Skip to main content

Double standard or consistent behavior?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0216/dailyUpdate.html

So, Arabs are outraged at the abuse at Abu Ghraib, and they are really really outraged, to the point of rioting, arson and murder about cartoons.

Where is the Arab outrage at the mass graves in Iraq?

Perhaps they have a double-standard. Perhaps a Muslim being mistreated by another Muslim is okay, but a Muslim being mistreated by an "infidel" is bad. It could be an aspect of the "anything we do is good, anything America does is evil" America-bashing that is prevalent throughout the world.

Or perhaps they are being perfectly consistent. Perhaps the issue is not that Muslims are dead - perhaps it is that Shiite Muslims are dead. After all, according to some counts, Sunni's make up the vast majority of Muslims, as much as 90%.

So perhaps the real answer is that most Muslims simply feel the same way their Brother Sunni Saddam did - Shiites are not real muslims and deserve to die like animals right alongside the infidels.

This view is consistent not only with the specific situation in Iraq where Sunnis persecuted and worked to exterminate Shiites. It is consistent with the constant examples of the Muslim nature of violent, animal savagery.

Hey, they've been brutally slaughtering people for thousands of years. Who are we to tell them any different?

Don't mistake my comments here for racism - they are not. I fully believe there is no reason Arabs and other people who are Muslims cannot act in a civilized manner. The issue is that their culture and religion are based in violence, and they don't care to change it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Murder in the US

In 2011, I calculate the overall US murder rate as 4.6 per 100,000 population.

But if you recalculate this, and assumed that black men murdered at the same rate as everyone else, the overall rate would drop to 1.9 out of 100,000 population. That would give the United States the 147th highest murder rate in the world - or, the 60th best.

The insane disproportionate murder rate among US blacks is why the overall US murder rate seems so high.

I don't understand why liberals refuse to talk about this. I don't understand why blacks refuse to talk about this. Blacks are just as often the victim as the offender - almost SIXTY PERCENT of murder victims in the US are black. Shouldn't they care about this? Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton to talk about this? Yet they are silent.

And it's not like this is any secret. This culture of violence, abuse of women, and plain thuggery is paraded around daily in pop music. It's glorified on TV shows like "The Wire…

The Root of Violent Extremism

We are too flippant about writing off violent extremists as "crazy", "psychopathic", etc.

Just because *we* have a hard time conceiving of doing violence to others, does not mean that those who do are insane.

Hitler was not insane. Hitler was evil. There is a distinction.

To be insane, to be "crazy", means you cannot understand the difference between right and wrong.

People like Hitler, like ISIS, these people are *evil*. They have, in what they believe to be a rational process, *chosen* to embrace a death-worshipping morality.

Such thinking is going to lead us down wrong alleys in dealing with violent political extremism.

Unless we understand the various reasons why such people embrace philosophies of death, we cannot combat the root causes and defeat violent extremism.

Obama's "they need jobs" is a juvenile approach at this. But you simply cannot ignore and dismiss the reality of life in the countries that are the flash-points of extremism…

Transparency needed in investigations of police

I have not sat on a grand jury any time in my life. I am disinclined, having not pored through records, nor listened to dozens of witnesses, to second-guess the difficult decisions these jurors have had to make.

HOWEVER. There is a clear problem of trust going on, and it stems from a couple different sources.

1) Grand Juries are usually secret. There are good reasons for this. Simply investigating whether a crime might have occurred, which is what Grand Juries do, collects a lot of evidence which could put people's lives at risk, or could be embarrassing. You want folks to feel free to talk. And you don't want the person being investigated to get unduly smeared.

However, the flip side of secrecy is that the lack of transparency can lead to a loss of trust. Clearly, in the two incidents discussed recently, many people who have no idea what went on in the GJ's or what evidence was presented, know, they just KNOW, an injustice was committed! And, because they have no opportun…