< HOME  Monday, March 13, 2006

30 days as a Muslim in America



Morgan Spurlock, director of the documentary Supersize Me! sends David Stacy, a practising Christian from Virginia, to "work, eat, and sleep" as a Muslim in "the heart of Muslim America, Dearborn, Michigan."

70 Comments:

At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

How about 30 days as a Jew in Saudi Arabia?

Oh, that's right. Jews are not allowed in Saudi Arabia.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger Jeff G said...

The NY Times has a very interesting expose about Dr. Wafa Sultan, a Syrian-American psychiatrist living near LA: For Muslim Who Says Violence Destroys Islam, Violent Threats

She has recently been interviewed by Al Jazeera. (Transcript exerpts, Video)

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

Outstanding! I hope a lot of people have seen this and reflected on it.

Not sure what to think of Sultan, in the video she seemed somewhat inconsiderate, to say the least - patronizing certainly won't help things.

Besides, the "clash of civilizations" is no struggle between "modernism" and "medievalism", as she put it - it's a fabricated pretext for imperialism. I thought this was well established by now.

Was her question whether Jews had ever suicide bombed a german restaurant supposed to insinuate there was no terrorism on behalf of Israel? What about her absurd claim regarding the greatest inventions of the 19th and 20th century? I can see why this was picked by MEMRI...

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger jc said...

Torah

by Levi Chazen
Mar 12, '06 / 12 Adar 5766


Some weeks ago, the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, while denying that a Holocaust against the Jews took place during World War II, stated that there was indeed a "holocaust" that took place in Iran some 2,000 years ago, in which the Jews killed thousands of people. To this day, it is still celebrated year in and year out with singing and drinking. He was, of course, talking about the story of Purim.

Some might indeed mistakenly come to the conclusion that all killing is a bad thing. In fact, we find even among fellow liberal Jews that the holiday of Purim can make them blush and feel uncomfortable, for here we find the Jews celebrating the downfall of their enemies after killing some 75,000 of them. Now how un-Jewish is that?

There is, then, in this world good and evil, and they are not the same - and woe to one who mixes up the two. Take, for instance, an example from World War II, when Germany bombed England and England bombed Germany. Both bombed, but surely, every sane person knows that one was pure evil and one was fighting for good.

HaShem has created good as well as evil in this world, and it is our job to complete creation and eliminate evil. Amalek, and his physical and spiritual heirs, must ultimately be wiped off the face of the earth…

Today, we are witnessing, throughout the world and in Israel, the mercy of fools; those taking pity on the wicked. Such behavior is not good, but evil.

How clearer a signal could HaShem have sent us than the Hamas landslide victory? Now, it is clear for all to see that there are no innocent bystanders among the Arabs living here in Israel. Clearly, the great majority of them want to see Israel destroyed, as was made clear by them in their elections. It is high time for Israel to act accordingly and stop playing around, claiming that there are innocents in the area and moderates to work with. Clearly, the law must be the same for all of them.

Still, we see the nations of the world continuing to explain away the Hamas victory, even as the Arabs have learned to use the great tool of democracy to their advantage. The nations are also guilty of taking pity on the wicked, and surely this will backfire on them in the end, as well. Nation after nation invites Hamas to visit, and the European Union and the US continue to pour millions of dollars into the Palestinian Authority, which, of course, will go towards continuing the Arab terror campaign.

So, it really is too bad that the beloved President Ahmadinejad of Iran does not understand the difference between one who comes to kill, and one who kills defending himself, for history repeats itself so often. And if he comes, like so many before him, against the Jewish State, then he and his people will be the ones to fall. It is worth recalling the strange last words uttered by one of the leading Nazis who was hanged after the Nuremberg trials: "Purimfest 1945!"

So take note, cruel and harsh world: Purim is still going strong for the Jewish people.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

*pukes*

If this guy was muslim, he'd make MEMRI headlines asap. but alas...

I wonder when the mafia will start employing the "anti-italian" meme.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Yeah, and Muhammed killed thousands of Jews. And Christians killed millions in the name of their religion. Let's not kid ourselves that Jews are in an especially violent religion.

For the record, Purim is pretty much like Halloween. The story is not celebrated as much as eating Hamuntaschen and dressing up in costumes is celebrated.

The bottom line? There is a history of violence associated with religion, which is a form mind control and irrationality.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger jc said...

talking about mind control and irrationality

this video i posted is 45.44 mins long.

it was posted at 6:37 PM Mar 13 2006 EST.

the first "comment" to it was posted: Mon Mar 13, 06:45:18 PM EST.

go figure.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

I did not see the video. I admit.

But given every single one of your posts is about how horrible it is to be a Muslim in America or the war on Muslims or Israel's occupation, or how Israel and America planned 9/11, I felt the need to also note that Jews are not even allowed in certain Muslim nations.

I am sure Morgan Spurlock made a great video. I have seen many of his shows and he is a great guy. But the point of my original post remains the same, nonetheless.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Sorry, there are also a few posts written about how the money system of America is evil and the culture is evil. I forgot. I am not saying I disagree about the money system, but the point is that every single one of JC's posts is about how America or Israel is evil to the core.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger jc said...

the point of yr post being what?

that i support the suadi gov whose so called scholars and imams consider me fair game?

who deny me the hajj?

who think that all muslims who do not support wahhabism are fair game, may be killed, raped, robbed, and quartered, and who were brought to power and kept in power by my "government"?

you say i do nothing but critcize israel, while i criticise my "government" and its allies including israel as they happen to work together. and as my posts, if you actually read them, clearly show.

but his does not concern you.

also, i have been thrown in a jordanain jail twice and denied help by my "government" because i criticize them and israel, something you know nothing about and probably consider just, you views concerning my person taken into account.

do i think then that it is worth discussing anything with you? no.

i disagree w/ thor but consider him so far gone i've never tried discussing anything with him. yet you lump me with him because it suits you.

i've tried discussing matters with you but i have, alas given up. why? because you deny me the right to mention anything having to do with israel no matter what it has done. and then profess free speech.

you are of base character, an inveterate liar and a hypocrit. and you've proven this time and again.

you've not seen the video but "know" what it's about, why i've posted it, and who i am.

you are in reality a very sick individual.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger jc said...

"how America or Israel is evil to the core."

yet another lie.

i am actually capable of distinguishing between the politics of the American "government" and my fellow citizens, as i am able to distinguish between the politics of israel, it citizens and jews.

something you seem incapable of.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Blogger jc said...

btw, sonce you offten cite yr friends as support for yr "arguments" i'll do the same.

i have friends, jews, very good friends, who are anti-zionist and who consider your comments pathological and disgusting.

but then, you consider all who disagree with you, jew or non-jew, to be irrelevant.

this is of course, according to you, entirely rational.

 
At Monday, March 13, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

being "able to distinguish between the politics of israel, it citizens and jews."

is exactly the crux here.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

JC,

If you really were thrown in jail in Jordan and kept from being able to complete the Hajj, why not mention that as well? But no, you fail to mention this. The cruel actions of Middle Eastern nations are borderline romanticized by you, who applies a double standard to Israel and the U.S..

It's always about how Israel is evil - never about how any other Middle Eastern nation is evil.

The video? I will watch it - I happen to like Morgan Spurlock. I look at evidence presented. I just cannot download anything on the computer I am on.

But what evidence will this give? That it is bad to be Muslim in America? And?

Of course Muslims face problems in America. I do not deny this. I am not saying this is right, and I am not appologizing for every action of Israel or America.

I just fail to see the point of yet another post about how bad the Muslims have it, while glossing over how bad the certain Muslims treat each other and the rest of the world. (9/11 and all terrorist acts not being the fault of Muslims, of course, but rather, being only a "conspiracy theory dreamed up by America and Israel." According to you, even the Danish cartoons are some sort of conspiracy theory dreamed up in part by the Jews.)

I defend Israel only because I see it attacked all the time in such a senseless way. I want a two-state solution, which I hope will come as soon as possible. I do not think Israel is always right.

And yet you think Israel (the nation) is always wrong. I would like you to deny this if you can and show me how I am wrong, but I doubt you can.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

JC,

And thanks for the compliment in saying I have a base character. It really makes me smile, coming from you. :-)

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

JC,

One more thing. I do not consider it irrelevant if a Jew or nonjew disagrees with me.

I simply consider it irrelevant if it is a Jew or Nonjew who disagrees with me.

One opinion by one person of a particular religion does not a representative of that religion make. Even a handful opinions by people of a particular religion does not a representative of that religion make.

If you can show me that most Israelis or Palestinians are anti-Palestinian or anti-Zionist or whatever it is you are trying to prove on a given day, I would take notice.

Of course, these distinctions in how I think are always lost on you, who has friends who are Jews, but actually quoted individuals who had individual problems with Jews, and pretended it represented the broader Jewish population. I honestly am not even sure if that was meant to be a parody or not, but assuming you were serious...whoa.

The way you think is frightening, though thankfully, you think I have base character. I do feel assured there. :-)

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger jc said...

actually i don't "think" you have a base character. you have a base character.

that this should please comes as no surprise. you lie so shamelessly to begin with.

As here: "Of course, these distinctions in how I think are always lost on you, who has friends who are Jews, but actually quoted individuals who had individual problems with Jews, and pretended it represented the broader Jewish population."

And here: "The cruel actions of Middle Eastern nations are borderline romanticized by you, who applies a double standard to Israel and the U.S."

when and where did i do that? can you show me?

in the post before this i speak of the regime of saddam supported by the cia and my "government."

is this for instance "anti jewish"? or is it anti american?

and the regimes in the ME all backed and funded by the US, these i speak of, yet according to you i romanticize them. where do i do that? and how is this anti jewish?

why do i not speak of my experience in jordan? one, they're personal. two, they are commonplace. three, they are supported by my "government" which i deem to be at the root of the problem, and this i speak of and have been put in prison for.

it was a representative of my "government" who denied me any help because my "crime and punishment" were in accord with their policies. and i criticize these policies. this is what acoording to your base and twisted mind?

anti what exactly?

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger jc said...

what i actually do speak of can be seen if you would bother to read the posts.

but no, you have already decided who and what i am and it please you no end to slander and defame. is this biased? yes. is it base? absolutely.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger jc said...

do i blame the israeli and american populations as a whole for the crimes of their governments? no. the main reason i write and post what i do is to inform them.

i believe that they do not know.

you on the other hand, do not wish to know.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger jc said...

one more thing. thor i believe is irrational. you, i don't think you're irrational. i think you have willingly chosen to side with power against the powerless. this is not irrational. this is base. this exibits a complete lack of moral character. and that you exult in this only underscores you complete lack of moral character. something you and thor actually agree on incidentally.

i would not be surprised if you were one and the same person.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Confessions of a Malamute said...

Miss R and JC

Just out of curiosity how did you two end up on the same blog together ?

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger jc said...

mal, i have no idea...

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

JC,

Says who that I "side with the powerful against the powerless"?

I routinely am active in electoral politics, voting against Republicans. I have repeatedly spoken out against Bush and cannot stand the man. I also do not like Netanyahu in Israel and think Sharon was a monster before he decided to start unilateral disengagement.

But of course "I side with the powerful against the powerless" because I do not blame America/Israel for ALL of the world's problems.

And as far as "informing" the populations of America and Israel, given the fact that all you do is speak out against America and Israel, I would have to assume that anyone who would change their minds about the situation has stopped reading this blog long ago, and for the most part, you are preaching to the choir. As far as I go, my eyes are open to atrocities committed in the name of America and Israel. (which I do not deny) I do, however, deny that these are the only nations committed atrocities, even though you exclusively focus on them.

As far as the regimes backed by the US - I now there are ties between Bush and the Saudi royal family. However, you know as well as I do that there is also popular support for these royal families.

You spoke of individual Jews and pretended they represented the broader population in the IRS/Fed thread, just as a point of clarification.

And you borderline romanticize Iran - a nation that beheaded two teens for being gay.

Confessions,

I came onto this blog due to QRS, who is a collegue of mine at law school. I was at contributor at one point and considered leaving (having asked QRS to remove myself), but honestly, I enjoy this back and forth with JC way too much, so I decided to stay.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Jeff G said...

Lumos,

To understand where Sultan is coming from, you have to consider her comments in relation to her experience in Syria. The NY Times article reads:

But, she said, her life changed in 1979 when she was a medical student at the University of Aleppo, in northern Syria. At that time, the radical Muslim Brotherhood was using terrorism to try to undermine the government of President Hafez al-Assad. Gunmen of the Muslim Brotherhood burst into a classroom at the university and killed her professor as she watched, she said.

"They shot hundreds of bullets into him, shouting, 'God is great!' " she said. "At that point, I lost my trust in their god and began to question all our teachings. It was the turning point of my life, and it has led me to this present point. I had to leave. I had to look for another god."


In the interview she frames it as, "a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century."

If I understand her correctly, what she is questioning is the interpretation of Islamic scriptures by certain imams and clerics who use it to justify outrageous acts of violence. There are Muslims killing Muslims because of these men. These clerics are as addicted to power as BushCo and the Zionist leadership in Israel are. And they manipulate the poor and the hopeless to do their destructive bidding.

Israel is engaging in state sponsored terrorism--the aggression and violence is ordered by politicians and carried out by the military. Islamic clerics are engaging in what I would call religious terrorism, and in effect endangering the lives of Muslims everywhere. Given the amount of suffering this conflict has caused, the difference is probably academic. Whatever form it takes--state sponsored, religion sponsored, rockets, bombings, kidnapping, assassination, etc--terrorism is an act of barbarism.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

jeff g,

that's tragic, and she does have every right to criticize these deplorable excrescences. However, losing sight of the whole stage by focussing on one actor will not yield applicable solutions. She went on iranian national TV and sacrosanctly framed muslim culture, not terrorist individuals, as medieval, inconsiderate and unintelligent - what was to be expected to come from that? It's essentially Neocon rhetoric...

Miss R said: "I defend Israel only because I see it attacked all the time in such a senseless way."

There you have it. You "see it" as such - everyone else does not, however, so who should adapt? Again, where's the distinction between states, religions and individuals in your perception when it comes to Israel, Judaism and Israelis/Jews, specifically? Did you really look into 9/11 or is your dismissal of the "conspiracy theory dreamed up" by american and israeli elements, not entire states, just another knee-jerk reaction? A sinister conspiracy by Muslim terrorists: credible; A sinister conspiracy by american/israeli terrorists: outrageous conspiracy theory

Why is that?

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Jeff G,

I happen to disagree that Israel's actions are "state sponsored terrorism."

If you mean terrorism to be purposely targeting civilians, that is not what they are doing. There may be a rogue soldier who does this - but that soldier is not part of the Israeli policy, and I never condone such actions. Such soldiers are also subject to the Israeli courts - something American soldiers are not. (they are court martialled in special "military courts") The fact that this is somehow lost on everyone here on the board is both obvious and sad.

As far as the US. There is some evidence that the US did aim for civilians in Iraq. It is sad - and this does not represent the America that I believe in. I also am very saddened by the torture that went on at Abu Ghraib. I literally puked when I saw the images. *sighs*

As far as Islamic terrorism. Either y'all are blind or purposely ignorant. Obviously there is religious-sponsored terrorism going on in the world, in the "name" of Islam.

I do not think Islam is an inherently violent religion, though I think large contingents of Muslims are easily manipulated into violence. Just look at the reactions to the Danish cartoons, as an example, to see large scale violence (and sheer ANGER) of Muslims. This did not represent the MAJORITY of the 1.2 billion Muslims - but it does represent a frightening minority.

There are also frightening minorities of other religions - a frightening minority of Israelis, namely, settlors of the Gaza Strip, violently resisted leaving the Gaza area. (as just one example that came off the top of my head)

In neither case do I think these people represent what it means to be Muslim or Israeli, BUT, they do represent some of the overall problems with religion - which is a form of mind control.

Some of the world's worst atrocities were committed in the name of religion. THIS is the central problem, the central thread that I see.

Then again, I doubt the world could handle secular humanism...I mean, how many people could actually live with the thought that it's ashes to ashes, dust to dust? If nothing else, religion is a comfort to the world, who think there is something in the afterlife.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

thanks jeff and lumos for a very thoughtful discussion of Sultan's position. I learned a lot from your comments.

miss R, when I read about atrocious conduct that's at attributed to a person professing to be Jewish, I do not consider it a reflection of all Jews.

But, when I observe your knee jerk condemnation of anyone who draws attention to the atrocities commited by Zionists in the name of Judaism it makes me wonder, why you would want to cover up the facts.

For example, if the theory about 19 muslim hijackers flying into the WTC towers and they subsequently collapsing was plausible, I would not think for a moment to try to cover it up or steer conversations away from it.

First, it would not benefit me in the least, as I have nothing to do with those madmen, even though I am Muslim. I would spend my time and effort demonstrating by deeds that I and my faith are in no way related to those actions.

Second, the whole truth must be known for reality to be whole and not disjointed and schizophrenic.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

And Lumos, I read ALL of the documents presented by this board and NONE of it sways me. I am sorry. It is time to admit that 19 Muslim hijackers planned and executed 9/11.

This does not mean there is something fundamentally wrong with Islam as opposed to other religions. I fail to see why it is so difficult to admit that Bush was criminally negligent, yes, but did not plan 9/11. The proof of this is out there.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

QRS,

Read my last comment. I am not saying that the 19 hijackers are a condemnation of Islam itself. I think Islam itself is peaceful. But it is a condemnation of the violent factions that exist within the religion and need to be addressed.

I do not defend every action of Israel. Contrary to JC's amusing characterization of myself, I am not a "sayan." I do, however, see double standards applied to Israel by this board, and wonder why this is. The natural reaction I had to the double standards being applied was anti-Jewish sentiment. (I say anti-Jewish and not anti-semite, because Muslims are also semites, and so the term has no meaning) I am not saying anycriticism of Israel is anti-Israeli or anti-Jewish. I am not even saying robust criticism is anti-Israeli or anti-Jewish. But this kind of targeted criticism (ncluding the conspiracy theory that Israel was involved in 9/11) is histrionic and frankly, does ring of such anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiment.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

The problem with all of the so-called evidence that it was the US/Israel acting in concert on 9/11 is that it fails to take note of some very key bits of evidence.

1) The fact remains that there are call records from the planes - the hijackers were described, and even heard talking in Arabic in one case.

2) Flight school records

3) The scientific fact that of course is overlooked by those who claim it impossible for a building to collapse as it did - the science of 9/11 is still not understood. The way the metal twisted from those buildings is not something seen from controlled demolitions. I am the only one on this board who has seen the twisted metal remains of 9/11, and I can tell you that the way the metal twisted simply cannot be the result of a controlled demolition, unless nuclear material was used. (and there is no evidence that nukes were used)

4) The lack of motive of a controlled demolition - why demolish structures that had planes crash into them already? Where is the necessity of this?

5) Osama Bin Laden has all but taken credit for the attacks.

6) The fact that there was a smoldering for months after 9/11, and WTC7 was connected through underground tunnels to buildings 1 and 2. (none of the other buildings in the area were connected) This explains why Tower 7 fell while others did not. (the fires attacking the foundation of the structure)

Now I do not deny Bush was criminally negligent on 9/11, and have said he was for YEARS. He should have been impeached for that alone. I do not say he is a good guy. I do not say his administration is good. But I am sorry - nothing this board has linked to to show the supposed "planning" of 9/11 by Bush/Israel has adequately explained what I cited.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Miss R, I wonder if you watched Loose Change Q posted awhile back?

The Bin Laden tape is suspicious, and I believe there was one report about him flat out denying he had anything to do with 9/11. I don't have a source for that at the moment , just typing away.

The molten metal underneath WTC indicates extremely high temp reactions that could not be created by jet fuel and office materials alone. Please see
Jones
The pancake collapse "theory" fails to bring into account the 40+ steel support collumns.

WTC 7 damage

The damage done by fire COULD NOT have created a near-symmetrical collapse with no resistance. The building should have toppled over onto the street, not into it's own footprint.


Just because one feels there was no need to demolish the towers doesn't mean they weren't demolished.

Eyewitnesses account indicate explosions at ground level. Please research William Rodriguez. I do not believe these explosions could have been caused by the planes as per the way the elevator shafts are built.

Twin towers aside we also have the pentagon, which is just as bad. Conflicting eyewitness accounts, inconsistent damage (please see st911.org article by mike meyers, mech engineer)

Don't know if I should go on I'm just putting out some salient points ...

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

vper1,

The problem with the controlled demolition theory (which I already have said is scientifically plausible, though I do not think more plausible than the towers collapsing on their own), si that I simply see no reason to collapse the towers. What is the motive?

On a different note. I want to say the Morgan Spurlock video is great. However, I do in general have a problem with the idea that men and women cannot be trusted to be in the same room together. I have tons of platonic male friends who I have not touched, except to give them hugs. I even have married platonic male friends who I have been alone with - and nothing happened. I really fail to see why men and women cannot be friends and be alone together. (that said, I know that religious Christians and Jews also believe this, which is not unique to Muslims)

I guess my overall stance is not a problem with Islam, but a problem with religion itself. (which I have stated many times)

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Just because you can't conjure a motive doesn't simply negate controlled demo. I think your ignoring what these researchers have done.

Maybe Silverstein wired it himself, who knows it's all speculation if you want a motive. I think it's important to be holistic, look at the pentagon, look at flight 93 (or lack thereof); don't be confined to the towers.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

vper1,

What is Silverstein's motive? I mean, he was already going to get insurance money for 9/11. I don't know how much more he got because the towers were outright demolished, but I have looked at the math, and he is not making out like a bandit. He may not even break even.

He is responsible, with the insurance money, to rebuild the WTC. Due to the ongoing community fight concerning the site, nothing has even been started to be built there. Meanwhile, he has to pay an exhorbitant amount of money to the Port Authority for the rights he purchased every year - even with no Towers on the ground!

This means, to reiterate - He is paying the right to rent rights to the PA with nothing there (several hundred million a year), AND, he is responsible for the rebuilding of the towers. If you do all the math, the amount he received in insurance money (I think it was $12 billion though it could be less) really may not cut it, especially if the fight over what is to be rebuilt in lower Manhattan continues.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Jeff G said...

I simply see no reason to collapse the towers. What is the motive?

Possible motives: (and note that I write possible)

1) Destroy evidence: If it is an inside job, cover your tracks.

2) Psychological impact: Would there have been enough support for war if the buildings had not fallen, and by extension greatly minimized the human casualties?


In regard to state sponsored terrorism, I'm primarily referring to authorized retaliatory strikes that are carried out with only a loose concern for "collateral" damage (innocent civilians). If its retaliation, that amounts to revenge. If its pre-emptive defense, thats a page from the Bush international playbook (see Iraq).

And, unless I'm mistaken, there are, and have been, Israeli policies designed to push Palestinians off certain areas and to separate them geographically. To me this sounds like a method designed with the intent to keep them divided, ineffectual, and unable to come together as a bona fide nation.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Jeff G said...

Lumos,

From the article:

BUT even as she settled into a comfortable middle-class American life, Dr. Sultan's anger burned within. She took to writing, first for herself, then for an Islamic reform Web site called Annaqed (The Critic), run by a Syrian expatriate in Phoenix.

An angry essay on that site by Dr. Sultan about the Muslim Brotherhood caught the attention of Al Jazeera, which invited her to debate an Algerian cleric on the air last July.


Al Jazeera invited her. The cleric agreed to an on air debate.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Jeff G,

The second motive I guess is possible, but I think an attack of the towers itself created enough of a visceral reaction, so that collapsing the towers (and not emptying them of firefighters first, before doing so), just appears...cruel and not necessary.

As far as the first reason goes, I don't think it was an inside job by the government, but assuming it was, then why keep records of everything at Hangar 17 at the JFK Airport?

As far as Israel goes.

I have had problems with some of the ways in which Israel has struck back at organizers of suicide bombers, but I would not call that state sponsored terrorism, as they are not aiming for civilians, which I consider to be an essential element to call it "terrorism." They also are more careful in how they counterattack than any other nation in a comparable situation. Question: what should be done instead? I guess that is the ultimate question I always come back to. Should they just accept suicide bombing attacks and do nothing? I have a friend at law school who thinks this is what Israel needs to do, but I worry this will only lead to the total destruction of Israel. I do not disagree that Israel sometimes overreacts in their counterattacks, but really, what should they do? What is a better strategy?

Maybe Sharon Stone will lead to peace in the Middle East. She has stated she will "kiss anyone" for peace in the Middle East. I am sure that solves everything! (haha, felt like injecting humor in a sad topic - and this is true!) http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1647548,0047.htm

Finally: Are you referring to the Israeli wall in your last comment? Because I think that as long as Israelis are willing to tear down the walls inside the West Bank for the Palestinians to have their own nation...it really may be necessary at the moment. Sad sad sad and harmful to Palestinians, no doubt. But necessary. This does not make me happy. But as long as it is temporary - until the two state solution is forthcoming, which seems possible with Ehud Olmert (a man I actually respect save for a bribery scandal)...then okay.

Btw, good news on that front.

Olmert stated he is cutting funding of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Read about the man:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehud_Olmert

Talks going on the Middle East (let's hope Netanyahu does not win the March 26 elections!):

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3720242.html

Olmert speaks of relinquishing additional West Bank territory:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=21706

These are all good developments. We'll see what happens.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Hmmmmmmm

Ignoring the truth does not make it go away.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

I have read the evidence. I even saw that very video you linked me to.

But I am sorry, the official story just makes much more sense to me.

The following link refutes all the theories this site has propogated. I am sorry it is a government site (for those who do not trust one word of the government), but it is the best site of its kind that I have found.

http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Sep/16-241966.html

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

lol.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

I found another great source. Wikipedia also is great at debunking this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

It links to the sources it uses.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Confessions of a Malamute said...

1)The fact remains that there are call records from the planes - the hijackers were described, and even heard talking in Arabic in one case.

The pasties spoke arabic - big deal. Who controlled them is the question.

2) Flight school records

Are very easy to forge. Not to mention using pasties to cover their tracks easily explain this.

3) The scientific fact that of course is overlooked by those who claim it impossible for a building to collapse as it did - the science of 9/11 is still not understood. The way the metal twisted from those buildings is not something seen from controlled demolitions. I am the only one on this board who has seen the twisted metal remains of 9/11, and I can tell you that the way the metal twisted simply cannot be the result of a controlled demolition, unless nuclear material was used. (and there is no evidence that nukes were used)

The twisted metal comes from the fall. Check out any controlled demolition and you will see the same things

4) The lack of motive of a controlled demolition - why demolish structures that had planes crash into them already? Where is the necessity of this?

The motive is the creation of war. Burning buildings dont have the same visual impact as demolished ones

5) Osama Bin Laden has all but taken credit for the attacks.

Actually Bin Ladin issued a statement saying he was NOT connected to the attacks.

6) The fact that there was a smoldering for months after 9/11, and WTC7 was connected through underground tunnels to buildings 1 and 2. (none of the other buildings in the area were connected) This explains why Tower 7 fell while others did not. (the fires attacking the foundation of the structure)

The explosives used in the demolition of the building get incredibly hot. MUCH hotter than jet fuel. Being that these objects were found at the bottom of the pile tells me that something went off at the bottom of the pile. Not the top. You're telling me that months later there was still enough jet fuel burning that it could heat the metal found at the bottom of the pile ? You need to learn how buildings are made and the dynamics of how they come down. By the time the fires reached building 7 there was NO jet fuel left. What was burning was local material – wood, plastic, paper etc. This isn't going to bring down the foundation of a building. Anyone who believes otherwise is lying to themselves. The elevator shafts were hermetically sealed. This means that there wouldn’t be enough oxygen in the shafts for jet fuel to burn and do things like blow out windows and blow tiles off the walls. Learn some basic physics and you will know this

The next major problem is the cell phone calls. At the time of the supposed hijackings cell phones didn’t work from airplanes…

Seems to me you're being deliberately obtuse. Seems to me you automatically dismiss anything that doesn't already fit into your preconceived ideas. But as the saying goes, there is none so blind as those who will not see.

The motive to collapse the twin towers is to provoke a war. If you don't have a reason to go to war then no war will exist. The twin towers was just the thing the neocons needed by their own admission.

Silverstein is getting several billion dollars from the collapse. By the way they were specifically insured against acts of terrorism. How convenient.

There is a lot of racism against Muslims in the US right now. Planned and nurtured that way. There is also a lot of misinformation about them. Educate yourself to how things really are, not how the tv propaganda "news" hour wants you to believe.

What amazes me in that no one has asked WHY. Why is it America, that a group of people hate you so much that they’d strap explosives to themselves just to take a few of you out when they go. Hatred doesn't just materialize over night. It has a source. That source is American oppression. That source is American support (and outright installation) of tin pot dictators to rubber stamp decisions that benefit American multinationals at the expense of the local population. Until you ask why, you will never know how to stop it. Your soldiers will continue to die and your population will continue to be led around by the nose like good little sheep.

Put simply, the peons you have created in the 3rd world are sick to death of living under the yankee jackboot. Unlike you they know what is going on - they live with it every day. If you do not change your foreign policies and they way you treat your peons servants serfs and slaves of the 3rd world, they will come back to haunt you. Low tech solutions can do and are defeating high tech enemies. Why do you think you got thrown out of Vietnam ? You’ll get thrown out of the ME too don't kid yourself. And who will step in ? China and Russia. Be VERY afraid of China. They're your bankers. Without their loans your country is bankrupt. Without the oil from the ME your war machine cant operate and your national economy fails. China can replace its American customers quite easily with European ones. America cant replace Chinese loans and expect to survive

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Bush's Bad Science

In 2002, the US Geological Survey submitted the results of a 12- year study, concluding that oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would adversely affect the habitat of the wildlife of the region (duh). Interior Secretary Gail Norton ordered a reassessment and -- coincidentally -- got the desired result in one week: arctic wildlife just love oil rigs. See http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print.php?sid=6431

• Also in 2002, the Pentagon terminated the contract of the "Jason" panel – an advisory group composed of forty to fifty elite scientists. John Marburger, Bush's science advisor, described the group as "working scientists – top-notch people who are experts in their fields". One member suggested that the termination Jason followed from an attempt by the Bush administration "to place political appointe
...

etc. etc.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Confessions,

The peons *I* created? HAHAHAHAHA!

Go ahead and read the link I gave. If you do not trust the government one, the go to the other one. I have looked at the evidence submitted about 9/11 by everyone here. If you are so sure of your theory go look to that.

Same to you, vper1.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Confessions,

Just as a point of fact. In some areas, cell phones DID work from planes at that time. In other areas, in flight phones (which, yes, as a frequent flier I can attest were available in planes in 2001) were used.

As far as whether I specifically have ANYTHING to do with Amwerican foreign policy, please don't make me laugh. I have specifically worked to try and STOP many of the policies you cite. So whatever.

Confessions, and re: building 7. It sat atop a huge Con Ed gas line! So when the fires reached Building 7, which it was connected to, it exploded with the gas line. That's some basic physics the conspiracy theorists ignore.

Other random things to note...

Twisted metal from the fall...nope. Not twisted like this. This type of "twisting" has never been seen before in ANY controlled demolition. I say this as someone who actually SAW the metal involved.

Finally, WHY would they speak in Arabic? I mean, given according to everyone on this board, the powers that be were going to blame Muslims no matter what, WHY speak in Arabic? Seriously. What is the motivation?

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

One final final thing to note.

As a point of fact - FACT - the fires were smoldering at the WTC for MONTSH afterwards. I should know. I saw this with my OWN TWO EYES when I went down to Ground Zero. I *smelled it*

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

One final FINAL thing to note.

None of this exchange going on has anything to do with an assertion on my part that all Muslims are suicide bombers or terrorists, or even that a large minority are. Rather, a very VOCAL minority of Muslims are suicide bombers. Different from LARGE minority.

I am perplexed why y'all refuse to acknowledge this, as that fact is *not* an indictment on Islam itself. Furthermore, frankly, pretending it does not exist is not helping Muslim-American relations, if y'all are so concerned about that.

For those who will then say "But you don't acknowledge anything about Israel," they would be wrong. I have repeatedly stated Israel is not a perfect nation and does troubling things. I do not see Israel as the EVIL nation or even as a terrorist nation, but I aknowledge it has done some bad in the world. (existing in a world where other nations also have done bad)

Why the failure even to admit the POSSIBILITY that in fact al queda planned 9/11? Why is this so difficult? The facts are out there. (in the wiki article I linked to)

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Miss R, I think because you're trying to use 9/11 to prove a point when the truth is no one really knows what the hell happened that day.

Why should I trust my government Miss R?

MLK? Lies.
Iraq? Lies.
Katrina? Lies.
Pamela's boobs? Lies.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

CIA prisons? Lies.
Gitmo? Lies.
Wiretapping? Lies.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Wiki nor the government has debunked anything.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

What is MLK? I honestly have no idea. Martin Luther King? What was lied about that one?

And Pamela's boobies are not government produced, even if they are fakies. :-p

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Lee Harvy wasn't responsible, check out "An Act of State" .

:P

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Here's a link.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Um, vper1, I think you are confusing MLK with JFK. No one ever said Lee Harvey Oswald, who died in 1963 was responsible for killing Martin Luther King.

And I know all about every single conspiracy theory of JFK's death. I have long been fascinated with the Myth of Camelot. My own belief is honestly that we will never know the truth. James Ellroy wrote a great work of historical fiction on this all, called American Tabloid. I think you would like it.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

That's weird. It posted what I had to write as anonymous.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger vper1 said...

Oops! You're right, not sure why I said that.

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Confessions of a Malamute said...

you being the US in general Miss R

You come across as a pompous know it all. Painted into a corner of your own making with your preconceived ideas. It doesn't help your case at all. In fact it weakens it.

The US has MUCH to answer for in regards to its treatment of the 3rd world. In fact its starting to answer for it right now.

So you were at ground zero, big deal. You still know nothing. You eagerly eat up whatever lies are spoon fed you, then with arrogance that the US is infamous for attempt to come across as an expert with your misunderstandings of basic physics.

A gas line sitting under the building and exploding and bringing that building down into its own footprint ? Wow are you ever gullible. I worked in London England when they were expanding a tube line. They got within feet of a major feeder line (for gas) Had they hit is a large part of that entire area would have exploded. You know little yet you claim to be an expert. When presented with solid facts you bury your head in the sand and refuse to see what is right in front of your face. You optimise what is wrong with your country. Ignorant. Arrogant. With a lack of information or understanding about what really happens around you. This attitude is precisely why the US is fast becoming a failed nation. Far too many of your countrymen are the exact same.

Tell me what will you say when the Chinese dump your dollar and your dollar becomes expensive toilet paper ? What will you say when after getting kicked out of the ME and you no longer have access to oil? What will you say when you cant afford the gas to drive to the empty stores to purchase food you can no longer afford ? Will you still have that smug grin ? I highly doubt it.

You are being lied to by a government that isn't on your side and never has been. This isn't just bush. Its your entire political system since day one. In some ways the Soviets had an advantage over the Americans. They knew their government lied to them. A far too large majority of Americans believe whatever load of BS comes out of whatever government it has without any question whatsoever

 
At Tuesday, March 14, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Um...Confessions...I do not believe everything my government says, and never said I did. I am well aware of what the government has done. I do take issue with your implied assertion that the US is somehow *particularly worse* than other nations in the world. Its ideals are amongst the best, but lately, those ideals have been trambled upon.

Furthermore, I dispute that the US government is behind 9/11. I dispute this after having looked at the evidence this board has showed me, so it's not that I am "blind." Wow, that makes me such a rabid conservative!

*rolls eyes*

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

Oh my, Miss R

mal already answered your 6 questions regarding 9/11, in pretty much the same way I would have - it appears you simply ignored them, just like you ignored vper1's and jeff g's points, and instead recited your "belief".

If you're that much into government sources, check this. Excerpt: "Early news reports had indicated that a high-pressure, 24-inch gas main was located in the vicinity of the building; however, this proved not to be true". There was an electrical substation underneath WTC7, but that's rather irrelevant.

The thing is, if everything brought forward to support at least severe internal complicity didn't convince you, you can't have been looking or thinking, none of which would reflect too well upon yourself. If you can offer one plausible explanation for WTC7's astonishing, symmetric, near free-fall collapse within the boundaries of the official story, I might reconsider. However, up to this day, there is none - not even from the "experts" of FEMA, NIST or the 9/11 (C)ommission...

Did you know no steelframe skyscraper has ever collapsed from fire excluding 9/11?

Miss R said "I happen to disagree that Israel's actions are "state sponsored terrorism."

If you mean terrorism to be purposely targeting civilians, that is not what they are doing. There may be a rogue soldier who does this - but that soldier is not part of the Israeli policy, and I never condone such actions. Such soldiers are also subject to the Israeli courts - something American soldiers are not. (they are court martialled in special "military courts") The fact that this is somehow lost on everyone here on the board is both obvious and sad."


Yeah, the "special military courts", also known as "preliminary investigations" - know any details about these? I'm sure you don't.

The Bart Simpson Defense

Excerpt: "Well, there are two important things you have to bear in mind every time you hear the phrase “preliminary investigation” in the context of the I.D.F. The first is that an I.D.F. preliminary (or initial) investigation isn’t an “investigation” in any sense that a reasonable person would understand the word – i.e. a process involving the collection of physical evidence, the identification and interviewing of eyewitnesses etc, etc. In fact it isn’t an investigation at all, it is simply a report by the commander of the I.D.F. unit that carried out the shooting, giving the unit’s version of events."

I think it's your duty to read the entire article, painful as it might be, or stop pretending to be aware.

Things the MSM won't tell you about Israel/Palestine:

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

messed up that last link.

Things the MSM won't tell you about Israel/Palestine:

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

Hm, looks like I didn't mess up those links after all, the code did. Well, whatever - the datestamp hyperlinks to "Lawrence of Cyberia", a truly recommended blog.

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

lumos, many thanks.

That's a great site. I have it in my blog roll...:)

You make excellent points. I for one am convinced 9/11 was an inside job. Who exactly was behind it, we have yet to find out.

But, I am hopeful that one day we will.

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

Always one step ahead, you are ;)

What reports is essential for understanding the conflict, which is generally depicted as extremely one-sided by the MSM. The results are, to put it bluntly, brainwashed apologists as well as the scapegoat meme du jour, namely the fanatical suicide bomber, the epitome of unprovoked, total aggression. A beast borne out of blind hatred for no apparent reason, other than elusive myths of "jihad" and the "caliphate".

This seems to horrify people so much that they let go of reason entirely - no questions asked. Or rather, not the right questions. Instead of asking "what drives a person to sacrifice his very existence?", the question all too often is "how perverted must a person be to sacrifice his very existence for no good reason, other than some barbaric, imposing, belligerent religious doctrine, maybe?"

The MSM can provide the answer for the latter, LoC for the former. I'll stick with viewing people as human, not monsters.

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

Ouch. Everything was alright when previewed, but now, the anchor out tag got...eaten?! Just like two others already :/ I'll try with some extra tags for consumption next time...

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

http://www.911myths.com/

I am not convinced by the evidence that the government planned 9/11. Criminally negligent? Yes. Planned it? No.

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

Are you convinced that the US currently occupies Iraq?

just checking.

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

QRS, was that meant to be witty? I always like attempts at humor, haha.

Did you even look at the link I presented? Or did you decide to not bother, because nothing can convince you that the US/Israel was not behind 9/11?

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

http://www.st911.org

http://www.911research.wtc7.net

http://www.911proof.com

http://physics911.net

http://www.question911.com

Enough?

What was your point Miss R? Do you expect me to debunk every single of the quite many unsubstantiated claims on 911myths? How about presenting your arguments, not URLs?

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Blogger Red Tulips said...

Lumos, go to the other thread on Cheney's supposed involvement in 9/11.

 
At Wednesday, March 15, 2006, Anonymous Lumos said...

Ok, been there...and?

Just seen you reference the same URL.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home