Replies

See my post #125 to Terriergal.

Bush is trying to make a clear distinction between 1) the religion of Islam and 2) Islamic states who sponsor terrorism and Islamic terrorist orgainizations, as he should. Let the religious elements discuss the merits of Islam. It doesn't need to be a political discussion from our political perspective and it will save us from having a worldwide jihad against us.

Think of the business relationship as the political aspect of our relationship with Islam nations [client] and think of the fat and disgusting aspect as the religious aspect or our relationship with Islam nations. In other words, let's leave the business relationship alone and graciously introduce the client to our personal trainer and psychologist [religious right]. Get it?

Fair enough. Except..

Bush is trying to make a clear distinction between 1) the religion of Islam and 2) Islamic states who sponsor terrorism and Islamic terrorist orgainizations

The distinction is more correctly 1) lukewarm Moslems, and 2) serious Moslems.

Bush's diplomacy is an attempt to convince the lukewarm, to STAY lukewarm, by trying to prevent the perception that we are at war with Islam... even though, that is exactly the truth.

Let the religious elements discuss the merits of Islam.

Then why is Bush throwing his hat in?

From post #125 Our public policy should not denounce a religion

And where does Pat Robertson et al decide public policy? Bush should have just shut up and kept talking about the COUNTRIES that support terrorism and let the religious leaders talk. He can leave the comments about "Islam" unsaid. Because it IS in fact a dangerous religion, totally contrary to what this country stands for in its doctrine. Bush can let people figure that out for themselves, granted, but my guess is he's not familiar enough with it to have done so. For example, it is sacrilegious and insulting to them for him, as a non-Muslim, to have taken part in their religious festivities, in his display of "understanding" he made to them. To display such ignorance about their religion and then try to tell us "islam is OK" only reinforces the non-credibility of the assertion.

let's leave the business relationship alone and graciously introduce the client to our personal trainer and psychologist [religious right].

Yeah I get it, and I agree there, but at the same time, why introduce the client to the personal trainer and psychologist when you are saying to his face that he is for the most part OK and doesn't need them...?

IF the client REALLY needs the PTrainer and Psychologist, you would keep quiet about it even while others are making comments about it... and gradually as you earned the client's trust you would steer them in the direction of reform and maybe even mention that you think they need it, but ONLY once you had established enough rapport.

However, if your business relationship is an uneasy one, the 'rapport' may be just an illusion and you will never get the chance to introduce reform until the client's disgusting habits become too much for the relationship to continue to function. That is how I see it happening now.

It doesn't need to be a political discussion from our political perspective and it will save us from having a worldwide jihad against us.

I think that is completely wishful thinking. Islamists (as opposed to plain old Muslims who may or may not want to act on the Jihad teaching) don't care what we say about them, their position against us is fixed, as long as we are not willing to convert to Islam.