Muslim Scholars condemn Berg crime

[abu afak]

Originally posted by Mira
I am very torn about it, actually, because I don't think that andak is being disingenuous. At the same time, I am with MGB8 on this one.

He is not only Disingenuous he is Mr Disingenuous.
As I and others have shown SO many times here it ridiculous.

This string a Perfect example. (and others have said it on the previous page)
Surely He's noticed the Incredible and Stunning Silence of Muslim Leaders..
instead of admitting it, he will go to a search engine (like he did with 'Sudan'.. for just one of Scores of others).. and come up with some obscure apologism which Skirts the main issue.

This is not even debatable.

He will repeatedly do things like compare Terrorism to Traffic Deaths to minimize it.

I would also Tell you this occasionally extends to Downright Dishonest, but certainly unquestionably/Classically Disingenuous.

and I've seen him make the same argument even after it's been debunked/discredited.

I've seen him do this for more than a year.. and more than this board.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by andak01
CAIRO, May 12 (IslamOnline.net) - Several scholars from Al-Azhar, the world's highest Sunni religious authority, condemned the decapitation of an American civilian by unknown people in Iraq, saying Islam stands against such acts.

"Islam respects the human being, dead or alive, and cutting off the American's head was an act of mutilation forbidden by Islam," Ibrahim Al-Fayoumi, a member of Al-Azhar's Islamic Research Academy, told IslamOnline.net.

He cited a number of verses from the holy Qur'an which affirm giving due respect to dead people regardless of their race or religion.

However, Fayoumi suspected the whole episode was "an American propaganda to divert attention from the scandal of the U.S. military abuse of Iraqi detainees".

A video put on a website linked to Al-Qaeda shows the beheading of Nicholas Berg with his executioners saying it came in revenge for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. troops.

Under the title "The moment of revenge ," The Independent likened the horrific incident to the Iraqi prisoner scandal as "cruel image for cruel image".

'Harming Islam'

Mahmoud Emara, another member of the Academy, slammed the decapitation, saying it would harm the image of Islam.

"The mutilation even of enemies is rejected by Islam. A mistake could not justify another," he underlined.

The scholar cited the respect Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had paid to bodies in the battle of Badr when he ordered the burial of the dead irrespective of their religion.

The Prophet urged his Companions on the day of Badr to be kind to their captives and treat them with clemency .

'Venting Anger'

Abdel-Rahman Al-Adawy, another member of the Islamic Research Academy, agreed.

"There is no basis in Islam to justify this, as Islam calls for justice and treating the prisoners with clemency," he said, noting that the occupation forces share a fair share of blame.

"The decapitator vented his anger at the occupation forces," mired in gruesome acts of torturing and abusing Iraqi detainees.

Al-Adawy said the broadcasting of the execution "mirrors deep anger now filling the hearts of all Muslims and world peoples over the U.S. military abuses of Iraqi civilians."

The scholar recalled that the Iraqis "were not even prisoners of war but simple civilians detained for no clear purpose."

Mohamed Raafat Othman, an Academy member, said Islam deems mutilating the body of an enemy a "punishable" crime" because after all he is a human being.

A video, titled "Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi slaughtering an American", showed five hooded men standing behind Berg while one of them read a statement denouncing the abuses of Iraqi detainees at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison.

The bearded Berg was seated on the ground dressed in an orange jumpsuit while the statement was read. After the statement was finished, Berg's captors decapitated him with a large knife.

The State Department said the body of Berg, a Philadelphia resident, was found at the weekend dumped in Baghdad.

Several Iraqi leaders and scholars have strongly condemned the beheading, saying its is against the essence of Islam.


http://www.islam-online.net/English/...rticle08.shtml

They didn’t condemn the actual killing just the beheading after Berg was dead.

[andak01]

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRe...d=167-05112004

http://ciogc.org/none.html?articleId=1391

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp...3&nav=51s7N7pt

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wi...-regional-wire

http://www.news14charlotte.com/conte...=63063&SecID=2

http://www.onnnews.com/Global/story....2&nav=LQlCN4yv

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRe...d=137-05132004

http://www.islam-online.net/English/...rticle03.shtml

and a petition.

http://www.cair-net.org/images/petition2.gif
http://www.cair-net.org/default.asp?...tion1#petition

[andak01]

Tempe (AP) -- For 13-year-old Huthaifa Shquirat, it seems like ages since the last time he played outside and felt safe.

"My mom, she lets us invite kids over but we all have to stay inside or in the backyard," Huthaifa said. "If the ball goes out of the yard, we can't go get it. My dad has to get it."

Shquirat's family, like other Muslims in Arizona, is taking precautions. They and others worry about a possible backlash from people who may blame Muslims for the war in Iraq.

"All the emotion that stems from Sept. 11 makes us feel very threatened, especially now that we're at war," said Deedra Abboud, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations of Arizona.

Arizona Muslims have already seen the consequences of the anger that can be directed against immigrants and minorities in times like these.

In the days after the Sept. 11 attacks, a Sikh gas station owner was killed in suburban Mesa by a gunman who according to police later said that "all Arabs had to be shot" and that he wanted to "slit some Iranians' throats."

Balbir Singh Sodhi was neither Muslim nor from the Middle East, but authorities say he was singled out by the gunman because Sodhi wore a turban as part of his faith.

Authorities have never directly said the shooting was in retaliation for the terrorist attacks, but they have characterized it as a hate crime. Some people have also said that Sodhi was as much a victim of the terrorist attacks as those who died in New York and Washington.

"We all remember what happened to Sodhi," said Abboud. "We definitely have fear in our community, but not just because of that killing."

Because of the concerns, Abboud's group is launching a program called Operation Safe Haven. They are working in conjunction with churches and synagogues to make certain that Muslims have a place to stay if they feel threatened.

Abboud and other Muslim leaders in Arizona recommend that Muslims not walk alone, that they always tell someone where they are going and carry a cell phone.

"As a woman, I've always had to be conscious of my safety, but as a Muslim woman, I have to be especially conscious," said Abboud.

Police are also keeping watch at mosques and other Muslim buildings. Phoenix police Detective Sebon White said the Department of Homeland Security requested extra protection for Muslims and Jews across the nation.

"At this point we don't feel there's a personal threat to the community," White said, "but security has been enforced just in case."

Others are taking personal measures. Omar Shahin, the leader of a mosque in Tucson, said he outfitted his mosque with cameras and a security system.

"We don't keep the front door open anymore, and police patrol the area," Shahin said.

Nor are Muslims the only ones feeling concern.

There is a lot of cause to worry, said Sodhi's brother, Lakhwinder Singh Sodhi, who like most Sikhs wears a turban and a beard.

"People look at me suspiciously," he said. "Sometimes they yell nasty things and tell me to go back to my country."

Sodhi said a war against an Arab nation makes him more concerned about his safety, but also gives him more reason to educate the public about his culture and all religions.

"My wife says to me, 'Don't go to work, don't go anywhere,' but how can you teach people not to be scared about you if you stay away from them and have no interaction?" Sodhi said.


http://www.kpho.com/global/story.asp...ientType=Print

[Mira~]

I haven't read all of the links in your first new post, but as to this last one I can only say that all of our families came to the United States to escape persecution and find opportunities for a better life. We are a nation of immigrants and to harm any of our communities threatens who we are as a people.

I will read the links you provided tomorrow. Thanks.

[andak01]

My point is simply, anyone who says there has been no public Muslim reaction against the Berg decapitation and against terrorism is wrong. You may say we do it out of self interest, or for the wrong motivations, but to say it never happened is a lie. There is a mountain of evidence that Muslims including myself are fed up with terrorism and with having our religion dragged through the mud. But if we are reviled equally if we march against terrorism or if we stay at home, I don't see much in store for the future.

How long do you expect to have any assistance if you call every informant a money grubber and a liar and ignore every Muslim that dies fighting terrorism? All I'm asking is a tiny recognition that some of us don't believe we are in a state of jihad, some of us don't hate everyone who isn't Muslim and some of us are actually a lot like you. We are self interested, and we want to see our children and yours grow up in peace with prosperity and tolerance. That means tolerance for you and tolerance for us.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by andak01


http://www.islam-online.net/English/...rticle03.shtml

Here is another example of how Islam Online "opposes" terrorism:

Palestinian Fighters Kill Five Israeli Settlers

An Israeli armored vehicle in the scene of the attack

Additional Reporting By Mostafa el-Sawwaf, IOL Correspondent

GAZA CITY, May 2 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) - Five Israeli settlers were killed Sunday, May 2, and three soldiers injured in a Palestinian resistance attack on an Israeli settlement in occupied southern Gaza.

Two Palestinian fighters disguised as shepherds ambushed two cars of Israeli settlers near the Kissufim road, which leads to the major Gush Katif settlement bloc, witnesses told IslamOnline.net.

The Palestinian resistance groups Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees claimed the attack.

Earlier, media outlets said the operation was claimed Hamas’ armed wing Ezzudin Al-Qassam Brigades, which later denied responsibility, but praised the "heroic operation".

An Israeli occupation spokesman said the dead were a woman and four children, adding that the operation seriously injured a fifth settler.

Witnesses said that Israeli occupation troops gunned down the two fighters, adding that one of them detonated an explosive device against occupation troops, injuring three soldiers.

The Palestinian resistance groups see as a legitimate right attacking Israeli soldiers and settlers on their occupied lands in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

...

Of course, the five settlers were all female, and four of the five were young children--all shot at point blank range by Muslim savages.

Yet andak01 comes here day after day to tell us how wonderful Islam is.

I'll ask again the question you evaded the other day, andak: do you accept Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state?

[MGB8]

Andak,

People are angry. Half of these denunciations seem to be "we're worried about backlash from our neighbors, so we are denouncing it."

But, at the same time you have denunciations, groups like CAIR spread hate against Israel and often the US, more often than not being misleading while they do that. CAIR officials are on record saying they want the US to be a muslim country as well as providing justification after justification for terror and attempted genocide.

Meanwhile, there is no international outcry, like there was when an Israeli shell broke through a building (which it was sent at to be a warning shot) and hit something near protesters, which included, according to the NY times, some armed men, and killed 8 (now revised down from yesteradys - "at least 10") Pal Sunni Arabs. And, for all we know, it may well have been a mine, lay their by terrorists, that killed their own protestors - it happened on another occasion yesterday.

Its like the Saudi cleric said - "killing of a MUSLIM is the most grievous crime" (in reponse to a terror attack which killed Muslims and non-Muslims"...meaning clearly that terror killing infadels is at least not as bad.

So....what we need to here from the Muslim community, is that, despite the harm to Pal Sunni Arabs, the attempted destruction of Israel was wrong and a mistake, including the cowardly attempt on Yom Kippur in 1973 - that it was a moral mistake. We need to here that the world does not need to become Muslim unitl the end of days/time of the prophet. We need to here that the goal is not the eventual "conquest" of the world by Islam. Anything else is just a "hudna" a truce in Islam's war against Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and everything else.

Originally posted by andak01
My point is simply, anyone who says there has been no public Muslim reaction against the Berg decapitation and against terrorism is wrong. You may say we do it out of self interest, or for the wrong motivations, but to say it never happened is a lie. There is a mountain of evidence that Muslims including myself are fed up with terrorism and with having our religion dragged through the mud. But if we are reviled equally if we march against terrorism or if we stay at home, I don't see much in store for the future.

How long do you expect to have any assistance if you call every informant a money grubber and a liar and ignore every Muslim that dies fighting terrorism? All I'm asking is a tiny recognition that some of us don't believe we are in a state of jihad, some of us don't hate everyone who isn't Muslim and some of us are actually a lot like you. We are self interested, and we want to see our children and yours grow up in peace with prosperity and tolerance. That means tolerance for you and tolerance for us.

[andak01]

Originally posted by MGB8
[B]Andak,

People are angry. Half of these denunciations seem to be "we're worried about backlash from our neighbors, so we are denouncing it."

How about simply: "We don't like our people being killed and don't like becoming the target of foriegn armies." As a matter of state security and for reasons of popularity among the people, the governments at a minimum of those countries that have been targeted have a selfish reason to fight terrorism.

If by some freakish chance they ever got any advantage by backing terrorism, they don't now. The terrorists are fighting them (Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen). The attacks are coming against their people. Their governments are being shaken and their people made afraid. If you want to call that justice, fine. But at least admit that it is happening.

But, at the same time you have denunciations, groups like CAIR spread hate against Israel and often the US, more often than not being misleading while they do that. CAIR officials are on record saying they want the US to be a muslim country as well as providing justification after justification for terror and attempted genocide.

My auntie wants the whole country to convert to Baptism. She is entitled to her opinion. And if she tried to do that with force or arms or military incitement, she would belong in prison. Same goes for any member of CAIR or anyone else in this great land. We follow the laws, or we abide by the punishments of the place where we live. Exactly one of the members of CAIR has been fittingly put in prison for associating with terrorists. Another was deported on unrelated charges. If ANY member of CAIR breaks the law, they are subject to the law.

And, for all we know, it may well have been a mine, lay their by terrorists, that killed their own protestors - it happened on another occasion yesterday.

Of course, just like every single thing they say about you is a lie. No Jew has ever told a lie and every single Muslim is a liar. That is what you would have us all believe.

So....what we need to here from the Muslim community, is that, despite the harm to Pal Sunni Arabs, the attempted destruction of Israel was wrong and a mistake, including the cowardly attempt on Yom Kippur in 1973 - that it was a moral mistake.

I think what you really need is for us all to become cheerleaders for the IDF. Acknowledging Israel's right to exist doesn't even come close.

We need to here that the goal is not the eventual "conquest" of the world by Islam. Anything else is just a "hudna" a truce in Islam's war against Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and everything else.

I read you loud and clear.

a) No militant Muslims deserve to live.
b) No Muslims claiming not to be militant are telling the true.

a + b = nuke the world.

There are a lot of Muslims in Detroit. Why not start with a big bomb right there?

[Binyamin]

"Islam respects the human being, dead or alive, and cutting off the American's head was an act of mutilation forbidden by Islam," Ibrahim Al-Fayoumi, a member of Al-Azhar's Islamic Research Academy, told IslamOnline.net.

They don't object to killing him, but the mutilation was unexcusable.
The same about suicide being unacceptable, without a word about the people killed by the guy committing suicide.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by andak01
My point is simply, anyone who says there has been no public Muslim reaction against the Berg decapitation and against terrorism is wrong. You may say we do it out of self interest, or for the wrong motivations, but to say it never happened is a lie. There is a mountain of evidence that Muslims including myself are fed up with terrorism and with having our religion dragged through the mud. But if we are reviled equally if we march against terrorism or if we stay at home, I don't see much in store for the future.

This is the kind of lie you tell here daily. Please show us where anyone here said there was "no public Muslim reaction against the Berg decapitation and against terrorism."

No one ever said that. What they have said is that the denunciations are few and mainly insincere.

Of course, you know that, but there is no defense against that, so you make up the lie that no one acknowledges any Muslim denunications of terrorism in order to attack that lie--a lie of your own making.

Yep, even Hezbollah condemned the Berg beheading. It's OK to gun down a pregnant Jewish mother and her four young daughters at point blank range, but beheading is wrong because it spooks the Islamo-fascists' European allies.

[Mediocrates]

I think you have to look at things the way they are, not the way we pretend they are.

Outrage? Let's be serious, the national, official, media connected Islamic focal points to the west I don't suppose deeply care one way or the other. I'm not even sure that most americans care all that much. But we and they have to make whatever obligatory noises they are supposed to make. Do I think that the newsheads on Fox are personally outraged? Do I think that some Islamic spokesman is ready to jump down from the parapets in the name of women's rights, freedom and Tuesday night bowling? No I don't. So it's all rather disingenuous isn't it.

I think I pretty much know how they feel about it regardless of what they say or don't say. I mean we claim they muzzle their own and then we claim they're lying anyway and then we claim there's no such thing as moderate anything. OK. I take that to mean we really don't care to listen to what they have to say. And I'm pretty sure they don't care how we feel about it either.

And what difference does it make if they champion the murder of pregnant women or not? Isn't that more or less what we expect? Isn't that the same rhetoric we've heard for 40 years? We really need to start dealing with reality here. Take the Iraqi prison scandal. Sure some knuckleheads did some bad things. And we complain that no one complained when the Baathists tortured, murdered, raped, gassed, exterminated thousands upon thousands.

So what if they did? That's then, this is now and they really really don't want us there and they will pluck any and all reasons to show us in a bad light. That makes perfect sense. It also makes perfect sense that they and all their official brethren had nothing to say when they were doing it to each other. Why? Because it's not about the act - no one cares about the act. It's about who is doing it. That is the reality of the world. Everyday we watch Arab leaders of all sizes and shapes openly do things that appear to be hypocritical, evil, cynical, false. Of course it doesn't matter because they are already doing those things and committing other atrocities. They accept that that is an acceptable scope of behavior, that is an acceptable way to run their affairs. They do these things, of course they don't complain about it. It's not about brutality, it's about who is given the authority to be brutal.

The arab world takes it upon themselves to act in whatever manner they feel they should act. Brutality is theirs to use and brutality is there to be used. That's not the point. The point is that we have not been given the authority by them to do those things as well. They don't like us or want us there. We don't have from them the legitimacy to be there and so we don't have the authority to use the same methods and behaviors they themselves establish as the basis for that legitimacy. So many people in Iraq and elsewhere pine for the days of Saddam precisely because he was brutal. That is what gave him his legitimacy and power and in kind, his legitimacy and power is what authorized him to exercize that brutality. To them all we are is interlopers who don't have authority to act with authority and without that authority they believe they are free to resist in any and all ways. This is why liberalization and democracy in Iraq is pointless argument. It's not from where legitimacy and power arise.

[Mira~]

andak,

I posted on an Egyptian forum last week about Nick Berg’s murder. Several of the posters claimed that they had not even seen the news covered in their media. Others claimed that it was done by Americans. I will make a deal with you. If you go on this board and post the articles you posted here and make an effort to convince others to condemn the murder as well, then I will back your efforts here. If you agree, then I’ll post the link to the other forum in a PM to you.

[MGB8]

Andak,

I gave you the respect of taking you at face value, despite the fact that many of the people who are wiser than I on this board do not do so. I believe that I consistently have taken you at face value.

I would ask that you do the same for me. I believe that if you have read my posts over the time you have been on this board, you would know that I am nothing but extremely direct. If I feel that someone is a liar, I call them that. If I feel that they are making excuses for attempted genocide, I call that out, also.

In general, I haven't felt that way about you, until possibly this last post. I never wrote that Arab countries aren't the target of terrorism. I did point out Arab nations still are slow to denounce it, and often encourage terrorism with one hand while denouncing it with the other - witness the blaming of "zionists" for recent al-queda terror attacks in Saudi Arabia by several members of the royal family.

I never said that all Jews tell the truth and all muslims are liars. I do know that it the PA, in particular, essentially has a policy of lying, from the Karin A, the "Trojan Horse", the non-removal of the destruction of Israel in their charter which was recently admitted, Jenin, etc. etc. etc.

Using this last example, originally reports said that Israeli troops openned machine gun fire ON THE CROWD. It turns out that machine guns were fired, but at the abandoned building. Originally it was reported that the Helicopter fired a missle AT THE CROWD. It turns out that a missle was fired, but at an empty area away from the crowd but visible to them - a warning shot that had no casualties. Originally, the death toll from the attack was "at least 10." It has been since revised to 8. According to the Palestinians, there were no armed men in the crowd and the crowd was peaceful. However, according to reporters, there were at least two armed men with machine guns and the crowd was throwing stones.

Now, why is it impossible that the tank shell, which is the probable source of the casualties, in fact did not cause them, but instead, near the same time in which the shell hit the building, a mine, many of which have admittedly been planted all over Rafah, caused the casualties? I'm not saying its probable, but it certainly isn't impossible. Mines planted by the Pal Sunnis have killed several Arabs over the last couple of days.

What's sad, though, is that you flatly refused to support the idea of disavowing the goal of converting the world to Islam (at least until the end of days/time of the prophet), as well as of announcing that the attempted genocide of the Jews and destruction of Israel was an ethical and moral mistake, even in the eyes of Islam, by the Arab governments at the time.

What this means is that the rest is gargabe, Andak. You have just shown that you, a moderate, is unwilling to co-exist over the long term. Essentially, you are making many people's points that Islam is synonymous with Imperialism. Babtists want to convert people, sure, but more and more Christians are willing to not be conversion orriented. In fact, for the great majority of Christian sects, it is their POLICY to respect other faiths and not actively pursue conversion. They are willing to wait until their end of days. Without this being a policy, their would be continuous religous wars and violence, like the Crusades were or the inquisition or much violence in South America, Asia and Africa. Sure, there are many missionaries - but it is generally not the policy of the Church overall, and certainly not the policy of the Christian COUNTRIES. There is no analagous Muslim policy.

Instead of facing these core questions, you simply through in some hyperbole. That's sad. It confirms the opinions of those here that you most want to discredit.

Originally posted by andak01
How about simply: "We don't like our people being killed and don't like becoming the target of foriegn armies." As a matter of state security and for reasons of popularity among the people, the governments at a minimum of those countries that have been targeted have a selfish reason to fight terrorism.

If by some freakish chance they ever got any advantage by backing terrorism, they don't now. The terrorists are fighting them (Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen). The attacks are coming against their people. Their governments are being shaken and their people made afraid. If you want to call that justice, fine. But at least admit that it is happening.



My auntie wants the whole country to convert to Baptism. She is entitled to her opinion. And if she tried to do that with force or arms or military incitement, she would belong in prison. Same goes for any member of CAIR or anyone else in this great land. We follow the laws, or we abide by the punishments of the place where we live. Exactly one of the members of CAIR has been fittingly put in prison for associating with terrorists. Another was deported on unrelated charges. If ANY member of CAIR breaks the law, they are subject to the law.



Of course, just like every single thing they say about you is a lie. No Jew has ever told a lie and every single Muslim is a liar. That is what you would have us all believe.



I think what you really need is for us all to become cheerleaders for the IDF. Acknowledging Israel's right to exist doesn't even come close.



I read you loud and clear.

a) No militant Muslims deserve to live.
b) No Muslims claiming not to be militant are telling the true.

a + b = nuke the world.

There are a lot of Muslims in Detroit. Why not start with a big bomb right there?

[MGB8]

Medio,

A growing number of Arabs are pointing out the hypocrisy in the Arab nations condemnation of the Abu Graib abuse. Its in the Arab liberal press, the little of it that there is.

That's why liberal democracy and free speech and all the things that are associated with it are precisely the point.

People tend to want to apply one set of rules to most everything - they want logical consistency. When they don't find it, they start questioning the inconsistencies. The result, IMO, is positive change.

This won't happen overnight, or over a year. But over a decade, or a generation - there is hope for them, and thus hope for us.

Originally posted by Mediocrates
I think you have to look at things the way they are, not the way we pretend they are.

Outrage? Let's be serious, the national, official, media connected Islamic focal points to the west I don't suppose deeply care one way or the other. I'm not even sure that most americans care all that much. But we and they have to make whatever obligatory noises they are supposed to make. Do I think that the newsheads on Fox are personally outraged? Do I think that some Islamic spokesman is ready to jump down from the parapets in the name of women's rights, freedom and Tuesday night bowling? No I don't. So it's all rather disingenuous isn't it.

I think I pretty much know how they feel about it regardless of what they say or don't say. I mean we claim they muzzle their own and then we claim they're lying anyway and then we claim there's no such thing as moderate anything. OK. I take that to mean we really don't care to listen to what they have to say. And I'm pretty sure they don't care how we feel about it either.

And what difference does it make if they champion the murder of pregnant women or not? Isn't that more or less what we expect? Isn't that the same rhetoric we've heard for 40 years? We really need to start dealing with reality here. Take the Iraqi prison scandal. Sure some knuckleheads did some bad things. And we complain that no one complained when the Baathists tortured, murdered, raped, gassed, exterminated thousands upon thousands.

So what if they did? That's then, this is now and they really really don't want us there and they will pluck any and all reasons to show us in a bad light. That makes perfect sense. It also makes perfect sense that they and all their official brethren had nothing to say when they were doing it to each other. Why? Because it's not about the act - no one cares about the act. It's about who is doing it. That is the reality of the world. Everyday we watch Arab leaders of all sizes and shapes openly do things that appear to be hypocritical, evil, cynical, false. Of course it doesn't matter because they are already doing those things and committing other atrocities. They accept that that is an acceptable scope of behavior, that is an acceptable way to run their affairs. They do these things, of course they don't complain about it. It's not about brutality, it's about who is given the authority to be brutal.

The arab world takes it upon themselves to act in whatever manner they feel they should act. Brutality is theirs to use and brutality is there to be used. That's not the point. The point is that we have not been given the authority by them to do those things as well. They don't like us or want us there. We don't have from them the legitimacy to be there and so we don't have the authority to use the same methods and behaviors they themselves establish as the basis for that legitimacy. So many people in Iraq and elsewhere pine for the days of Saddam precisely because he was brutal. That is what gave him his legitimacy and power and in kind, his legitimacy and power is what authorized him to exercize that brutality. To them all we are is interlopers who don't have authority to act with authority and without that authority they believe they are free to resist in any and all ways. This is why liberalization and democracy in Iraq is pointless argument. It's not from where legitimacy and power arise.