>>But it is too much. This sort of attitude can only warm the hearts of Osama et al. It can only increase recruiting of enemy agents, worldwide. The heart of your attitude lies in your false belief that Islam is what the radicals say it is. While there are different species of communists, they all agree on some basic things. But this is not true of the great religeons. Fundamentalists have almost nothing in common with devout traditionalists or with casual followers in all of them. There are "Islamic" cultures where people go to mosque less often than American Christians do, where they have no idea what the mainstream beliefs are, much less the radical ones. A person says "I am a Muslim" in the Balkans because, well, that is what his parents said. It does not mean he is your enemy. If your prejudice makes him that, it is a mistake, and a grave one<< I only believe Islam is what Muslims say it is, a religion founded upon the Quran and the Hadith. That Muslims that don't regularly attend mosque and are only casual participants in their religious gatherings rarely find themselves signing up for jihad and terrorism is a rather obvious point for my side of the argument, in the same sense that American citizens that don't regularly attend combat training rarely find themselves jumping out of perfectly good airplanes with the 101st Airborne. It's rather silly to point to Muslims who don't take their religion seriously and claim it as proof that Islam is inherently peaceful, pure, and loads of fun at karaoke parties. Personally, I find disturbing the much vaunted "tread softly" approach when dealing with the allegedly peaceful religion of Islam. The whole "offending them will create more terrorism" line of reasoning. The pretension to moral and cultural superiority from the Islamic world ("America is the Great Satan," "Muslims should never be humiliated by infidels," "America is a paper tiger," etc.) is not only insulting to me and my culture, I feel it is a sentiment vastly in need of having its guts stomped out of it, to the point that when the last of those that espouses such bellicose words lies prone begging for reprieve he is stomped even more fiercely for begging without permission. If you don't understand why I'm so harsh, you've never truly pondered the depth of insidiousness within a cultural mindset that will cry foul at terrorists who happen to kill a Muslim (Iraq) and remain steadfastly unmoved as it slaughters millions (Sudan). The "Arab street" is an aerial bombing target landmark, nothing more.

ilpars, you avoid responsibility for your comments faster than an adolescent avoids cleaning their bedroom. Here is your reply to my “Oh! Yes you did say that ilpars” post, 7/2/2004 11:48:09 PM: “Yes, that sentence to Teneighty was a little cheavaunist. I admit. Sometimes I have a bad temper. But that does dot change the fact that I did not say the sentence you originally mentioned. As none of these sentences related to it, I think you agree that I did not. Bad memory. It happens to all time to time.” - 7/3/2004 10:32:21 AM Who has a bad memory? Me, or you? You think I agree with you? Wrong! Read on. You said: “We just qualify Americans from a very different set of standarts. We expect Americans to be much better than their enemies.” – ilpars- 6/17/2004 11:24:32 AM Then you said: “We Turks” hold the US to a higher standard…” Then you said: “That is how stupid we are Teneighty. If anyone wants to mess with us; we are always ready for the war. So noone does” – ilpars- 6/24/2004 5:11:34 PM You then explained when another country captured Turkish soldiers, Turks immediately responded by capturing that countries soldiers, thus solving the problem through a mutual exchange of prisoners with little or no publicity. (imagine: what the UN would say if the US, or more recently, Great Britain, used these methods rather than ‘diplomacy’ ” Now you respond by saying: “…I did not say the sentence you originally mentioned.” WELL PARDON ME, for getting the quote wrong. YOU told the people that read these posts that “We Turks” hold the US to a standard of behavior YOU do NOT hold Turkey to. Period. It matters not that I didn’t quote your exact sentence. You should sit down and examine your prejudices before “forgiving” my bad memory.

“The heart of your attitude lies in your false belief that Islam is what the radicals say it is.” – el cid - 7/4/2004 5:48:51 PM Wrong! I can’t understand your inability to understand that the problem is not my “false belief that Islam is what the radicals say it is.” The problem is that the majority of muslims DO NOT say “ islam is NOT what the radicals say it is”. What is so difficult to understand? Stop telling me how peaceful islam is! Tell the 99% of innocent peaceful muslims to stop what ilpars describes as 1% radicals from murdering anymore innocents in the name of their god. Is this a difficult concept? End of discussion!

1.70 Billion Muslims in the world today. Only 1% of them want to kill me? Good, then I'm not as likely to run out of ammo. UNTIL THEN, CL.

Why do you think that would do any good? What makes you think the "99%" have the slightest influence over the radicals? What makes you think they can actually compell them? Granted, there are a few who can. But, news flash, some of them are. The most effective intelligence service in the world on this problem at this time is the Jordanian one - because a few Muslims with power are using it - although it is dangerous for them - they know it is more dangerous if the radicals win. But not many Muslims are able to make choices like the Jordanian King and his government ministers can. You are engaging in meaningless rhetorical games whose only effect is to emotionally justify your ill considered attitude. Your supposed suggestion is not close to a useful or effective policy. As my mother used to say, if you don't have a suggestion to make things better, keep quiet. If you have no clue how to make it better, and you don't be quiet, you probably will make it worse. But I can help you on one point. It is not that I do not understand your words when you say Islam is what the radicals say it is. It is that I reject them. They are false. That is, they are not true in the only sense that metters: the way people live. People live as if what they believe is true. This is not a question of theology or even what is true in some ultimate sense (as, say, God sees it). It is a question of what people believe. And people, at this time, in general, do not think the radicals have it right. If that ever changes, it will only be temporary, for the radicals will surely drive people to dislike their teachings, the more they are exposed to them. The truth is that the central tenant of Islam is the same as it is in Christianity and in Juadism: love your neighbor. Jesus said this is as important as loving God with all your heart. St. Paul said he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. And I assure you, mainstream Islam preaches that the essential duty of a sincere adherent is to serve his neighbor, Muslim or not. You may - for reasons unclear to me - not like hearing that. You may - for equally unclear reasons - not like hearing that the vast majority of people who have a clue about Islam respect some variation of that idea. But your feelings do not change the truth, nor what people believe, nor transform them into our enemies. But expressing things as you do can contribute to a hostile atmosphere which terrorists can exploit for their ends. I am not a pacifist. I am not unwilling to fight. One undercover professional said "you will go, unarmed, and live, where I am afraid to go, for a moment, armed to the teeth." He said it with some kind of awe in his voice. For I walked out every night, while people slept, and wrote a report, which I was afraid to send in by telephone, radio or written means. The enemy is the people who try to hurt us. Our friends are the poeple who try to help us, even if they are also Muslims. And people who do neither are properly innocents and neutrals. If you cannot distinguish between them you are a loose cannon, likely to do much harm to our cause.

I have been there. I have seen it happen. I have also been in Muslim countries. Trust me - it is quite true. And if you go to a class run by terrorists - I have been on the rescue squad a few meters away listening by radio to an agent inside - they will teach why it is true. I will tell you a secret. Terrorists are very like communists. Except for a few leaders who may be quite insane, most of them believe in nothing. They like sex with the girls who are fellow agents. They like power over people who fall under their control so they can bully, torture, rape, and kill, without fear of consequences. They are quite honest about it in many cases, in private. They think we are fools, by the way. These are people who either do not have families, or do not have normal relationships with them: I ran into those willing to tell a child - even their own child - to do something quite fatal. No person of any normal civilization - or of any of the great religeons - excepting those who are sociopaths - will naturally like the radical point of view. The radicals must step on emotional buttons and delude them into even marginal support. It is the atmopshere of prejudice and hate that aids them in this process. If you want to learn what I call "combat psychology" go to prison. I am quite serious. Go and live in a prison. Go unarmed among the population, and learn how to seek out and confront trouble, and its ringleaders, unarmed, and using the tools of your mind as your main battery. If you live, and if you get to the point you can say to me "There is going to be a riot at 2 p.m. The staff and guards have abandoned the prison. I can go stop it alone" I will be impressed and say you have graduated. Until you have a clue what I am talking about, stop pretending you understand what psychological warfare is about. Just believe someone who knows: hate is a trap, and it ensnares you more than anyone else.

I got bored from your nonsense. Believe what you want to believe. we both know that what was your initial sentence and I did not say it. You are making hypocracy. And I do not have time to make a "who will spit farther" kind of contest. That is my last post about this nonsense subject. You may continue without me. A cat will not be a dog by your saying anyway.

Sid, I'm going to be very frank with you, so pardon me if I am blunt: You are beginning to sound like a badly broken record on this issue -- you constantly imply that you alone have the 'experience' to decide what is right on this issue, and keep reminding everyone of this over and over and over by your claims of having been in 'x' situation, or 'y' situation, etc etc. You basically tell others to 'be quiet' (your exact words) then in a rather condescending manner inform them that they have do the right to free speech, as if that is the only reason they are allowed to speak to your points. You have repeatedly belittled others who you claim lack your level of 'experience'. Sid, you have the right to state your opinion on matters on these forums. You have the right to question others opinions. But doing so in a manner that, to this poster at least, is condescending and arrogant, is doing no one good service, including yourself and your cause. NewGuy

Let me fix that. I wish to claim explicitly that every experienced person I know and respect as a policy maker or analyst agrees with me on this subject. I wish to claim that hate speech and prejudice as such are dangerously incorrect points of view in policy discussion. I do not wish to claim to be alone in my views at all!

If you are going to condemn the innocent, and simultaneously align yourself with the policy our enemys gleefuly wish you to have, you may expect just a tiny bit of criticism from me. I do have a higher opinion of most of you than is warranted by these bad attitudes you are displaying. And I do hope that saying you can do better is a way to make you reconsider them. Possibly in this sense I am foolish and wasting valuable time. But I think this may be a strategic matter: if we cannot form a consensus of alliance against the actual enemy, we are in trouble. For we will not win until we do much more than that: first we must agree, then we must convince people who are not very inclined to listen to us. But until we do the first, we cannot start on the second. And the war will go on.