4 ms·
I was nodding my head throughout most of this article until I got to this: "the pledged supporters of a wicked theocratic ideology. These people will kill them
by meelash 17y ago
I was nodding my head throughout most of this article until I got to this:
"the pledged supporters of a wicked theocratic ideology. These people will kill themselves to attack hotels, weddings, buses, subways, cinemas, and trains. They consider Jews, Christians, Hindus, women, homosexuals, and dissident Muslims (to give only the main instances) to be divinely mandated slaughter victims."
This kind of insane toeing of the official line of good vs. evil is exactly the counter-productive foolishness that allows the security services to carry on with their ridiculous "responses" to these events.
Putting our heads into the sand about the actions WE have taken and supported in the past 100 years that have motivated these attacks does no one more disservice than ourselves. Just a few weeks back there was an extremely revealing article with statistics on the number of Muslim civilians directly killed by American forces in the past 30 years and vice versa.
Even when these attackers ARE explicitly motivated by religion, it is on the basis of worldwide injustices of our government that that religious motivation is invoked. It is never a question of killing because that is all Americans are good for, as is often implied in pieces like this.
- alabut 17y agoI'm glad to see that someone else noticed the last paragraph. It totally hijacks the rest of the article by conflating his excellent rant against security pantomime theater with his proposed solution of doing nothing, mixed in with a bit of racism. "We had better get used to being the civilians who are under a relentless and planned assault." Seriously? After bitching about the ineffectiveness of the TSA, the best idea for a replacement is to raise our hands and say "oh well, shit happens and planes go boom"?