Posted on 08/14/2006 7:26:05 AM PDT by Valin
Many of us are only concerned with reputation and image, our image in the media, and the reputation of the Muslims in the world, but they do not care about reforming the original source, their children.
When US President George W. Bush described those who plotted to kill thousands of passengers in ten airliners as Muslim fascists, protests from a number of Islamic societies in the west and the east were voiced against this description.
What is wrong with using a bad adjective to describe a terrorist as long as he is willing to personally call himself an Islamist; declares his stance, schemes, and aims; while his supporters publicly call for killing of those whom they consider infidels, or disagree with them religiously or politically.
The strange thing is that the protesting groups, which held a press conference, would better have held it to denounce the deeds of those affiliated to Islam, who harmed all Muslims and Islam.
Bush did not say that the Muslims were fascists; he said that the Muslim fascists were the problem, i.e. he distinguished between an extremist group and the general innocent peaceful Muslims. Yes, fascism is a word that has bad connotations, and is used here to approximate the meaning to the listeners. The westerners know that fascism is an extremist nationalist movement, which emerged from the European society, and was responsible for destructive wars caused by its premises, which are based on discrimination, racism and hatred. This approximation is correct when you apply it to the literature of the Islamic extremists. The same as the Europeans fought fascism and the fascists by word and by gunpowder, the world will fight the extremist Islamists. This is what the good Muslims, who are at the forefront of those hunting down Al-Qaeda, do; the same as the Muslim who exposed the latest conspiracy to hijack the airliners, when he hastened to inform the security authorities when he suspected what was happening in the neighborhood.
This is why I do not understand what those people - who want to protect reputation and image from the westerners - want to call the Muslim extremists who resort to violence? Do they want to call them Khawarij (The earliest Islamic sect, which traces its beginning to a religious-political controversy over the Caliphate)? The problem is that no one (in the west) understands its historical meaning. Do they call them by their names only, such as Osama, Ayman, Muhammad, and Zamani? Do they call them according to the sarcastic Egyptian way: "people who should remain nameless?"
Describing them as fascists in the west is better than all the bad adjectives that rightly or wrongly have been attributed to them. This is because as far as the westerners are concerned, fascism means a specifically defined group that still lives within their societies, is from their ethnic groups and religion, and hence distinguishes between them and the others.
What is more important than preoccupation with preserving the image is to rectify the situation, and to confront the extremists among us. The majority of the westerners did not know anything about Islam and Muslims until Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri, Muhammad Ata, and the culprits of the London explosions called themselves Islamists, and started to use the Koran and the Islamic historical nomenclatures. You cannot call the Red Brigades Movement anything g other than what they call themselves, and there is no escape from calling them Italian communists; the same applies to the National Front in Britain, which is described as a Nazi and fascist movement.
At the end, describing rotten apples as rotten does not make the people hate eating good apples. The same applies to the Muslims; there are one billion Muslims in the world, and the world has no option other than dealing with them, and hunting down the evil minority among them. We have wasted a long time since the seventies in being preoccupied with protesting against nomenclatures and images. This is despite the fact that these people hijack civilian airliners, kill people in restaurants, and justify their actions by using pan-Arab or Islamic descriptions. To describe a Muslim as terrorist is natural if he is a terrorist, the same as you do with a Colombian drug smuggler, an Italian Mafioso, a Russian butcher, a British Nazi, or a US right-wing extremist.
-------------------------------------------
Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed the general manager of Al -Arabiya television. Mr. Al Rashed is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs. He is currently based in Dubai
Ping
So he's the one that actually speaks out. Hope he has bodyguards.
Muslim making sense: The Fatwah against him should arrive any time now.
My problem with this statement is the lack of the "majority of peaceful Muslims" speaking out against these barbarians in their midst.
Glad he said it, he didn't quite take it far enough though. This line of reasoning leads to the rhetorical question of why the Muslim PC Police don't say a word whenany of the Arab/Persian leaders use offensive terms such as infidels, swine, etc when referring to any non-muslim. There was a brief glimmer of hope earlier this year when the press began to pick up on Ahmadenijad's hate speech, but they have completely ignored all other such statements emanating from the Muslim world since the Israel-Lebanon war began.
Good article. I do hope he has good security.
Slowly the truth is coming out of who we are up against.
My problem with this statement is the lack of the "majority of peaceful Muslims" speaking out against these barbarians in their midst.
I see it quite a lot. Part of the problem is the terrorists get the ink, remember, if it bleeds it leads.
He's a fascist, they're all fascists---this is beginning to sound like an old Dr. Pepper commercial.
The President used a term which everyone (over 30) understands, a term with definite pejorative connotations. If I understand George Bush at all, he is calling it as he sees it and using plain spoken English. Privately, no doubt, he calls it in even plainer spoken English.
So while the word is getting thrown around rather loosely of late, and the phenomenon he's referring to is not the scholar's idea of fascism, it's a better choice than having to come up with some value-neutral term and having to add the negative connotations after a couple of decades and a few hundred thousand dead Americans.
Personally I'd just call it Islam and add qualifiers to those few exceptions to the rule which Islam may encompass.
Truth hurts.
The lefties get more angry at Bush for using the word fascist than they ever get about terrorists blowing things up.
The Pres did NOT say Muslim Fascists! He said ISLAMic Fascists. BIG difference. Well, sort of. And he should say it more often too.
Can anyone provide a basic definiton or description of "fascism," and relate it conceptually and operationally to the Islamic terrorists? I attained adulthood during WWII, when Fascist Italy was at its peak, yet do not to this day understand just what fascism is. My dictionary offers no meaningful help, in the context of the present, saying that "the Fascisti are supposed to typify obedience to the law as did the lictors in ancient Rome." ?????
Fourteen Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Very good. But is this sincere? When the majority of the ideology of death and destruction condemns the head-slicing, torture of children, building bombing, bus bombing, train bombing, airplane bombing, hostage taking I'll believe it.
See reply 9.
I was at a support Israel rally last night here in Mpls. About 200-300 people showed up, does that mean the rest of the Twin cities doesn't support Israel?
I could also mention the differences between the "pro war" and anti war rallies. Does that mean most American don't support what we are doing in the GWOT?
Do you see my point?
Thanks for the info. Without taking time just now to examine these points in detail, I note that the ruling party of Hitler's Germany was the National Socialist party, and that most of these characterists said to define fascism also applied, in spades, to the USSR.
I'm not meaning to be argumentative, just making a couple of offhand observations in passing.
I appreciate the reference to Dr. Britt's analysis.
Fascism would be a tremendous leap forward for Islamic economies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.