More Outraged By the Outrage

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

The Telegraph/UK first ran a story on the Arab/Sudan strife, Muslim versus Muslim, on the 24th of April`04. I watched, and disn`t see any brave people from our part of the woods take this further in our media.

A few weeks later there are some photographs, true or false still emerging, and everybody has their hackles up.

Thank you for your patience.

Salaam Alaikum!

Shehryar, your comments and points were well put.

I also wanted to add that the current situation in Palestine/Israel is a consequence of Arab/Jewish nationalism. Both Palestinians and Israeli`s are essentially motivated by a nationalistic vogue that rubbed off from the 20th century. What is particularly sad is how people in general, political pundits in particular try to link the situation with religion. Such is an intellectually lazy and desultory conclusion to swallow and regurgitate --I say.

--Hakim

Romair, the cultural similarities or differences are not solely based on language. Other things such as religion, housing, family values, apparel, food, codes of conduct, etc also make up lifestyle.

The point I was trying to make was that Canadians are not that similar to Americans as you suggested. They have differeneces just as European nations have differences with US but at the same time have similarities just as other European nations do.

And you can pick up Canadians from Americans. I have been told very frequently of my Canadian accent even though I moved to Chicago 10 years ago. Perhaps in the East coast its less obvious, but certainly in the Midwest and West Coast it is.

Canada does not have overt war agendas but Israel and Britain do. Brits very much have been in the game all along. If it were in their power they would have incited a world war III. I think they played a big role in anti-communist movement. However sly, but obvious role.

Israel has been a sore point for mainly muslim world, most of my European friends do not consider Israel as aggressive (they have the guilt of holocaust). And hence, the image of Israel is limited to our views. Countries like India, for eg., has good diplomatic relations with Israel.

And if Canadians watch the same TV, games etc, so do half of the world. You can watch US TV in Germany (even in small town like Karsruhe). They have American restaurant chains in Europe as well as Asia.

You are right about stronger muslim community in Canada than in the US. The reason is that most Canadian muslims are professionals (or atleast some education) and well-connected through various organizations. There is a huge Ismaili community as well. They have more voice and deeper roots there. Because of supposed neutrality of Canada, more muslims there are patriotic to Canada.

Most of the muslims I see living in US are not necessarily highly educated. The ones that are, do not like to get involved. They are simply not organized and lack the leadership to protect their rights. And some are very aggressive, who know not much diplomacy, which further damages the opinions about them (esp true of Pakistanis and some Arabs). Many voice their anti-American sentiments, which does not help.

BTW, the West doesn`t want peace because thats what fuels their powerhouses. In times of political unrest, the rich always gets richer. Its only the middles and lower classes that suffer. And who cares about the middle and lower classes anyways? Certainly not the political leaders.

It would be more logical to have stability and ``live and let live`` policy, but most of us are not really logical.

And please don`t blame everything on the Jewish community. Our muslim community is much to be blamed for allowing others to subjugate us.

correction #30: `` say this with quite a bit of personal experience. What to talk of anything else, which European country, other than UK speaks English? ``

Which major European nation. Obviously Ireland speaks English.....

Shehryar #29: ``The similarities between US and Canada are like similarities between most european countries and US.``

This is definitely not correct. I say this with quite a bit of personal experience. What to talk of anything else, which European country, other than UK speaks English? Are you seriously suggesting that Americans and Germans, French, Dutch, Poles etc. cannot be differentiated.

The only Canadian province that has a different lifestyle, than the USA is Quebec. Canadians speak the same language, with nearly identical accents to the Americans, from Ontario to BC. They watch the same TV, play in the same hockey leagues, laugh at the same jokes. Most major business houses in Canada, that one sees like restaurant chains, car dealerships, hotel chains, coffee shops are all American.

It is ten times easier to pick a Brit from an American, than a Canadian from an American. And picking Dutch, Spaniards etc. from Americans only requires saying hello to them. Or asking them who Matt Sundin is or who Steve Nash is. They will have no clue.....Nor will Brits, for that matter.

``Canada comes out more neutral mainly because it does neither have overt military ambitions nor the resources to engage in militant actions like the US.``

This is partially correct. I don`t think it is the main reason. Israel does not have overt military ambitions, outiside Palestine either, yet it does not come out neutral. UK has about the same amount of resources as Canada (more people, much less land), and no overt miltiary ambitions, yet it comes out non-neutral.

The reason Canada comes out neutral is because its internal politics, and thus its foreign policy, are not influenced by pressure groups, like USA`s are. Specifically for Mideast conflicts, Canada does not have a strong enough pro-Israeli lobby to get it into the wars. The pro-Israeli lobby that does exist in Canada, tried like hell to get Canada to support the USA, and enter the Iraq war. Every Jewish owned newspaper, commentator etc. was on every TV show, trying to get the Canada involved. Yet there is too much of a counterweight, and they did not succeed.

The Muslim community, and the Pakistan community specifically, is far far stronger in Canada than in USA. Hence it can counter the Israeli lobby in Canada, quite a bit. Canadian PMs and federal ministers, regularly show up at Pakistani shows and events and at Muslim events. I never saw that in the USA.

Canada could be non-neutral by just supporting the USA in conflicts, without having a large military. But it doesn`t do that. I don`t think the USA would be too interested in Mideast conflicts, had it not been for Israel. They certainly have harmed the USA more than helped it. USA and its allies could have gotten its oil at cheap prices, peacefully. After all, Arabs have to sell it to someone.

It is caught in those conflicts, which now have a life of their own, and have turned into Arab-USA conflicts, specifically because of USA`s support to Israel, due to the influence the Israeli lobby enjoys in US politics.

Romair, I agree with HP.

The similarities between US and Canada are like similarities between most european countries and US.
Only Ontario is similar in culture to America, other Canadian provinces have very different lifestyle. And if you have been living here (in US) for long, you can spot the different accent easily. Canada comes out more neutral mainly because it does neither have overt military ambitions nor the resources to engage in militant actions like the US.

``The US conflict with Arabs is purely an off-shoot of Israel`s conflict with Palestinians.``

No, it is not. It goes way back to the early 20th century around the time of world war I.
When the house of Saud betrayed its own people and took sides with the British and later were able to establish the Saudi Arabia.
The West, even though had loyalties from the leadership, were never welcome by ordinary Arabs. The West wanted to control oil-rich land and the Arabs were not willing to let them. The decision to grant the Palestinian land to the Jews was made in consideration to its central location in the oil-rich MidEast.

Keeping the Jews there served their purpose of controlling the Arab land with political unrest. I think that its the West that controls the Jews and not the other way around. Jewish community is relatively small in number and most small communities learn to survive by cunning and treachery. In the US many Jews are still serving their anglo-saxon masters in exchange for money and power.

The plight of Palestinians is no different from the plight of Bosnians, Albanians, Kashmiris, Kurds etc. It is not impossible for the Arabs to relocate the Palestinians, but the house of Saud does not wish it to be. It will remain in power as long as it has fuel to create unrest in the muslim world. How can we blame the West?

We expect apology from the US for mistreatment of prisoners, but far worse crimes have been committed by the muslims themselves against their own brothers. The formation of alqaeda like groups is not a result of suppression but of aggression. And this aggression is putting us down everywhere in the world.

``Most of the world is still a safe place for American``

Yes it is. It is not safe for muslims anymore. Because they are looked at with suspicion. While a devout Christian can boost about his/her commitment to Church and love for Jesus, many educated professional muslims here now are reluctant to display affection for their religious values. Looks like we are the ones who are cornered. And unless we straighten our acts, we may continue to be cornered.

HP #27: You have misunderstood my comments:

``There are some common cultural Similarities I will grant that.``

These are the similarities I was talking about. And they are not, ``some.`` They are huge. It is nearly impossible to tell a Canadian apart from an American. Even many Americans and Canadians cannot do it. The only real way to tell is by listening for the term, ``aye`` or the dropping of the sound, ``ou.`` They are far more similar than say Pakistani and Indian Punjabis. Can you name any other two countries in the world that are so similar in culture, looks, religion, values, living standards, etc.?

``They influence elections with their financial clout.``

This is what I meant. American politics doesn`t just work on one man-one vote. It works through pressure groups, lobbyists, think-tanks, media, campaign contributions. If anyone can dominate that, they can punch much higher than their weight, because they can influence public policy. This is what the Jewish community has been able to do. Their ratio in all of the above organizations is far beyond 2-3%.

``The US has a major conflict with Arabs. Arabs attacked the US on 911``

The US conflict with Arabs is purely an off-shoot of Israel`s conflict with Palestinians. 9/11 is the latest event in that. There is a reason that Arabs hate Americans, but do not hate Canadians or French or German. The Americans, themselves, historically have had no issues with Arabs. Arabs want their dollars, and Americans need the oil. Do you think Americans would have been in conflict with Arabs, had it not been for Israel? Or do you think it just randomly started off on 9/11?

``The only way anybody can remove the US president is thru impeachment or thru elections.``

Obviously. And that is what I meant. His party will not win the next elections. That is the technique followed by NRA and AIPAC type organizations. Anyone (Congressman, President etc.) who is against their policies is targeted for the next elections. It is not in the USA`s interest to support Sharon as much as Bush does. Yet he does it, much to the deteriment of his own countrymen? Why? Becuase he needs the support of strong pro-Israeli groups.

``Alqaeda is not a champion of Palestinian rights. ``

Yes this is true. However, the support it has generated amongst Arabs is centered around Palestinian cause. That cause, and its subsequent conflicts, including 9/11 and Iraq war, has turned the Arabs against the USA. This is the anger than Al-Qaeda taps into. Do you really think there are too many people in Pakistan who are concerned about the Saudi monarchy being toppled. I doubt it. But they still support OBL, because they feel he is the only one who is willing to strike the USA. If today Palestinian situation was solved, Arabs and American would grow closer, and OBL would have a tough time tapping into any kind of anger - specifically outside Saudi Arabia...

``Most of the world is still a safe place for American``

I am not sure about this. Most of the world is safe for most people. However, safe is a relative term. And Americans are far more unsafe in the world today, then perhaps they have been before. America itself, isn`t safe for Americans, if one goes by the budget of the Homeland Security Dept. Even the FBI has said that another major attack will occur. American embassies are the most fortified of any embassies in the world. The US President is fighiting a whole election on, ``fight against terrorism.`` Wouldn`t that indicate something?

#26 by Romair

Minor factual errors in your post!

“Canada and USA are such similar countries.”

The US is the largest military power in the world, Canada is not!
Canada is I think 1/10 of the US in population.
Canada is 1/10 of the US in economy.
There are some common cultural Similarities I will grant that.

“Jewish vote here is nowhere near as powerful as in the USA.”

Jewish vote in the US is NOT ``powerful`` from the election point of view. Jewish are barely 2-3% of the US population. They don’t decide elections with their vote. About 70% vote dem regularly and obviously not every president is a Dem.
They influence elections with their financial clout.

“America has no conflict with Arabs. They should be mutual allies. Yet it is in war with them,”
The US has a major conflict with Arabs. Arabs attacked the US on 911. Still, the US is not in war with all Arabs. All major Arab countries are in the US camp.
One reason the US is in Iraq, is to protect Saudia.

“Canada and USA are such similar countries…USA, with similar domestic values”
What are “domestic values”- Did you mean cultural values? See my reply above.

“In the USA, no President can oppose an Israeli policy, even if he wants to. Even at the cost of losing American lives. He will be out of office in a heartbeat.”

The only way anybody can remove the US president is thru impeachment or thru elections. Nobody can remove the president in a heartbeat.

“The moment the Israel conflict is solved, all the air will come out from Al-Qaeda, and the world, specifically for Americans, will become a safer place.”

Alqaeda is not a champion of Palestinian rights. Its primary political agenda is against the House of Saud. It may claim many things but it has no influence over the “Israeli conflict”.

Btw, Most of the world is still a safe place for American. Middle East or Iraq or even Pakistan is not the “world”. This world has five continents and Middle East is just a small part of one continent.

dost-mittar #25: ``The oil lobby would press to stay in Iraq whatever the cost, while the Israeli lobby`s purpose has already been served and they would be quite happy to see America turn its back on an Iraq in a mess.``

I probably have the opposite view.

I am not sure, but I think the oil lobby is probably ready to give up on Iraq. It tried hard to get control over it, and it did not succeed. I think it would want the USA to cut its losses now, and move out. Specifically since, because of Iraq, its President may lose the White House. And because, there is no way the Iraqis will agree to see a single American on their soil now. The 10-15k deaths for the Iraqis, proportionately, is equivalent to 150k deaths in the USA. Imagine the impact on Iraqis. I am sure they are far angrier at the Americans, then the Americans were over WTC, considering the proportional loss of lives.

Israel is a different story. One really has to read about the Israeli lobby, in detail, to understand how phenomenally powerful it is in the USA. It is truly amazing. AIPAC (?) is the second most powerful group in the USA, after NRA, according to some magazine I read.

Canada and USA are such similar countries. Yet Canada is so well respected in the Muslim world, and has been able to stay out of all conflicts. USA, with similar domestic values, is hated all over, and is in knee deep in every conflict. Even though it does not have colonial tendencies. I am convinced it is because Canada does not have a strong Israeli lobby, that it has been able to remain out of conflicts. The National Post and the Jewish voters have tried hard to get Canada into the Iraq war, but they have not succeeded. Because, Muslims here, somewhat like France, are too well-established and here Jewish vote here is nowhere near as powerful as in the USA.

In every TV show I see on Canadian TV, the Jewish guy is always supporting the war, allegedly for the liberation of Iraqis, blaming Canada for not supporting the USA.

In the USA, no President can oppose an Israeli policy, even if he wants to. Even at the cost of losing American lives. He will be out of office in a heartbeat. Just like no American President can oppose the NRA. Even Kerry shows videos of him hunting in ads......

America has no conflict with Arabs. They should be mutual allies. Yet it is in war with them, because it has to veto every UN Resolution on Israel and its occupation. All Arab countries have agreed to accept Israel with 67 borders. Yet Israel continues fighting on. The moment the Israel conflict is solved, all the air will come out from Al-Qaeda, and the world, specifically for Americans, will become a safer place.

The whole Bush team - from Wolfowitz to Pearl - that started this war, was nearly all Jewish - some with very strong direct ties to Israel. Even the Canadian guy, who came up with the catch phrase, ``Axis of Evil,`` David Frum, is Jewish (I think). However, they seem to have shown thei traditional achilles heal of Israel and the Jewish community again, i.e. don`t know when to stop and they overplayed their card.

They had a neocon govt. in their control, and could have gotten anything they wanted, from Bush, and the USA, after 9/11/. But they stretched him out too much, and may have created more problems for Israel (definitely more for the USA). Depends on what happens in Iraq. If Iraq splits, then maybe it is weakened, at least for a while. But if it doesn`t split, then it will definitely have a religious Shia popularly elected govt. Much like Iran`s, with strong ties to Iran. It will have proven itself through a battle in which it, ``defeated`` the USA occupation. Hence will be quite popular. I am not sure whether an internationally disliked Saddam was more trouble for Israel, or an internationally popular Sistani and domestically popular Sadr.

My guess is that Israelis would definitely want the USA to stay in Iraq, and control it from the inside. And they will not allow Kerry to move out of their quickly either. Even he doesn`t seem to have that on his agenda. Even though that would be a good sell to the US public......

Romair:
``However, Americans are driven by other motives, i.e. oil and Israel lobby.``

If my reading of the situation is correct, then there is going to be a split in these two lobbies. The oil lobby would press to stay in Iraq whatever the cost, while the Israeli lobby`s purpose has already been served and they would be quite happy to see America turn its back on an Iraq in a mess.

malik99:
``Can you really trust Bush Administration with Iraq? Hasn`t this administration broken enough international laws and told enough lies? Do you really think they have Iraq`s best interest in their mind? Is a rapist the best person to heal his victim?
Lastly, would this stop the war mongers in US from going into more misadventures?``

There are no easy answers to any of these questions. But right now, they are stuck in Iraq and are looking for a way out. My point is that it is there cross now and they have to carry it. They broke it, they must fix it.
The UN solution would be ideal but does it have the willingness and capacity? While other countries would be willing to send their troops for peacekeeping under the UN, they may not want to send them for the purpose of pacification of the populace.

Chowk readers may be interested to read ex-President Jimmy Carter`s observations on human rights, reproduced in the following:

Carter says US policies hit international human rights

Fri May 14, 1:09 PM ET Add Entertainment - AFP to My Yahoo!

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Former US president Jimmy Carter called for a change to tough US security policies introduced after the September 11 attacks which he said had been used by other countries to justify clamping down on human rights.

Highlighting the effect of the Iraqi prison abuse scandal on world opinion, Carter said international human rights groups are ``expressing deep concern`` about the adverse impact`` of new US policies.``

``To ensure that additional human rights embarrassments will not befall the United States, we must examine well-known, high-level and broad-based US policies that have lowered our nation`s commitment to basic human rights,`` Carter said in a commentary for The Washington Post.


``The United States must regain its status as the champion of freedom and human rights.``


According to Carter, ``many traumatized and fearful`` Americans accepted the hard line of the US administration after the 2001 attacks in the belief that ``international agreements and human rights standards`` would be honoured.


But he added: ``These American decisions had an immediate global impact.``


Human rights and democracy advocates around the world had complained ``that US policies are giving license to abusive governments and even established democracies to stamp out legitimate dissent and reverse decades of progress toward freedom.``


``Lawyers, professors, doctors and journalists told of being labeled as terrorists, often for merely criticizing a government policy or carrying out their daily work.


``Equally disturbing are reports that in some countries the US government has pushed regressive counter-terrorism laws, based on the USA Patriot Act, that undermine democratic principles and the rule of law.


``Some American policies are being challenged by Congress and the federal courts, but the reversal of such troubling policies is unlikely in countries where legislative and judicial checks and balances are not well developed.``


Carter highlighted worries about:


-- The extended detention of Middle Eastern origin men in the United States who have not been allowed to see a lawyer and have never been charged.


-- Inmates ``arbitrarily detained`` at the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, without access to lawyers.


-- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld`s statement that Geneva Convention restraints would not apply to the interrogation of terrorist suspects.


-- Complaints by the International Committee of the Red Cross about abuse in US prisons in foreign countries.


-- Reports that some accused terrorists were being sent to Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia or other countries where torture was thought to be acceptable.


``In many countries, the leaders of human rights and democracy movements represent our best hope for a safer and more just world in which fewer people will succumb to extremism fueled by hatred and fear.


``These human rights defenders on the front lines of freedom are our real allies, and the United States must make long-term commitments to support -- not undermine -- them,`` said Carter.

Carter called for ``basic reforms`` in the United States and elsewhere, including ``restrictions on governments` excessive surveillance powers; reassertion of the public`s right to information; judicial and legislative review of detentions and other executive functions; and strict compliance with international standards of law and justice.``

Mohammad Gill

dost-mittar # 20 - You wrote ``I am now in the opposite camp, namely those who are against precipitous withdrawal of the Americans from Iraq``

Thats a tough one. Can you really trust Bush Administration with Iraq? Hasn`t this administration broken enough international laws and told enough lies? Do you really think they have Iraq`s best interest in their mind? Is a rapist the best person to heal his victim?
Lastly, would this stop the war mongers in US from going into more misadventures?

Your suggestion makes more sense if it has two caveats:

1 - An international force, excluding the countries which took part in the invasion of Iraq, should take over Iraq for the near term future.

2- The role of UN should be strengthened so that no power dreams of making its ``pre-emptive``wars in future.

3- Its a bit far fetched, but the countries that took part in the illegal invasion of Iraq should pay reparations to Iraq. ALL of Iraq`s foreign debts should be forgiven.

Zain Malik