Posted on 11/05/2009 3:11:02 PM PST by kellynla
MAJ. GEN. ROBERT SCALES (RET.) "This was a deliberate act of execution."
Will Durant, the well-known American historian says in the book “The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage” page 459
“...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within.” Almost all the Muslims of South Asia are descendants of weaker elements of the population who had succumbed to forcible Islamic conversion.” )
“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history”.
The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride of the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period. “
(source: The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage - By Will Durant page 459).
And unfortunately so few know this history. It is whitewashed in India as well; it is not taught in schools, according to what I’ve been told. Muzzies still screwing with India.
This bit of Steyn's piece is something I'm fine with. I am not claiming that Islam shouldn't be criticized or that Muslims should be given a free pass. I'm also perfectly fine with his discussions of the cultural implications of Muslim immigration in Europe. No, I'm not preaching multiculturalism. Earlier in the thread, I endorsed the use of cultural filters on immigrants to make sure they are compatible with American and Western civilization, regardless of their religion and country of origin.
Steyn says, "But we never make any effort to delineate the line which separates “radical Islam” from non-radical Islam." I've tried to do that throughout the discussion on this thread. From my experience, the way their women are treated and act, the way they react to other religions, and the way they talk about the United States are all good indicators of where that line is.
When a Muslim friend votes libertarian, let's his mother and wife call the shots on a lot of things, doesn't expect women to wear headscarves, narrowly reads the Koran, largely ignores the Hadith and Sunnah elements of Islam, celebrated Christmas as a child to fit in, and surrounds himself with plenty of non-Muslim friends, that tells me he's not a menace likely to shout "Allah Akbar" and start killing other people.
When a local Subway sandwich shop owner who is the first in the nation to offer Halal meat with the approval of Subway nevertheless has a sign on his door supporting America, has no problem selling the standard Subway ham and pork offerings, has no beard, lets his daughters work at the shop without headscarves and dressed like normal American teenaged girls, let's his wife (also without headscarf) handle part of the business, pays young people's pop music, and is willing to chat with me amiably about his business, I'm not worried about him shouting "Allah Akbar" and killing other people.
And there are other Muslims that I've known that were quite, even shy, guys who clearly genuinely loved their wives and kids, never made a big deal about their religion, and didn't fit the profile of a jihadist. I'm not worried about them shouting "Allah Akbar" and killing other people. Maybe they are all masterful actors but somehow I doubt it because there are certain things a genuine frothing at the mouth jihadist would never abide buy including letting a woman tell them what to do or letting their unscarved daughters out among the infidel. And I see no justice in persecuting or advocating the murder of these people who do not mean anybody any harm unless.
The jihadists really aren't all that smart. What they did on 9/11 was a one time stunt that relied on the fact that, up until that point, people would let hijackers take control of a plane because, up until that point, hijackers would normally let people go. No handful of jihadists is ever going to be able to take control of a plane like that again, as we've seen demonstrated in cases like that of Richard Reid (the shoe bomber) where he was quickly subdued. Sure, they might blow up planes and kill a lot of people, but they will never again have the opportunity to use them as cruise missiles against buildings.
And this guy, the most successful terrorist since 9/11, gave so many warnings I'm stunned that anyone can claim that they don't know why he did it with a straight face. The guy tried to convert his colleagues during a lecture. Imagine if a Christian tried to stand up in front of a group of psychologists at a military hospital and witness the Word of Jesus to them. That's political correctness run amok and that's not what I'm advocating at all. Muslim's should not be given a free pass if they step out of line. But the all too obvious point here is that this was not some stealth jihadist. This guy did everything but send out, "I'm going to kill you tomorrow," emails to warn people of what he was thinking and might do. Most jihadists aren't really a surprise. The 9/11 hijackers gave off plenty of signals, too. The jihadists aren't cleverly hiding most of the time. They are in plain sight.
So what's a radical Muslim? Saudi-funded Wahabbist Islamic centers and mosques should be considered suspect because of both the doctrine they preach on their foreign funding. Wahhabism is one of the two sects behind much of the terrorism and murder. Women who wear face-covering veils and their families should be suspect. Headscarves can be a suspicious sign if it's clear the woman would prefer not to wear them (e.g., a young woman who takes it off among friends), though sometimes they are harmless. Women who look restricted, abused, imprisoned, or forced into arranged marriages are a big warning sign (the same thing is a warning sign for fringe Christian and Mormon cults, too), as is rhetoric reflecting a jihadist point of view (such as defending the murder of apostates or saying kind things about al Qaeda), or long trips to terrorist hot-spots like Pakistan. Getting a wife from another country, particularly one who doesn't speak English and seems subservient, is suspect. I can go on but my point here is that there are warning signs and we shouldn't ignore those warning signs (there were plenty in this case), but if there are no warning signs, we shouldn't assume that they are all Oscar-caliber actors waiting for their chance to murder infidels any more than we should assume that everyone we know is a potential Dennis Rader, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Timothy McVeigh, or Karla Homolka.
The vast majority also don't seem to condemn too damn strongly it either. They always seem to offer sympathy, but seldom do you hear outright condemnation. I suspect, simply through my belief in basic human nature, that their reluctance to speak too loudly in public is because of internal intimidation. I also suspect that some percentage are quietly cheering for the 'Brother" who commits these atrocities while publicly pretending to be horrified but equally worried about revenge attacks which never seem to happen.
I know a Muslim man who was outraged by 9-11 and spoke so publicly and often, until one day he suddenly fell silent and would no longer discuss it. I can't prove it, but I'd bet he was given an ultimatum to keep his mouth shut or else. The man has a wife and children. What would I do? What would you do?
Yeah, because Michael Moore has nothing better to do than bait Freepers.
He says most Muslims can’t read so they don’t know what’s in the Koran. First of all, what a racist statement!
The way I wrote that is inaccurate but the Koran is written in Arabic. Most Muslims don't speak the Arabic the Koran is written in or recited in, though there are plenty of Muslims who are illiterate (the literacy rate is 28% in Afghanistan (maybe as high as 50% for men only), just below 50% in Pakistan and Bangladesh, 61% in India, 71% in Egypt, 74% in Iraq, 77% in Iran, and 79% in Syria. So between actual illiteracy and Arabic illiteracy as well as other factors, plenty of Muslims haven't read the Koran.
Second, that’s the problem. They believe what they’re TOLD is in the Koran. But I can read so I KNOW what’s in it.
Yes, and my point is that you may care more than a lot of Muslims do.
He admits the religion teaches to kill all who aren’t muslim but says most muslims don’t know that because they can’t read. The major at Ft. Hood could read pretty good.
And there are Muslims who do read the Koran and don't interpret it that way. The fact that the Wahabbists promote translations that go beyond what the text actually says to justify their brand of jihad is because there is room for people to read what they want into it and it doesn't support their agenda strongly enough without some tweaking.
And I see the press is falling all over themselves finding muslims who will condemn this act and say it’s not about Islam. Even Fox is asking “What would cause a man to do this?” Are they that damned stupid? What causes one to do it in Iraq? What caused them to fly airplanes into the WTC? Islam is what caused it!
His religious beliefs definitely played a key role in what he did and, yes, they are being stupid when they pretend that they don't know that. But not all Muslims share the full set of beliefs that led him to murder.
And yes, this is the guy who will be wondering why they cut his family’s heads off when it wasn’t him who was being nasty to the muslims.
Again, I'll quote Franklin, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Just how much liberty and justice are you willing to sacrifice and how many people are you willing to persecute and kill to feel safe?
And this guy says there are muslims who have turned their fellow muslims in but are afraid to come forward. First, how the hell does he know this if they’re afraid to come forward?
I provided links about Muslim informants earlier in the thread. You tell me you can read. Try it.
Second, I wouldn’t be afraid to come forward. And I’m sure 99 per cent of all other religions will certainly report a possible suicide bomber to the authorities. But muslims get a pass because they’re afraid. Boo effing who.
Really? Is that why so many Germans stepped forward to stop the slaughter of the Jews during WW2, because it's so easy to stand up and do the right thing when your life is threatened? It's always easy to talk a big game when your life isn't in danger. We have publishers and movie directors who are not even Muslim who fear offending Muslims because they don't want to be murdered like Theo van Gogh. It's not just the good Muslims who are afraid of the jihadists. Lots of people are.
The problem is P.C. B.S.
That absolutely is a problem and was a huge problem with this murderer.
And I’m not a racist ‘cause Islam is not a race. I’m a muslim hater!
Not all bigotry is racism but bigotry is wrong.
And, like you, I won’t respond to this P.C. Christian again either. I hope I’m don’t miss the rapture but it would almost be worth missing it to see people like this guy watch Jesus wipe out all the muslim race and everyone who sides with them. I said “almost worth it”.
Because the Jesus in your Bible tells you to enjoy the suffering of others and to wish all of your enemies dead? So your Jesus enjoys the blood of human sacrifices just like the Allah of the jihadists? Apparently you don't just hate the sin and the sinner but want to enjoy their suffering and watch them die.
Do you understand this parable?
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, "Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.
"Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him. Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.
"The servant fell on his knees before him. 'Be patient with me,' he begged, 'and I will pay back everything.' The servant's master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.
"But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. 'Pay back what you owe me!' he demanded.
"His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, 'Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.'
"But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. When the other servants saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed and went and told their master everything that had happened.
"Then the master called the servant in. 'You wicked servant,' he said, 'I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn't you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?' In anger his master turned him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.
"This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart."
Since you are looking forward to the Rapture, what do you think "turned him over to the jailers to be tortured" is a metaphor for?
Or how about this?
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[h] and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies[i] and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Like I said, plenty of religious people ignore even things that are crystal clear in their religious books when it suits them. Do you really care what Jesus actually said or are your own fears and hatred more important to you? If you don't want to listen to Jesus or don't like what He had to say, how about Paul?
Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves. Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. Share with God's people who are in need. Practice hospitality.
Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.
Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. On the contrary:
"If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Is any of that unclear in any way?
Well, let me give you two similar situations to consider. If the artist Andres Serrano who created the work "Piss Christ" with a crucifix in a jar of urine were to be murdered by a crazed Christian fundamentalist, how much sympathy do you think he'd get here even though people might condemn the murder? If that's too speculative, take a look at some of the threads on Free Republic when abortionists are murdered. While most Freepers and pro-life people do condemn such murders, there are also plenty of people who express sentiments that perhaps the abortionist got what they deserved.
My point is that people normally don't get too broken up over the death of someone who they consider an adversary or bad person and the condemnations of their killers can be less than forceful, even if they would never personally raise a hand to murder them themselves and even if they object to the murder out of principle. Consider that people have been toying with the idea of genocide against Muslims in this thread. While I doubt most Freepers would do the deed themselves, where is the outrage and condemnation?
I suspect, simply through my belief in basic human nature, that their reluctance to speak too loudly in public is because of internal intimidation. I also suspect that some percentage are quietly cheering for the 'Brother" who commits these atrocities while publicly pretending to be horrified but equally worried about revenge attacks which never seem to happen.
And as I pointed out above, I suspect another percentage regret the atrocity and would never do it themselves, but have trouble feeling too much sympathy for the victim and maybe sympathize with the anger of the perpetrator just as very extreme, anti-Muslim sentiments are getting a pass in these threads because many Freepers sympathize with the anger that's behind the sentiments.
I know a Muslim man who was outraged by 9-11 and spoke so publicly and often, until one day he suddenly fell silent and would no longer discuss it. I can't prove it, but I'd bet he was given an ultimatum to keep his mouth shut or else. The man has a wife and children. What would I do? What would you do?
What most people do is shut their mouths, which is what more than one person in this thread has asked me to do, too. Part of the reason I'm speaking up is that my Muslim friend and his wife wound up being CCed on an email years ago containing a message forwarded by a friend of a friend that said essentially that all Muslims are garbage (and worse) and realizing what was sent to whom I asked him, "So are you going to reply?" And he asked me, "Why don't you reply?" And he was right, so I did. It's easier to remain silent and not be called names, not be threatened, and not be killed for disagreeing.
That is misleading. While it might be true that the vast majority of Muslims have never "read" the Koran, as someone who lives and travels extensively in countries where Islam is dominant, I can tell you that the vast majority of Shiite and Sunni Muslims memorize the Koran, in its entirety.
They know exactly what it says.
Many educated Muslims whose native tongue is not Arabic do learn it in order to read the Koran, but then again the vast majority do not understand Arabic, even though many do learn parts of the Koran by heart without understanding a word.
Let's be clear here -- compared to the dominant Muslim sects; Salafism-Wahabism and Shiism, Sufis are a tiny minority. In addition to this fact, Sufis aren't considered "real" Muslims by those dominant sects.
The overwhelming majority of Islamic proselytizing and "outreach" is funded by Wahabists/Salafists, more specifically by Saudi Arabian Wahabists.
OK. I know this game well and it goes like this: Not all Nazis believed in employing mass murder in pursuit of racial purity. Not all Communists believe in the use of murder and "reeducation" in pursuit of socialist paradise. So on and so forth.
Instead of using this evasive, apologetic device, why not examine the components of Islam that have fueled -- nearly unabated -- aggression, genocide, mayhem and oppression for 1400 years?
I too, know many Muslims who abhor the violent, supremacist actions of some of their co-religionists. In fact, my dearest friend; a man I have trusted my life to on several occasions, is a devout, Shia Muslim. That doesn't change the obvious fact that there is something about Islam that today compels a broad swath of its adherents to murder non-Muslims, and mostly other Muslims, in the name of God.
Here's a little something to chew on: If I were to stand on a corner in Times Square and make boisterous ant-Jewish or anti-Christian remarks the worst that would happen to me would be some nasty looks or insults. The best that would happen would be an invitation to a seat at the Oscars. I currently live and work in a "moderate" Arab Muslim country. Sure, human slavery is rampant here, the rape of expat housemaids by indigenous Arabs is also a serious problem as is the mistreatment and overall subjugation of non-Arabs -- both Muslim and non-Muslim, but the streets are calm and the place is generally safe for most people, including Westerners and those who practice religions other than Islam. However, if I were to walk outside of my apartment and begin making statements against Islam, I would likely be beaten to death within a very short time.
What does that tell you?
Let the relativist spin begin! Lol!
Want to lose whatever illusions you might have concerning the Middle East, Arabs, Muslims and Islam? -- Come to the Middle East and spend 8-10 hours a day for at least a year, working and living with hundreds of Arab and non-Arab Muslims.
I don't know if their CNN International broadcasts seen abroad are any different than their broadcasts aired in the States. The program we watched was hosted by Anderson Cooper
It seemed to us that every reason beside Hasan’s Islam was being sought for the reason behind the shootings. But his Islam was very hard for CNN to dispense with.
CNN did report that there was an eyewitness (ear-witness?) that heard Hasan cry out “Alah-Ahkbar” as he began shooting.
There were interviews with people who knew Hasan and had attended several of his lectures in which he focused on Islam even though the lectures were supposed to be on other totally unrelated issues. In one such lecture, according to a colleague of Hasan’s, Dr. Val Finnell, his PowerPoint presentation attempted to justify suicide bombings.
The report revealed that there ware very many people who were quite aware of Hasan’s views and tendencies, and that his stability was deteriorating rapidly.
Anderson Cooper's program also highlighted two American born and raised Muslims who, on the streets of NYC, praised Hasan’s murders in the name of Alah. These traitors were also attempting to recruit others to their causes. The report did say that they are their REVOLUTION MUSLIM website are under continuous FBI scrutiny.
Good fences make good neighbors.
Hey John, my wife is considering a gig in Shanghai. If you have the time, please private email me with your impressions of the place. Thanks, in advance.
That nails that part of the issue for me.
It’s nice to say “we should take everyone as individuals”. The practical reality is that it is extremely difficult to do this, borderline impossible.
And it is not at all clear that the “MTV bomb” of cultural assimilation will ever work in the face of quiet intimidation and indoctrination by the radicals. See: Europe for how this is working; not well, from what I can tell.
The Germans said nothing because they sat by and allowed the government to take their guns. We’ve handed a well armed army to the muslims in Iraq and they’re still standing by and watching their brothers plant suicide bombs that kill our soldiers and their own citizens. Don’t try to tell me that no one sees them being planted. If bombs were going off constantly in any city in this country everyone would be reporting seeing them set. But for some reason all the muslims are blind and afraid. I don’t buy it.
Now, go preach to your leftist “let’s be nice to our enemies and they’ll be nice to us” friends. And I’ll keep preaching “Kill ‘em all!” If we do it’ll make Jesus’ job a lot easier.
If most Muslims didn't approve of 9/11, and of this Fort Hood Massacre and of the 1400 years of Islamic genocide of innocent populations, if the Muslim public did not believe the same as Bin Laden then why do they ,the Muslim world does NOT condemn Osama bin Laden and Islamic terrorists? Answer me that , liberal/Marxist/Democrat.
And answer this: Why if Islam is not genocide and world domination why are so many countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran over 99% Muslim? What happened to the Christians and others that lived in Iran? I want an answer , liberal.
You can never understand how Laura Ingraham, I, and her listeners think because you are a totally different creature, a liberal/Marxist/Democrat, while I like Ingraham, Mark Levin,General Patton,Most Freepers here, Reagan, Palin am a conservative: I am Republican.
I am REPUBLICAN!
Have you read the Koran? Well I have. And I can send you more quotes if you want but here is just one command from Allah:
The Goal of Islam is world domination.
This is akin to commandments in the bible. Muslims take these quotes as quotes from their God Allah and thus as commandments from Allah.
So here I am quoting Allah in the Koran:
-(Koran 8:12) I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them. (Koran 8:12)
- I (Allah Your God) will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers( all non-Muslims), Smite ye above their necks (beheaded Nick Berg) and smite all their finger tips of them ( ouch why would Allah command Muslims to cut off non Muslims’ fingertips off if Islam was a religion of Peace?). (Koran 8:12)
[Koran 2.193] And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah:
See Koran 2.193 commands Muslims to make war through deception or fighting until religion is only for ALLah , until Islam is the only religion and in many countries Muslims have achieved this genocide , In Saudi Arabia and Iran Muslims are over 99% of the population. so what happened to the Christans and atheists there?
http://www.internet-grocer.net/koran.htm
Unlike Christianity, Islam was founded on violence and its "holy" book encourages, promotes and demands violence against--and murder of--non-believers. If we in the West do not awaken to this danger from "radical" Islam, it will mean our destruction, probably within the next 20 years. What Americans--and others in the West--MUST understand is that these suicide murderers are the faithful Muslims . . . those who really believe and follow the teachings of the Koran.
Keep in mind, as you think about these things, that the average Muslim DOESN'T READ the Koran, just like the average Christian doesn't read the Bible. So, it truly is the faithful Muslim (who studies his Koran) that murders nonbelievers and wants to destroy the West.
Not at Sunnis are Wahabbists and not all Shi'as are the fundamentalist messianic variety (many of the anti-government protesters in Iran). You are correct that the Sufis are a tiny minority but people were claiming that essentially no Muslim can be a good Muslim or moderate Muslim and the Sufis are the clearest example of moderate Muslims. But I also mentioned the Alevis, who are a sizable portion of the Turkish population. Like the Sufis, the militants don't consider them "real" Muslims, either. And that means that those Muslims are just as endangered by the radicals as everyone else. There are other fringe Muslim groups like the Druze, as well.
Maybe they are bad Muslims. As I've already said, there are Christians who don't believe that Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, Unitarians, and generally people not of their own sect or branch are really Christian and there are Orthodox and even Conservative Jews who don't believe Reformed Jews and my point there is that, nonetheless, there are Unitarians, Mormons, and Reformed Jews even though they've all thrown large parts of their base religion out the window or have even replaced it and that just because the Bible says something doesn't mean that "Christians" believe it without question. Muslims are, in practice, the same way.
The overwhelming majority of Islamic proselytizing and "outreach" is funded by Wahabists/Salafists, more specifically by Saudi Arabian Wahabists.
Absolutely, and it's a dangerous radicalizing influence. I've already said as much in this thread and I think the government should do more to scrutinize Wahabbist mosques and Islamic centers for that reason. I'm not advocating putting our hands over our ears and ignoring the Muslim radicals the way that was done with this nut in the army. I'm saying that we shouldn't assume that all Muslims are radical if they exhibit no evidence of it.
Maybe that will let some clever terrorist slip through but the idea of not persecuting and prosecuting innocent people is an important part of the American system and it's why we don't let the police search homes without warrants or arrest people without cause, even though I'm sure they'd catch some criminals who fall through the cracks if they could. Remember, our system has let domestic terrorists slip through the cracks, too, and there were frantic individuals on the left, after the Oklahoma City bombing, who wanted to treat militias and even right-wing radio hosts the same way that people are talking about Muslims here -- guilty until proven innocent on the grounds of public safety. That's a very dangerous road to start walking down.
Many of the worlds Muslims, including Pakistanis Afghanis, Indonesians, Nigerians, Somalis, and so on, don't live in the Middle East or speak Arabic. The links I provided in my earlier reply were by people opposed to Islam and include ex-Muslims and it's there assessment that large numbers of Muslims don't really know the Koran. Not discounting your experiences out of hand, however, what was the context in which you were talking to these people about Islam? (You don't have too specific but having been overseas I know that such conversations can range from the casual to in-depth and I'm curious about the breadth and depth of the conversations you've had.)
Want to lose whatever illusions you might have concerning the Middle East, Arabs, Muslims and Islam? -- Come to the Middle East and spend 8-10 hours a day for at least a year, working and living with hundreds of Arab and non-Arab Muslims
Earlier in the thread, I discussed the legitimacy of cultural filters for immigration and I think it's a good idea, at least in theory. Having known quite Westernized Muslims (as well as non-Muslims from the Middle East) and having lived in and done work in Asia and seen the difference in cultures there, how much of that is the regional culture and how much if it is the religion? In my experience, for example, Persians who left Iran before or during the Shah's reign seem to have a very different attitude than Arabic people, almost regardless of religion, and remember that before the PLO moved in, even Lebanon was not such a bad place to be because of the European cultural influences.
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.