In war, words matter as much as weapons. And Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, writes in this Washington Post commentary that he’s concerned about President Bush’s increasing tendency to use phrases such as the “murderous ideology of Islamic radicalism” and to liken that ideology of communism.
As the president furthers what Brzezinski calls “Islamophobia” with such language, he said, “Bush is implicitly elevating Osama bin Laden’s stature and historic significance to the level of figures such as Lenin, Stalin or Mao. And that suggests, in turn, that the fugitive Saudi dissident hiding in some cave (or perhaps even deceased) has been articulating a doctrine of universal significance.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
53 Comments
I think that anyone who remembers the Tehran Vaudeville Show during the Carter administration should completely dismiss any opionion that the utterly incompetent Mr. Brzezinski has to offer.
It was Brzezinski, an ivory-tower academic, who advised Jimmy to allow the Shah into the United States, against the advice of the American ambassador in Tehran, (a career diplomat with more experience in foreign affairs than the entire Carter White House put together), who warned him saying (paraphrased) “Are you nuts? They’d storm the embassy!”
-jcr
And, as it happens, Islamic radicalism is, for all practical purposes, identical to communism. They both discount the value of human life, for some mythical “higher purpose”. They both demand that their followers sacrifice themselves and others for a collective goal.
Islamofascism is the same enemy we’ve always had. It’s just the latest façade for misanthropy. You can spot the enemy by their rhetoric: whoever glorfies death, is an enemy of humanity, whether it’s today’s terrorists pretending to be muslims, the last century’s goose-stepping thugs, or the pseudo-christian fanatics who destroyed Spain’s economy in the 15th century by murdering their Jews.
-jcr
The truth of the matter.
The Bush Administration is rotten to its core.
Islam is the most peace-loving religion to ever grace the planet, and if it were not for the evil radical elements or Israeli Jews and the murderous two-faced Christians, the Bush cabal would not need to deflect attention away their hellish ways, underhanded lies, and despicable unconscionable behavior.
Arabs, defending the land have been declared the “enemy” by this small group of lying, cheating megalomaniacs. And those, so beguiled as to disgustingly support them.
There is a war going on alright, but it has nothing to do with the misnomer of “terrorism” { the sales slogan of the hate mongers }.
The world is at war with those who try to cloak themselves from what the world has come to understand is nothing less than the rebirth of Nazism. The Israeli/Zionist, American/Neoconservative bloodthirsty cabal.
The Bush Administration has covered itself in blood.
Now that the racism and bigotry and warmongering, which constitutes the structure underling the so-called war on terrorism is surfacing, little is left to prop-up a failed policy based only upon such rank hatred.
Not unlike cockroaches scurrying to avoid the light, his feeble following of bewildered ideologues now becomes the object of scorn.
It’s simple: “Know a tree by the fruit is bears.” One only need look toward Fallujah, where the rubble of unseen graves and men women and children which lie there speak in stark silence.
My noble America should hang its head in shame letting this happen.
We are better than this, we are better than this, we are better than this……….my noble America weeps……
ef
“Islamophobe” First, what a devious word that is. Along the dubious line of “homophobe”. Designed to put those against the agenda of a group on the defensive.
So, is being an “Islamophobic” a bad thing? If the word means concerned, wary, maybe even a little prejudiced against the religion, I think not. I think we all ought to be concerned about this “religion of peace” that is involved in so much terroristic violence around the world.
I think jcr makes some valid points. It seems we will always be saddled with some fascist-type regime or religion that devalues human life to the point it will send out it’s own sons and daughters to blow themselves up for the “common good.”
The extremists of the Islamic state fit that moniker very well. The enticements they use to get children to strap on explosives in order to kill as many “non-believers” as possible is beyond my understanding. Rivers of milk and honey? Unlimited sex with beautiful virgins? Worshiped as heroes? That hardly qualifies as heroic deeds, but rather fanaticism and cowardice.
But is killing them going to stop the terrorism? I think not. I wish I had the answer to that question, but I don’t.
Remove the idiotic word “terrorism” out of the equation, which means nothing, adds nothing, and is only there to inflame the situation, then comes the clarity it takes to make sense.
You make fun out of the only weapon they have to what end? Are they just supposed to stand there and be slaughtered?
Peace can be made in the Middle East and put the radicals on both sides out of business.
The Neocons and the Zionists do not want peace.
They are the radicals.
The word “terrorism” means: “I am an idiot”
Are the Palestinians defending their homes, farms and families “terrorists?”
It’s a made-up word.
John C. Randolph,
The reasoning in your second post runs something like the following:
Communism = Islamic radicalism,Islamic radicalism = Islamofascism,So, communism = fascism.
Obviously, that equivalence isn’t going to fly, since fascism is the private ownership of public goods, while communism is the state ownership of formerly private goods.
I find ‘Islamofascism’ an ideologically charged, polemical word that obscures what’s at stake rather than revealing it. The political aspiration of folks like OBL is theocratic and authoritarian. Along the same lines, the political form evolved by Saddam Hussein was secular and authoritarian. Neither is ‘fascistic’ in the proper sense of preserving private ownership. In Iraq, industry and the ownership of oil fields was nationalized. And in Afghanistan under the Taliban (arguably the closest thing to OBL’s vision of an Islamic theocracy), the private ownership of items like automobiles was severely restricted.
If the claim is that in ‘Islamofascism’ we encounter the ’same-old-same-old’ misanthropic ideal, fine. I might not agree, but fine. However, for the sake of precision, there’s got to be a less question-begging term for this negative ideal than ‘Islamofascism.’
I’m with Ed on this one: ‘Islamofascism’ is as big an intellectual cop-out as ‘terrorism.’
Actually Ed, it means:
terrorism – the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear.
If the shoe fits…
Well, It does fit. The Zionist made-up that word to describe Palestinian Resistance.
And the Zionists have mooched 1.6 trillion dollars out of the US Treasury by milking the word.
Why is 50lbs. of explosives wrapped around a committed fighter “terrorism,” while 500lbs. of the same stuff dropped from an F-16 is “homeland defense?” Guess it depends on who’s getting bombed.
Jed: Deliberately targeting of civilians fits and deserves the term “terrorism”. Am I missing something here?
Jed, You make good sense to anyone who is receptive to logic.
That is, with the exception of the enemy.
70% and growing in America and the rest of the world knows who the enemy is, and exactally what they’re up to.
But, then they’re those who buy the wrong sized shoe…….
Missing something? Start with the point and work backwards.
Muslim retaliation for being attacked is being “sold” as “terrorism,” when, in fact, Muslim retaliation for being attacked is completely justified, and has nothing whatsoever to do with so-called “terrorism.”
The big Bush lie.
Muslims are defending their country, homes, farms, wives, children, parents, grandparents, livelihood and possessions.
What’s your shtick?
Mr. Randolph wrote–”They both discount the value of human life, for some mythical ‘higher purpose’. They both demand that their followers sacrifice themselves and others for a collective goal.”
You mean like this?
“The president — who is spending a nearly five-week-long working vacation at his Texas ranch — said in a speech Wednesday that the sacrifices of U.S. troops were ‘made in a noble cause.’”
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/07/mom.protest/
Using Randolph’s criteria, Bush himself is a commie/fascist.
But in one respect Randolph is right–Bush only demands “sacrifice” from the troops . . . the rest of us don’t even have to pay for the damn war.
Out,Are you calling the carpet bombing of Berlin during WWII terrorism?
Israel is leading us into a disaster.
We need to make peace with the Arabs and that is more than just doable, that’s easy. Nothing that we are currently doing benefits the United States. Actually nothing we’re doing now even benefits Israel. They’re not the “brightest Bulb” in the socket.
We managed peaceful coexistence with the Soviet Union, and this situation in the Middle East is quickly reaching a just such a boiling point. Atomic weapons are being bandied about, and Israel is backing-off a retaliation for the Netanya suicide bombing.
Something is up.
That’s a clear signal that things need to be handled by clear-minded people.
Bush and Rice are fools.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1206/dailyUpdate.html
I get it. The towers came down because some brave Muslims were just defending their way of life.
Ed I’m glad you took the high ground.I’m sure that GTH stands for:GET THE HINT?
Outlander – so the Israeli bombings of civilians in the occupied territories is terrorism. The continued oppression of millions by the occupation is terrorism. The extermination of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians by US bombings is terrorism.
And we reap what we sow …
I think that we have gotten off subject. I simply offered the dictionary definition of terrorism, which, contrary to what some are contending, is a real word with real meaning. Apply it as you will.
Or I should say, mis-apply it as you will.
I would strongly urge reading Robert A. Pape’s book _The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism_ to anyone interested in the subject of this thread.
Pape is a political scientist at the University of Chicago and he provides a compelling argument for the case that religion has relatively little to do with the motivations for suicide terrorism.The largest number of suicide attacks in the world have been perpetrated by the Tamil Tigers – a secular terrorist group.
At its base, suicide terrorism seeks to change the policies (usually foreign) of democratic governments. Osama bin Laden’s argument with the U.S. is in large part a displacement from whom he has the most real problems — namely the Saudi government. His thinking is the U.S. is the distant, but root cause, of the cruelty and brutality of the Saudi leaders. He knows the U.S. props up the Saudi government due to our oil interests. He complains about U.S. troops being in the land of two Mosques.
The interesting thing about suicide terrorism is that it tends to be very effective in changing Democratic government policies. Shortly after 9/11, the U.S. started drawing down our troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Of course, a problem that we feared was that Sadam would find the newly vulnerable Saudi Arabia as a too inviting victim. Hence, a primary motivation for our invasion of Iraq.
OBL, like Bush runs campaigns. Wrapping his agenda in religious terms helps him garner “street support” in the Middle East. My take is that when Bush starts sounding like an “Islamophobe” he is in essence (and maybe unwittingly) helping Osama.
If you question how much of a relationship there is between the Saudi leaders and the U.S.government, the re-telling of a story I’m remembering might help with making the case.
I can’t recall where I read this, but on at least one occasion, Prince Adullah of Saudi Arabia, decided he had an urgent need to talk to President Bill Clinton. The prince hopped on a jet, did not bother to call Clinton in advance, and guess what. The Prince was ushered in to see President Clinton immediately upon his arrival. I don’t think any U.S. citizen would get that sort of accomdation — not even Monica Lewinski.
By the way, I am not saying it is right for OBL to kill our innocent civilians because of our country’s cruddy friends in high places. But, I think having a clearer picture of terrorist motivations can only be helpful.
CF,
Don’t try putting words in my mouth. I have proposed no such syllogism. I say that collectivism is evil, and that it’s the same old evil we’ve seen forever, with slightly different rhetorical packaging for each instance. What’s different this time, is just a matter of tactics that this latest batch has adopted.
Evil is never appeased. It must be fought, even over the protests of “useful idiots” (to use Stalin’s phrase) like yourself and Ed Friedemann. You don’t have to be grateful for it, but keep in mind that each and every US Marine, Airman, Sailor or Soldier has done far more for the cause of peace in the world than every single idiot with a “bush=hitler” sign.
-jcr
Regarding the equivalence of fascism and communism, they are self-evidently identical. They each demand the sacrifice of the individual to the collective, with obvious results.
-jcr
I have two Honorable Discharges.
And I disagree. Public opinion makes a difference.
jcr
Before you blow-off on me, it’s best to know what you’re talking about.
Not really not all I have to say.
jcr
Rabble rousing the definition of evil doesn’t buy you credibility. It does unnecessarily kill a lot of soldiers though.
That tool needs sme work.
He quotes Stalin.
Galahad,
I do not call Bush a fascist for the simple reason that he is nothing of the kind. If Bush were even as much of an authoritarian as Woodrow Wilson, you’d be cooling your heels in jail somewhere, instead of making a damned fool of yourself in this forum. (I mention Wilson, because my grandfather did time for protesting WW I, in blatant violation of his right to free speech).
Bush sent a *volunteer* army into Iraq, to topple a dictator who had twice attacked his neighbors in land-grab attempts; who had gassed his own cities; and who had a duty under the terms of a cease-fire agreement for a war which he had started and lost, to destroy his weapons and prove that they were destroyed, not to play posturing games with the weapons inspectors.
You may prefer the tactics of Neville Chamberlain, but I’ll give credit where credit is due, to GWB, for fixing his father’s mistake. Saddam should have been toppled in the first gulf war, but better late than never.
Tyrants today fear for their lives, and their behavior shows it. Muammar Khaddafi abandoned his nuclear program, paid restitution for the Pan AM 101 bombing, and isn’t about to follow Saddam to the gallows if there’s any way he can help it.
North Korea is looking for a way out of the corner they painted themselves into, by blatantly ignoring the promises they made during the Clinton administration.
You may argue that the Iraq war had no benefit for America’s safety, but you’d be wrong about that, too. We fight the dregs of the world *in Iraq* instead of fighting them in the USA, and a *lot* of them are dying. Meanwhile, Iraqis defy the terrorist’s threats, and turn out to vote in numbers that should put all of us to shame.
Iran and Syria will be free countries within a decade, when their people see and demand the rights that Iraqis will enjoy under their elected government. That’s what Assad and the Iranian theocrats are afraid of, and that’s why they have done and are doing everything they can get away with to try to prevent the liberation of the Iraqi people
-jcr
And you’re sure. That’s nice.
JCR–Well argued. Totally wrong. But well worded.
Iran is more emboldened now than they were before. They’re ramping up their nuclear weapons programs. What are we going to do? Invade them too?
They know that one war is all we can handle . . . and judging by how that one is going, we’re not doing too well there either.
North Korea too has gotten MORE not less belligerant since our wrong-headed occupation of Iraq.
I have no problem with taking out Saddam Hussein. I’m not a pacifist. It’s the occupation that’s the stupid part.
How many Vietnams do we have to live through to figure that out?
John,Like it or not, Bush has serious family ties to the third reich, his grandfather Prescott Bush, and his partner Georgs Herbert Walker having been major financial supporters of Hitler, and involved up to their eyeballs in a plot to install a national socialist government here. Since the Bush family has never disavowed their nazi connections, calling them fascists may not be too far off base!
Also, your critique of communism because it asks the individual to give up rights to the collective rings a little hollow when that is exactly what Bush is asking our military to do in this ill-conceived war.
My son is supposed to be mustered out this October, but that is entirely up to the whim of the military who can “stop loss” him and impose a backdoor draft and send him back to Iraq.
Some “volunteer” Army, huh?
Jed,
Most of what I’ve read about Prescott Bush & George Herbert Walker dealings imply, that yes, while they did business with the Nazis, they also provided information to the OSS (the CIA’s precursor). Thus, they were functioning as spies on what the Nazis were up to, and not considered traitors. I have not seen anything that has seriously challenged this interpretation. Have you?
John C. Randolph,
Read Ayn Rand much?
That’s the impression left by the narrative you’re pushing, in which individual = good and collective = evil. No wonder you take such such pains to assert the phony equivalence between fascism and communism; it helps to hide your own fascistic mythologizing of the individual.
Let me get another of your points straight: people who kill other people do more to further the cause of peace than do those who employ political process. You meant that, right?
Finally, spare us the Bush lies and propaganda. That crap isn’t going to fly here. This category include your use of the ‘post hoc propter hoc’ fallacy that Khaddafi disarmed ‘because’ he was frightened by Saddam’s fate. That’s a dishonest claim. The groundwork for his voluntary disarmament–which is an unqualifiedly good thing, by the way–had been in the works for some time, and the primary incentives were economic, not military.
The other piece of intellectual toadying on your part is the ‘flypaper’ analogy: we fight ‘em ‘there’ so we don’t have to fight ‘em ‘here.’ Oh, really? Tell that to folks in London, Madrid, and Bali. More to the point, this particular floating justification came late to the party after the Administrations’ lies about WMD had been found out. Nice how you carefully skirt THAT particular hot potato, since WMD was the primary justification pushed by the Administration. The other rationales you list were way down the list.
John C. Randolph, your verbal precision is well-matched to your intellectual shallowness and factual dishonesty in making arguments. But neither is as noxious as your cloaked, fascist convictions.
If you’re going to be a fascist, John C. Randolph, be proud; it’ll get you far in the current political climate.
Steven E.,My understanding was that they started providing information to the OSS to keep their asses out of jail after they got caught lending money to Germany in 1942.
Actually, Ed, you are not even close to the truth (imagine that). Terrorism is as old as recorded history. However the word itself was coined during Frances’s Reign of Terror in 1792-94.But terrorism itself has been a tool of fanatics since the first century when “Jewish zealots publicly slit the throats of Romans and their collaborators.” The Jewish zealots in no way mirror the Jewish settlers of Israel; completely different animal.
For an interesting intro to terrorism: http://www.terrorismanswers.org/terrorism/introduction.html
If one is going to claim a certain group coined a word, one should make sure they are correct in the first place
For the nost part, I have to agree with jcr: The ideological difference between communism and fascism is not worth arguing about. Neither ideology respects human, nor individual rights.
But does the word, Islamofascism, describe what the religious fanatics are doing by going to other countries to bomb civilians? I would go a step further and call them Islamoterrorists.
Does that make our military terrorists? I guess that boils down to your point of view.
And I strongly disagree that we have killed over 100,000 civilians in afganistan and Ieaq by dropping bombs. Give me concrete proof, and I might change my mind, but until then, I will continue to believe that we are purposly avoiding the killings of civilians in both countries. Unfortunatly, shit happens, but not to the tune of over 100,000 people. Get real.
Blowhard
You enthrall me with your accruement, but your idiotic history lesson does not apply to this current Israeli/American/Palestinian/ Iraqi/Middle East/ situation. It does, however, clearly show you firmly in the enemy’s camp. We are sitting on a powder keg, while you’re busy being a Blowhard.
Israel has taken 1.6 trillion dollars out of our Treasury since 1973 and used it to buy contempt for the United States. Your other hogwash history lesson, Blowhard, serves to distract Americans from the real crisis at hand.
That hatred of us murdering Palestinians exploded on 9/11. The 9/11 report says so. Not the “they hate our freedoms” crap put out by the White House.
Your “tinfoil Hat” ain’t working, pal. The “aliens are whispering to you again” Don’t listen.
Walker, I don’t think that you wrote the above post{ above mine}. That’s not your style.
Ed,Actually it is my style. I stick with facts, not fantasy. If that makes me a “blowhard” so be it.
“accruement”? The act of accumulating? What is that all about?
My “tinfoil hat” is nonexistant and unneeded. Your “sandbox” is filled with kitty litter.
The Israelis didn’t name the Palestinian resistance “terrorists?
CF,
I find it fascinating that you can denounce me for “intellectual shallowness” in the same post in which you resort to name-calling, and attempting to put words in my mouth.
Do you imagine that calling me a fascist in any way supports your position?
As for “toadying”, there is no more blatant a toady than a collectivist: your misanthropy makes you a cheerleader for totalitarian thugs.
-jcr
CF,
Yes, I’ve read Ayn Rand, as well as Marx, Solzhenitsyn, Chomsky, and many other writers with whom I agree and disagree. Have you read Rand yourself, or just the sneers against her from the misanthropes?
I find it fascinating that you can denounce me for “intellectual shallowness” in the same post in which you resort to name-calling, and attempting (again) to put words in my mouth. Do you imagine that tossing off an insult like calling me a fascist in any way supports your position?
And, getting back to the matter that seems to be pissing you off personally, about the equivalence between facism and communism: Hitler was responsible for about 20-30 million dead, counting those murdered in the Holocaust, and those who died in the war he started. Stalin killed about 30-40 million. Mao beat them both, by a vast margin: around 77 million dead.
Arguing that communism has some substantive difference from fascism is as repugnant as being a holocaust denier, as far as I’m concerned. Facism and Communism are both totalitarian, collectivist ideologies, which have resulted in murder on an industrial scale. Stalin and Mao killed many more people, because they weren’t stopped like Hitler was.
America’s attack on Iraq shut down a death factory. Even with the deaths in combat, the civilians killed despite the US military’s painstaking efforts to avoid civilian casualties, and the deliberate attacks on Iraqi civilians by the terrorists, America’s actions in Iraq have SAVED thousands of Iraqi lives, by toppling a murderous dictator.
Why do you hate the Iraqi people so much that you’d rather see them remain at the mercy of people like Saddam, Uday, Qusay and Chemical Ali? You rail against ending Saddam’s regime, and you have the gall to call ME a fascist?
Incidentally, that you chose to call me a fascist says far more about you than about me. I’ve been called a fascist, and I’ve been called a godless commie, by various fools just like you depending on which flavor of misanthropy they subscribed to.
You’re all alike, whether you’re one of Jerry Falwell’s homophobic anti-science crusaders, or an undergrad pinko in a Che Guevara t-shirt. Having no accomplishements of your own, you seek self-esteem by bootlicking and cheerleading for tyrants.
-jcr