Like most of humanity, I have been stunned by the sheer savagery and cruelty of the Islamic State. Yet, thousands have flocked to the ISIS forces from the West. For me, it has been a particularly shocking phenomenon. The images that repel us, attract them. Religion is clearly a release for these people. A release from the obligations of decency and humanity. Images show Islamic State fighters laughing and enjoying the torture and murder of captives. Muslim clerics with ISIS assure them that they can treat non-Muslims as lower than animals and commit rape as an Islamically pure act. It has been an incredibly depressing time for those of us who believe that humans can aspire to true greatest of spirit and caring. This Christmas, however, my daughter showed me the YouTube clip below of a man named Matt Harding who goes around the world getting people to dance with him. After watching him, my faith in humanity was restored.
What is so striking about the Islamic State and other extreme Muslim groups is that they most hate joyous expressions from dancing to singing. They throw acid on little girls trying to become educated and destroy the houses of worship of other groups.
Nothing could be a greater antithesis to the hate of these extremists than Matt Harding and people like him:
What is even more reassuring is that he is not alone. Around the world, people are spontaneously singing and dancing. These are a few clips shared by our readers this year. Watching them restores some of the faith in the future that these extremists really cannot extinguish the joy in the world.
While that previous post is retrieved, Nick here is another source:
https://craignielsen.wordpress.com/tag/more-than-30-laws-in-israel-discriminate-against-non-jews/
There are more than 30 laws that discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel. directly or indirectly, based solely on their ethnicity, rendering them second or third class citizens in their own homeland.
93% of the land in Israel is owned either by the state or by quasi-governmental agencies, such as the Jewish National Fund, that discriminate against non-Jews. Palestinian citizens of Israel face significant legal obstacles in gaining access to this land for agriculture, residence, or commercial development.
More than seventy Palestinian villages and communities in Israel, some of which pre-date the establishment of the state, are unrecognized by the government, receive no services, and are not even listed on official maps. Many other towns with a majority Palestinian population lack basic services and receive significantly less government funding than do majority-Jewish towns.
Since Israel’s founding in 1948, more than 600 Jewish municipalities have been established, while not a single new Arab town or community has been recognized by the state.
Israeli government resources are disproportionately directed to Jews and not to Arabs, one factor in causing the Palestinians of Israel to suffer the lowest living standards in Israeli society by all socio-economic indicators.
Government funding for Arab schools is far below that of Jewish schools. According to data published in 2004, the government provides three times as much funding to Jewish students than it does to Arab students.
According to the 2009 US State Department International Religious Freedom Report, “Many of the national and municipal policies in Jerusalem were designed to limit or diminish the non-Jewish population of Jerusalem.”
In October 2010, the Knesset approved a bill allowing smaller Israeli towns to reject residents who do not suit “the community’s fundamental outlook”, based on sex, religion, and socioeconomic status. Critics slammed the move as an attempt to allow Jewish towns to keep Arabs and other non-Jews out.
The so-called “Nakba Bill” bans state funding for groups that commemorate the tragedy that befell Palestinians during Israel’s creation in 1948, when approx. 725,000 Palestinian Arabs were ethnically cleansed to make way for a Jewish majority state.
Please, lost a post.
Interesting theory, Doody. I was taught to NEVER turn your back on a Greek, if you catch my drift.
Anarchist 2.0:
Actually, the humanitarian mandate per UNSCR 688 (1991) was emphasized throughout HW Bush, Clinton, and Bush’s enforcement. Recall that the no-fly zones – the most visible, dangerous, invasive, and provocative component of US-led enforcement through the post-Operation Desert Fox ‘containment’ – were actually a measure pursuant to UNSCR 688, not UNSCR 687.
In fact, in addition to being raised in UNSCR 1441, UNSCR 688 was highlighted in the 2002 AUMF (Public Law 107-243):
PL 107-243 also cited to Section 7 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338):
From Bush’s September 12, 2002 speech at the UN General Assembly:
Anarchist 2.0:
Actually, from the outset, the US role in the Gulf War ceasefire (and the Gulf War) was fundamentally about enforcing Iraq’s compliance with the UNSC resolutions and “to restore international peace and security in the area”.
Public Law 102-1 (1991) states:
UNSCR 678 (1990) states:
Public Law 105-235 (1998) states:
Public Law 107-243 (1998) states:
Anarchist 2.0:
Iraq’s possession of proscribed weapons was established as fact at the outset of the Gulf War ceasefire in 1991. From there, continued possession was presumed until Iraq proved it was compliant and disarmed by fulfilling all the steps mandated by UNSCR 687, eg, “declare” and “yield” all proscribed items to the UN inspectors for “destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision”.
As stated in the UNMOVIC Cluster Document, “The onus is clearly on Iraq to provide the requisite information”. The supervisory mandate of UNSCR 687 was critical because any unsupervised method, including the self-reported ridding touted by OIF opponents, could be exploited by Saddam to retain and hide weapons.
Indeed, as we established already, the Iraq Survey Group found numerous violations of UNSCR 687. Again, see the sample from the ISG Duelfer Report that I block-quoted in my comment to you at December 28, 2014 at 12:26 am.
Better yet, read UNSCR 687 and then, in the context of UNSCR 687, read the ISG findings for yourself.
Anarchist 2.0:
Actually, on October 7, 2002, President Bush said:
That was a “problem” because the burden of proof was on Iraq to prove it was compliant with the nuclear weapons mandate in UNSCR 687. Bush’s position was consistent with Saddam’s obligation to replace the international community’s ignorance about Iraq’s proscribed weapons with sufficient knowledge that Iraq was disarmed to the mandated standard.
Bush nowhere declared Iraq was “in the final stages of building a nuclear weapon”. Rather, while raising the nuclear weapons issue in various speeches, Bush described Iraq’s obligations, history on the issue, the danger if Saddam was pursuing nuclear weapons, and cited the pre-war intel indicating that Iraq might be pursuing nuclear weapons. While doing so, Bush was consistent that the resolution of the nuclear weapons issue, and all the outstanding issues with Saddam, would be Iraq’s compliance with its obligations under the UNSC resolutions.
The only reason christinas arent killing everyone is that they have been tempered by Greek thought. The Muslims turned their back on the Greeks a thousand years ago.
But, I am done discussing what middle school kids know. I’ve seen your tedium and anti-Semitism previously. It is a blind spot for you. Hate does that.
Israel is a parliamentary democracy, unless you’re an anti-Semite. The UN, World Court, and all civilized countries and people recognize that. You are flat ass wrong. Your hate is blinding you.
How did they become a country? By killing non Jews and kicking them out of the land.
Israel is a theocracy, look it up.
Israel is not a democracy, non-Jews do not have the same rights as Jews. Any marriage between non-jews is not recognized by the state. Non-jews cannot live in certain places and cannot hold certain jobs, ll of which constitute the antithesis of democracy.
Either answer my points or bow out gracefully, Nick 🙂
Olly, I see “normal” as being the “accepted standard” of behavior, certainly not the ideal state, and it changes over time. Yes, what I believe is “insanity” is considered normal by most people. Every living creature has natural rights to life and the pursuit of conditions it considers most beneficial to it. Dominant species often tend to ignore those rights for lesser species. Humans survived because of their aggressive traits, among many others. From the perspective of a species, this was good for humans. But from an individual’s point-of-view, this could be very bad when the aggression of one group was turned on another. In war, as in any competition, there are winners and there are losers, and even the winners often pay dearly for their victories. The losers frequently end up dead or lose everything they worked hard to achieve in their defeats.
The concept that humans NEED governments to control their behavior is part of what I consider insane about people. Voluntary cooperation, as opposed to competition, and free choice, as opposed to required compliance, are more rational ways to deal with life. That produces a win-win situation. Individuals are certainly capable of making decisions and dealing with other individuals without government guidance, protection, or interference. It’s when groups are formed and use force to impose their will on others that the problem occurs, whether as small-scale gangs, or as large national governments. Individuals kill only a few at most, government armies kill thousands, even millions.
There are three ways to acquire what is needed in life: Creation — build or grow what you want; Trade — exchange what you have for what someone else has; and Conquest — steal what you want by overpowering someone who has it. Thieves, and governments, historically, believe conquest and deception are acceptable in everyday life. Most people, though they claim to reject conquest and theft, do little to nothing to resist or prevent if from happening. Corruption is rampant in virtually every government today, yet the sheeple allow it to continue. That’s crazy. Having the simple idea of Aggression being totally unacceptable in all levels of human society, would be a good basic foundation. As a motivating value, it can be instilled in childhood by parents and teachers. And it can be promoted now by individuals expressing this belief to other individuals. That’s how I see it, “realistic” or not. The only way you get to where you want to be is to not accept just staying where you are now, and to start moving toward your destination at whatever pace you can.
You threw a batting practice fastball, po.
Nick, are you asking to know or asking to entertain yourself?
Not a theocracy.
Why, I just PROVED you wrong. Israel IS a country, not trying to create one, and they are a democracy.
Nick Spinelli
I knew some anti-Semite would say that.
——————————————————-
Nick, whenever I think you have found the light, you double down on the dysfunction. Am I right or am I wrong?
You asked the question, I gave the right answer only to be docked points and called names! I now wonder how good of an history teacher you were!
By the way, attacking Anarchist on the basis of his choice of an avatar says more about you than it does him.
Is Israel a democracy?
Oh wait, no they’re not according to those who want Jews wiped off the face of the earth. Never mind.
But, let’s dissect your predictable answer. Is Israel a country?
Pogo Hears a Who
My experience in over 50 years is that describing those you disagree with as being mentally ill is very likely to be taken as prima facie evidence of bad faith.
What you see as evidence that people are committing horrors “…in the name of their religions and governments” is to others evidence that man relentlessly pursues power over others, and will use any excuse to gain it.
Neither religion not government is to blame! but man himself.
He is irredeemably flawed, a sinner.
Religion is meant to repair that, or limit it.
But man can abuse any tool in his pursuit for profit or power, faith or the state or marriage or charitable organizations or a restaurant.
I don’t blame the hammer when a man uses it to kill.
————————————————-
Pogo, why did I take the time to pen an answer to you when I could have just quoted the above?
You answered better than i could your own issues about Islam.
But if you are still unsure, free guidance:
1-Is Islam the book?
2-Is ISlam the Muslims?
3- Is Islam the traditions or culture?
What is Islam to you?
You win the prize. A rocket launcher.
I knew some anti-Semite would say that.