Denial or ignorance?
Submitted by Noah Wilk (United States), Jan 22, 2007 at 03:14
Michel, I am starting to wonder whether your problem is denial of reality or ignorance of reality? Let me explain why. You wrote:
"If this inaction, passiveness demonstrated by the UK authorities is indeed representative for much of the Western Society ( you did indeed mount tons of evidence to that fact)""If" this inaction is representative? Either you've been living in a cave for 6 years, or you are in denial of reality. I'm asking you which, because if you're in denial, there's no point in going on with discussion with you, whereas if you are simply ignorant of reality, we can at least get you up to speed!
How can you not realize that this inaction is rampant? It started with President Bush calling Islam "the religion of peace" right after 9/11 and everything since then has been an appeasement of and catering to Islam. IT actually started before that, but it was not until after 9/11 that the pro-Muslim, denial of reality inaction started in full swing in the media.
"They condemned and negated these teachings almost as passionately, as you or I do. But they were Muslims."
A very rare exception to the rule. Remember that.
" Side remark: I researched today Iran's nuclear facilities
It would not be a Pyrrhic victory. We could you low-yield nukes that explode underground (as Israel is planning) to take out their sites, which means very little fallout. After taking out their military and population centers with precision air strikes, they would be crippled militarily and we would have no problem taking Iran on the ground. The point is, you cannot fight with two hands tied behind your back as we are in Iraq. We'd need to bomb them into the stone age and completely destroy them. When we send ground troops in, there would be very few left to fight, with little or no armament. We would of course sieze the oil fields and claim them as our own to offset the price of the war. In fact, we could come out ahead on that.
"We can influence our legislation. I become US citizen, so I can vote. We can stand up and voice opposition, wherever the achievements of our democracy are being perverted. We can lead by example."Wrong. Politicians in both parties are totally corrupt and do not listen to the will of their constituents. Something like 85% of Americans are against amnesty for illegal aliens, and yet both parties are pushing for that. Our government is owned by foreign and global interests. The entire government would need to be replaced from the top down in order to have a chance.
"I agree – But I do not see myself as "denying reality", but trying to somehow live in it."
If that's true, then why, even in this very post I am replying to, do you doubt reality despite being given an overwhelming amount of evidence?
As for your "evidence" of societal strength, let's shoot them down like plinking cans in the prairie.
"The ability to distilling down the failure of Challenger to one measly O-Ring."
Scientific investigation by a small group of scientists. Not evidence of societal stength by any measure.
" The power of innovation demonstrated by our society, which will make us independant from middle east oil in a foreseeable future."
Again, pure delusion. The internal combustion engine has been obsolete for over half a century. Every president since...ummm...Kennedy?...maybe even before him, but every president since has sworn that in several years we would be independent of foreign oil. Let's look at this prediction of yours.
1973 - President Nixon launches Project Independance and claimed "In the year 1980, the United States wil not be dependent on any other country for the energy we need to provide our jobs, to heat our homes, and to keep our transportation moving." He also promised federal funding to create a gas-free car that would be on the market in 5 years. Here 34 years later, I am waiting.
1975 - President Ford signed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act and claimed America would be energy independant by 1985.
1977 - President Carter declared that energy independence was an issue of such vital national importance that it was the "moral equivalent of war." He created the US Dept. of Energy that August, with the goal of managing our energy crisis. In July of 1979, after the Iranian crisis doubled oil costs, Carter swore: "Beginning this moment, this nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977 -- never." He claimed we would be energy independent by 1990.
1991 - President Bush (I) announced an energy strategy aimed at reducing our energy independence. He funded the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium to develop lightweight batteries for electric cars. How many electric cars do you see on the streets these days, Michel?
1992 - President Clinton proposed a tax on oil (59.9 cents per BTU) to discourage dependence on foreign oil, then launched the Partnership for New Generation Vehicles with the Big Three automakers in order to develop energy efficient cars.
2001 - President Bush (II) pledged to promote energy independence for the USA. He also announced his $1.2 billion Freedom Car proposal to develop hydrogen fuel cars. How many of those do you see on the streets, Michel?
2006 - President Bush (II) claimed during his state of the union address that America will replace 75% of its oil imports by 2025.
So where has this "power of innovation" been hiding for more than a quarter of a century, and why do we still have utter dependence on oil? Why is virtually no one outside of a few Hollywood environmentalists driving hydrogen fuel or electric cars?
Once again, denial or ignorance of reality.
" The ability to use every single Airplane Crash to improve technology"
Once again, the skills of a few science investigators, not any sign of strength in society.
" The leap frog in military strategy during the original IRAK campaign"
" Billions of $ for the Tsunami victims coming from every corner of the globe"
" The space station and the Dreamliner. The medical improvements just during the last 10 years. The IT revolution causing the "information Age"Again, all scientific or technological achievements, but not a sign of societal strength. " Our discussion we have without fear of being thrown into a Gulag"
A sign of the strength of our forefathers, but that right of free speech is being eroded daily. A sign of how weak we've gotten, when we cannot speak our minds freely even in America.
" The fact that some complete idiots are allowed to promote removing "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance"
Another sign of weakness, not strength. We cater to whiners because they're "offended" by things they do not agree with. How do you see this as strength?
" The fact that it is basic human behaviour to want more to strive for improvement, but never want to give up, what one has (Freedom is the most addictive drug - once enjoyed, one will kill to keep it.)"
Michel, I have news for you. A society's strength is measured by how much the people care about their culture, about how much they are willing to sacrifice for their nation, about how aware they are of their Constitutional rights and how far they are willing to go to preserve those rights. We're a pathetically weak society now. When we reached 2,500 military deaths in Iraq (currently 3,000), we lost our national will to fight and elected the democrats as a referendum on Bush's policies (that was a stupid way of doing it!). We lost far more in a far shorter time in WWII!
We suffered 6,821 dead in one month at Iwo Jima.
We lost 418,500 in WWII in roughly the same amount of time we've been in Iraq. That's almost 140 times as many dead in the same time period. And yet back then Americans were all sacrificing for the war...rations on meat, sugar, butter, coffee, gasoline, tires, shoes, clothing, etc. We established Civil Air Patrols and endured citywide blackouts. We formed the USO to support our troops. We enacted the draft, and formed civilian support groups. Do you have any idea of the toll that WWII had here at home in the USA?
And yet we never lost our will and cried to bring the troops home! If we had to make half the sacrifices as a society now that we needed to in WWII, Americans could not tolerate a single weekend of war in Iraq, much less several years!
Don't talk to me about the strength of our society. That's a joke.
"Again – I do not argue either way, if they hate us. Mute point."
That's "moot" point. "Mute" means not being able to speak. Sorry, that's been bugging me for days now.
" The many hours spent here, a worn out keyboard and a headache is not, what I would call burying the head in the sand. If you really believe after all these exchanges, that I promote passiveness, then you got me utterly wrong."
Like I said, it comes off like a game, coming from you. You seem to simply enjoy arguing although you refuse to acknowledge reality in each post, even while admitting that others have given you overwhelming evidence of that reality.
"I was blessed to be able to travel almost the entire world. One for me amazing find was, that no matter in a kraal in Africa, a village in Chechnya, in Warszawa or Philadelphia, in the Phillipines or China or Mexico, or in Tigris - when sitting with a local family at the dinner table, I listened to the very same idle form of chatter."
Your claim of travelling the world and searching out all these poor ghettos and villages is not very convincing, I'm afraid. Earlier you spoke of travelling on business. What is your business, the Red Cross? I think Susan pegged it right with her two group theory, and I suspect you fit into group two.
"We always point out, how diverse those many cultures are, but fail to acknowledge how similar the average individuals. It is because of that that I feel that basic human needs come first, no matter where you are. It is why I have faith in our society, because it stands for exactly satisfying these basic human needs."
Once again, we do not share the same values. People in all civilized western countries value the lives of their children above pretty much anything else. In Islamic countries, they value revenge above the lives of their children. Their pathological and demented hatred of Jews, Christians, and "infidels" of every sort is so powerful that they send their children out as suicide bombers and actually breed children to be used as terrorist suicide bombers. They do not believe in the basic human needs of life, liberty, or happiness.
They do need to breathe air, drink water, and eat food like the rest of us, but so do all animals. Even a rabid dog will seek shelter from the rain and seek food. That doesn't make Muslims civilized.
"I would not be a pragmatist, if I denied the reality you depict. It's grim. My own little lab experiment failed miserably - I humbly must accept as fact. In that sense – I concede defeat and a weak position."
Hopefully that is a sincere admission.
"The difference between us is, that I see various ways ( including introspective) to win and in essence disagree on the magnitude of several actions you promote."
Then again, I guess not. Your "introspective" solution is more accurately called "suicide". Your disagreement with the magnitude insures defeat. You clearly do not understand the enemy yet. Have you read that article yet?
"Words again. I could have used the word "extreme measures". Fanaticism in our context was not meant to be an insult, but a simple description for "extreme" measures. It does not offend me, but yes, it disturbs me."
And what exactly is wrong with "extreme measures"? If you have a raging infection of gangrene in your leg, we must use "extreme measures" and amputate that leg in order to save your life. Unfortunte, but for the greater good. When faced with extreme circumstances, you are forced to take extreme measures.
" Banning Islam, deporting 1% of our population is to say the least "radical". "
Yet effective, and neccesary.
"I am not willing to accept the "collateral damage" of deporting or suppressing innocent people"
Show me that they are truly innocent. Islam is the enemy. They support Islam. They give money to mosques and madrassahs that teach jihad and where our enemies plot atrocities against our truly innocent American citizens. They refuse to stand against terrorism and denounce Islamic terror. They are engaged in a migratory attack, and as someone else mention in another post, enaging in political, economic, and litigious jihad. They engage in full-force propaganda for Islam. They are the enemy every bit as much as the people who flew the airplanes into the WTC.
"If the price for survival is that high, that it would force us to abandon everything we stand for, I promote in fact suicide. "Then you are truly a fool. It does not force us to abandon our principles or "everything we stand for". Only a total fool would allow an enemy ideology to infiltrate his society in mass numbers, engage in various forms of jihad (political, economic, litigation, population, etc) and do nothing about it. It would be a far different case, and I would not be calling for such extreme action, if Muslims here were standing up, claiming their religion for peace, denouncing and refusing to support terror, refusing to fund it, refusing to be part of the propaganda machine, refusing to allow radical teachings in their mosques and madrassahs, etc. None of that is happening though. If it is, it is on such a small and insignificant scale as to be irrelevant.
Remember if you will the planned rally for a community of 50,000 Muslims in America in 2002, where only 250 people showed up, mainly non-Muslims. If even 5% of them cared, there would have been 250,000 of them out there marching and denouncing terror. Even if all 250 people who attended were Muslims (and they clearly were not, being mostly white America kids), that would account for only one-half of one percent of them. That means that 99.5% of them were not interested in or willing to denounce terror.
So until you can show me some evidence of widespread reform in Islam here in America, they are the enemy. Every last one of them. Period. If they want to remain here in America, let them become Christian or Buddhist or whatever. I'm not about to excuse 99.5% of them on the actions of those rare few 0.5% who actually aren't supporting terror either passively or actively. I am not about to risk out country's future for a tiny minority when 99.5% of them don't care.
" Yep - in my book moral and ethical principles are indeed worth dying for."
And in my book, stupidity is not worth dying for, at any price. And it would be an act of utter irresponsibility and stupidity in the extreme to use the pathetic argument that we would be "violating our principles" in order to avoid taking drastic measures to deal with extreme circumstances when that argument is in fact invalid.
"24h after 9/11, I offered my services to the CIA/FBI. Unconditionally. I will die for this country, if she calls me."
Why wait 24 hours? Yes, I'd die for my country too, but I will not die for stupidity, even if that's what my country asks of me.
" But , what has been done to my own jewish family only 50 years ago, I will not do myself, even , if that means my demise. Such a world is not a place I personally want to live in."
"You seem to be able to do that. To entertain insane ideas in face of insanity. I accept and respect your point of view and the fact that you are willing to pay an enormous price for our survival but..."
"Eradicating an entire culture, as nasty it may look at times, can not be the solution."
I can understand your cultural trauma and sensitivity to the issue, being Jewish. However, that's not the same thing we're talking about. Your ancestors were rounded up and exterminated by an evil madman and his military machine simply because you existed. I am not advocating the eradication of an entire culture. That decision would rest entirely in their own hands. As long as they did not attack America, they would not be eradicated. As long as they became civilized human beings worthy of living, they would not be eradicated. And I am advocating eradicating them (if it comes to that) not because they exist, not because I disagree with them, but because they are a deadly menace to all we hold dear and sacred...life, liberty, happiness, freedom. If the mythical "moderate" Muslims refuse to transform their religion, they must be forced to do so, just as we forced Japan to surrender its insane ideology.
"If you are right, and all your evidence is the ultimate truth, this world deserves another species to be extinct. That is my realistic conclusion. Not just another race or culture – the human species."
If you truly believe that, then you are a total fool. Only a completely ignorant and misguided fool would prefer suicide to genocide when faced with an implacable enemy that does not respect life itself, when the enemy does not respect freedom or happiness, when the enemy's goal is the total annihilation of everything you hold dear. Besides, they place so little value on life, why should they complain? They believe that if they die fighting us, they are all going to Allah's paradise to enjoy 72 virgins, right? It's what they train their own children to do...go out and die fighting the infidel. By their own standards, nuking them off the face of the earth is something they should be praying for us to do. It insures they all go to heaven!
"Survival at all costs is not something I can buy in to."
Which is why you will be among the first to die. Those who are not willing to win at all costs will always lose to an enemy who is willing to win at all costs. You simply cannot change that fact of reality. And who are you to impose your weakness and cowardice on the rest of us?
"In conclusion Noah – your price tag on our survival is too high for me. I'd rather die than to betray the memory of my Grandparents who died in Auschwitz by using the same methods to suppress my "enemy", as the Nazis did."
Your argument is as pathetic as it is invalid and is a disservice to your ancestors. We are not talking about rounding up Muslims in America and forcing them into gas chambers or into deadly medical experiments. We are not talking about a Final Solution and a planned genocide.
We are talking about deporting them, the way we would deport any alien criminal (if we enforced our immigration laws). Yes, the deportation would be by force for many. And many would die resisting, just as many other sorts of criminals die resisting lawful arrest. That's their own fault. They would be allowed free and safe passage out if they chose to leave peacefully. They also would have the option of converting to another religion and staying here, though we would have to closely monitor that.
They would be sent back to their country of origin. There, they would have an opportunity to prove to the world that Islam is as great as they claim it is. They can invent new things and acquire great knowledge as they claim they once did. They can put into practice the "peaceful" aspect of the so-called "religion of peace". They would live long, happy, healthy lives free of the interference (or aid) of the Great Satan. They would have a chance to show the world they are worthy of living, worthy of being considered civilized human beings. And if they chose instead to continue worshipping death, rape, and intolerance, they would be free to continue to do so...in their own countries. They would not, of course be given any sort of aid, any sort of help, any sort of interaction with the civilized world, if that's the route they went down.
Notice that at this point they are still alive, still breathing, still free to choose their own destiny. Quite unlike the situation in the Holocaust.
It is only if and when they somehow find a way to escape their Islamic countries and mount a mass terror attack on America that the nuclear option would become a reality. All they have to do to avoid that is to literally do nothing. If they simply refrain from mounting a terror attack against us, they are in no danger. Even if they remain a demented death cult of depravity and sickness, they will not be destroyed by us. And perhaps ove time they will desire the freedoms that the west has so badly that they will indeed reform their death cult into a peaceful religion and once again be allowed to immigrate to western countries. Win/win.
It is only if they mount a terror attack on us that we use the nuclear option. That, Michel, is called deterrence. It is a policy that is meant to deter that course of action, not encourage it. You do realize, do you not, that if they manage to mount a nuclear attack on an America city (say, NYC), that we wil inevitably mount a nuclear retaliatory strike anyway? And that is their intended goal. Ever heard of the American Hiroshima plot? My course of action actually diminishes the likelihood of any use of nukes, any amount of mass killing, etc.
"Can I deny the hatred and anger, I felt, when watching the video of the sermon given by the Imam in Birmingham? No. By all means, go ahead and euthanize this moron. Do I feel the same anger and hatred towards the hundreds of listeners, eating the propaganda up like manna from heaven? Nope. I feel sorry for them, as they are sheep being led to the slaughterhouse."
Then once again, you are a fool. Those people are willingly listening to the propaganda and willingly believing it without even bothering to question it. They are just as guilty as the imman and deserve death every bit as much as he does.
"Watch the video, but focus on the British Muslim who comments on it. He is proof that there are ( some) modern Muslims, willing to call for reform and condemn those depraved, medieval teachings. Are you willing to sacrifice people like him with your drastic all encompassing MO too?"
"I am not, even, if these voices are at present few and far apart."
So you're willing to sacrifice the peace, safety, happiness, freedoms and rights of hundreds of millions of people and all their hundreds of million of descendants...freedoms and rights that we have sacrificed millions of our citizens to gain and maintain...simply to coddle a very tiny minority that amount to probably a few thousand? That's insane. Those very few worthy ones have the option of converting and staying here, or immigrating to another free western country that will allow them great freedoms. Perhaps Britain, Australia, New Zealand, etc.
"I am emotionally bruised, tired and exhausted by the onslaught of differing opinions here."
That's just the emotional exhaustion that comes with having to be forced to confront reality. Yes, it's painful at first, as I said before.
"They are simply much smarter than I am, but – let me tell you, my moderate friends –as opposed to Noah and Susan, Infidel and dhimmi, I am ashamed of you and I walk away from here in disgust, whereas I respect the aforementioned as willing to speak up, voice at times harsh, even radical opinions and in general " do the work". They have backbone at least, whereas I can call you guys only Cowards with no spine. You enjoy the blessings and privileges of our society, yet lack any courage to defend it."
And yet you still think they deserve to be allowed to live in our society?
A very apt analogy. And yes, you're starting to see reality now.
"If you – the silent majority – continue to do so, I can not come to any other conclusion than Noah –we are doomed. God help us all."
Actions speak louder than words.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (2101) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes