Well, finally, Fuess. Glad to see somebody else supporting the boycott and disinvestment agenda against Israel. The murderous assault on and denial of human rights against the indigenous people of the region, Christian and Muslim, in the name of creating and preserving a Jewish homeland has been a real betrayal of all your values. At least you know you are not alone:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/...i-universities

(But please drop the "exceptional societies" crap. It's so obnoxious and hypocritical, and it just screams "I'm so white!")

"Doesn't US put people to death ?"

Facetious question. Yes. For murder. Not for fornication, burglary, or apostasy as in Saudi Arabia. And humanely. We abandoned stoning long before we became a country.

Execution stops the killing - it protects prison guards, fellow inmates, and the public from prison escapees. As Democrat NY Mayor Ed Koch said, "When we protect guilty lives, we give up innocent lives in exchange."

http://admin.faulkner.edu/admin/webs...rmack/koch.pdf

"Ps : Fuess, you really believe all the sh1t you write ?"
Swat: Do you only discuss things with people you agree with 100%? You seem unable to respond except with pejoratives. It really isn't hard to find someone with views similar to mine. In fact I know very few who think that despite its occasional moral failings, the US should turn a blind eye to human rights violations around the planet. Not that we don't. Saudi Arabia is a particularly egregious example of the duplicity we sometimes exhibit.

>>>"In fact I know very few who think that despite its occasional moral failings, the US should turn a blind eye to human rights violations around the planet. "<<<<

Is it unfair to ask how old you are? How much American history have you missed in your own lifetime? What is "exceptional" about US foreign policy is its exceptional level of hypocrisy when it comes to using murderous military might to impose its beliefs on other people.

Organized religion is really easy to kick, but you have to be deliberately not looking not to notice that Americans have been cloaking pure greed and the exploitation and murder of hundreds of thousands of people with a sickening pretense of bringing "democracy" and "human rights" and "liberation" to the oppressed.

You are really living in a goo-goo infantile fantasy world if you think America is some virtuous actor in the world, defending the downtrodden. It doesn't even do that in America. I don't know how you are going to get yourself out of this mental hole, but you're not going to persuade any thinking person whose read a serious history book about America's genocidal, racist, utterly greedy bent. You're time would be better spent reading the New York Review of Books or something.

'You seem unable to respond except with pejoratives'

Don't think so. Only with islamophobic and/or racist, antisemitc, antiblack etc.

This thread reminds me that there isn't a dime's worth of moral difference between any culture's "Promised Land" and their willingness to kill to have it, and their willingness to keep killing, keep hating, in an ever more frantic attempt to hold out to their world they are the truly moral people, spreading virtue -- whether it is the caliphate, the Third Reich, the "Lost Cause", the Holy Land, Manifest Destiny, "exceptionalism" -- or increasingly just the American Dream.

During the early years of the civil rights movement, an ordinary white racist was interviewed in Mississippi, and asked just why he was so opposed to ending segregation. He replied: "We killed Indian babies to have this country, and we are not handing over it to n*gg*rs."

People seldom understand what produced America and that the America they live in today is a crazy spawn of that unexamined past. One of the very few cultures to ever look down the barrel of its own rotten history is present day Germany. It's impressive what they've achieved -- one might even say exceptional. And the large majority of Americans haven't a clue.

'One of the very few cultures to ever look down the barrel of its own rotten history is present day Germany.'

Been telling my german friends the same for decades now.
Western Germany, unfortunately less in the east.

When in the army, we were taught we had a moral duty (and a right) to disobey orders we found unethical. It was explained as one of the achievements of Nurnmberg trial. Use you brain, don't hide behind orders.

I've been trying to read about massacres/slaughters and simple utter disregard for human life in Zaire at time of belgian colonization but haven't yet found a good balanced account of events there. I don't know of one people who can claim they are 'clean' - however acknowledging what has been done in our past is quite necessary to assess our future behaviour.

Sandra, you're really quite good on this thread.

Well thanks so much for the history primer. Very helpful to learn that we're no different from Nazis or ISIS. And of course, why didn't I know this, it's the racist Mississippian, so lovingly who best represents the typical unread American.

"People seldom understand what produced America..."

I guess I've had it all wrong. I guess it wasn't the American Indians who first had slaves here. And I guess it wasn't EUROPEAN colonist-farmers that spread slavery more widely. I guess those slave holders must have all been Americans - even before there was an America. After all, only Americans are cruel enough and racist enough to hold slaves. And it wasn't abolitionist Americans who from America's inception began moving to free slaves - and did - almost as soon as the Revolutionary War rifles had cooled off. That must have come about in some other fashion that I am unaware of because, after all, I am just your average (typically ignorant) American.

No, you guys don't deal in cliches and ignorance.

It is certainly possible to find "a serious history book about America's genocidal, racist, utterly greedy bent" in this country, where anyone is free to publish any trash he wishes without fear of reprisal.

But if that's ALL you've been able to find, sandralist, then I'd be pleased to send you a decent reading list.

Edit:

"...it's the racist Mississippian, so lovingly PORTRAYED BY SANDRALIST, who best represents the typical unread American."

I would like to propose a little interlude from all of the ranting and raving on this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPpS0r19D9M

Thank you, kerouac.
Very touching.

Just don't forget that human beings have always enslaved their brothers since the Dawn of Time. No culture, no nation, no ideology is to blame - it's human nature, and we are all guilty (at one time or another) of thinking that we are better than someone else.

I was at La Belle Equipe yesterday, kerouac - the tributes are piled waist-high there. I still cannot figure out why this little place was targeted.

How is it going with the Climate Change summit starting tomorrow?

CNN shows some small-scale protesters being tear gassed at Republique but the mass protests of thousands did not materialize in accordance with city of Paris' order against large demonstrations or gatherings - that was 4-5 hours ago though.