Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Enlightened Thought from Muslim 'Leaders'

Enlightened Thought from Muslim 'Leaders' (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 09:06 AM
 
Uday misrepresented something? no, say ain't so, joe.

     
einmakom
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: sh'hou rahok mi'dai
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 09:10 AM
 
We cannot fight them through brawn alone. We must use our brains also.
Those are fighting words. You really want to defend this?

Actually, I noticed you glossed over these words in favor of defending his speech about communism, democracy, and human rights.

So what of it, he's basically issuing the threat that he wants a fight both of physical violence (brawn) and also of strategy (brains.)

Here I was, with the notion that you were a peaceful person, now I see you defending the speech of a person threatening a fight.
     
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 10:58 AM
 
Originally posted by einmakom:
Those are fighting words. You really want to defend this?

Actually, I noticed you glossed over these words in favor of defending his speech about communism, democracy, and human rights.

So what of it, he's basically issuing the threat that he wants a fight both of physical violence (brawn) and also of strategy (brains.)

Here I was, with the notion that you were a peaceful person, now I see you defending the speech of a person threatening a fight.
FWIW, I felt he was correcting a misquote out of context rather then defending the speech overall.
He was pointing out that selectively editing quotes can give a much diffferent meaning than the quote in its entirety....

Heck, I could do the same thing with a Bush speech, that wouldn't mean I agree or disagree with the content of the speech, just disagree with intentionally chopping up the speech to give a mistaken impression.
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 11:15 AM
 
You know last week this same PM called for a more peaceful Islam. I posted an article about it and it was ignored by all those that like to argue that Islam is evil. Now look at what you guys picked up on. Hell there were even two threads about this topic as well.

It's quite telling really. A perfect example that people will only listen to what they want to listen to.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 11:29 AM
 
Originally posted by einmakom:
Those are fighting words. You really want to defend this?

Actually, I noticed you glossed over these words in favor of defending his speech about communism, democracy, and human rights.

So what of it, he's basically issuing the threat that he wants a fight both of physical violence (brawn) and also of strategy (brains.)
From the Malaysian PM's and a lot of his fellow Muslims' point of view, Islam is already at war, the problem is they are not fighting back at all - with neither brains nor brawn. They are indeed 'fighting words' that are targeted towards the enemies of Islam (not any Jew anywhere - be sure to make that distinction), the nature of the 'fight' is undecided at this point; Mahathir would appear to favor using brains to achieve his goals - but he doesn't (and shouldn't) rule out the use of brawn.

No doubt some right-wing conservative apologists will be along shortly to remind you that 'diplomacy must be backed up with the threat of force'.
Here I was, with the notion that you were a peaceful person, now I see you defending the speech of a person threatening a fight.
I am a peaceful person - that doesn't mean if you bulldoze my house or bomb my country I won't fight back. You seem to have me confused with a 'pacifist' or a 'coward'.

One shouldn't constantly poke a tiger in the eyes then complain when the tiger mauls oneself.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 11:32 AM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
FWIW, I felt he was correcting a misquote out of context rather then defending the speech overall.
Actually I thought it was a very good speech - I doubt many will see it as such though.

As we have already seen, people are quick to take the sensationalist angle and run with it.
     
djjava
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 03:00 PM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
oh, yeah, I find racist threats highly entertaining...
got a problem with fighting terrorists?

I find the racist program called Affirmative ACtion threatening to my success...oh well.
http://www.pardonmyenglish.com "Spreading the Conservative Word...In English Only."
RevA PB17 with Panther, Lacie d2 160gb, 4G iPod, Vectorworks 10.5
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 07:16 PM
 
Originally posted by djjava:
got a problem with fighting terrorists?
Well, got a version of that "humorous" pic actually geared towards terrorists, rather than just slighting Muslims in general?

If not, pls **** off.

Thank you.

-s*
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 07:57 PM
 
Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
You know last week this same PM called for a more peaceful Islam. I posted an article about it and it was ignored by all those that like to argue that Islam is evil. Now look at what you guys picked up on. Hell there were even two threads about this topic as well.

It's quite telling really. A perfect example that people will only listen to what they want to listen to.
Fellow Believers we must be peaceful and practice restraint and tolerance against the unbelievers, the infidels and the Jews who rule the world by proxy.

Yeah, like that makes sense!
     
vmarks
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 09:44 PM
 
As a follow-up,

Chirac blocked the EU from issuing a condemnation of the Malaysian PM's unacceptable speech.

The words Chirac objected to?



The EU deeply deplores the comments made earlier today by Dr Mahathir in his speech at the opening of the 10th session of the Islamic Summit conference in Putrajaya, Malaysia, in which he said:

"We [Muslims] are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them."

Such words hinder all our efforts to further inter-ethnic and religious harmony, and have absolutely no place in a tolerant world.

I can't find a good explanation of why Chirac objected, other than he felt the EU wasn't an appropriate venue to make such a condemnation. (But if they aren't, then what IS an appropriate venue?)

Malaysia's PM on Friday accused Western countries of using a double standard for criticizing Jews and Muslims, and refused to
apologize for a speech in which he said Jews
ruled the world.

"Lots of people make nasty statements about us, about Muslims," Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said Friday. "People call Muslims terrorists, they even say ... Muhammed the prophet was a terrorist."

"People make such statements, and they seem to get away with it. But if you say anything at all against the Jews, you are accused of being anti-Semitic," Mahathir told a news conference after the close of a summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the world's largest Muslim grouping.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 10:07 PM
 
Originally posted by vmarks:
"Lots of people make nasty statements about us, about Muslims," Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said Friday. "People call Muslims terrorists, they even say ... Muhammed the prophet was a terrorist."

"People make such statements, and they seem to get away with it. But if you say anything at all against the Jews, you are accused of being anti-Semitic," Mahathir told a news conference after the close of a summit of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the world's largest Muslim grouping.
well, no matter which side you're on, that is pretty much an accurate observation on his part. Its become the mode in the minds of some to equate muslim=terrrorist.
     
Uday's Carcass  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Frozen storage at Area 51, wrapped in pigskin. My damned soul is never getting out of the Great Satan.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 10:12 PM
 
Originally posted by vmarks:
Chirac blocked the EU from issuing a condemnation of the Malaysian PM's unacceptable speech.
'Old Europe' is known for its irretractable antisemitism. Chirac just echos that sentiment. He and the rest of Europe like to kiss Muslim booty and kick around the Jews. Just look at the chaos and idiocy that reigns in the UN General Assembly and how often France is more than willing to support those retarded anti-Israel Security Council resolutions. Dimwitted pinkos.

Linfidels harken! 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.'
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 17, 2003, 10:24 PM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
'Old Europe' is known for its irretractable antisemitism. Chirac just echos that sentiment. He and the rest of Europe like to kiss Muslim booty and kick around the Jews. Just look at the chaos and idiocy that reigns in the UN General Assembly and how often France is more than willing to support those retarded anti-Israel Security Council resolutions. Dimwitted pinkos.
France is FUBAR. Apparently 10% of the vote is now from Muslims so politicians there are pandering to them. So when synagogues are attacked the politicians are turning a blind eye.

They should have the balls to not pander to any group and stick to their jobs - running the country and condemning any stupid remarks from foreign leaders no matter who or what.
     
yakkiebah
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dar al-Harb
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 12:45 AM
 
from CNN:
In Brussels, European Union leaders concluded a two-day summit with a statement accusing Mahathir of spreading falsehoods and sowing ethnic and religious divisions.

"His unacceptable comments hinder all our efforts to further interethnic and religious harmony, and have no place in a decent world," the EU leaders said.

from the BBC:
The speech was also condemned by the European Union and Germany in particular, as well as by the United States, Australia and other Western states.

Germany summoned Malaysia's charge d'affaires in Berlin to protest at the "totally unacceptable" comments.

Speaking for the EU, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said that Dr Mahathir had employed "expressions that were gravely offensive, very strongly anti-Semitic and... strongly counter to principles of tolerance, dialogue and understanding".
     
Uday's Carcass  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Frozen storage at Area 51, wrapped in pigskin. My damned soul is never getting out of the Great Satan.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 01:05 AM
 
Originally posted by yakkiebah:
from CNN:

from the BBC:
but nothing directly from France.

Linfidels harken! 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.'
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 05:47 AM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
'Old Europe' is known for its irretractable antisemitism. Chirac just echos that sentiment. He and the rest of Europe like to kiss Muslim booty and kick around the Jews.
I take offense at that statement.

I'm pretty sure that was intended, so: Congratulations.

Lemme just go roast some Jews with my terrorist friends - I'm feeling a little peckish.

-s*
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 05:56 AM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
'Old Europe' is known for its irretractable antisemitism.
There's that A-word - I was wondering how long that would take.

Originally posted by eklipse:
Did anybody actually read Mahathir's speech in it's entirety? - or just Uday's choice quotes?

No?

Oh well, here is the complete text: http://thestar.com.my/oic/story.asp?...507802&sec=OIC


For those who bothered to read it, can someone please tell where the incitement of hatred towards Jews can be found?
Nobody answered my questions.


Here's another follow-up story: http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story...606&sec=nation
( Last edited by eklipse; Oct 18, 2003 at 06:06 AM. )
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 06:13 AM
 
Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
I take offense at that statement.

I'm pretty sure that was intended, so: Congratulations.

Lemme just go roast some Jews with my terrorist friends - I'm feeling a little peckish.

-s*
I think they're just pissed because there is some criticism of Jews floating around instead of the daily 'fvckin muslim' headlines.
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 06:30 AM
 
eklipse -- i read your post but I find the argument a little thin... Obviously we can argue until we're blue in the face about what Mahathir was trying to prove - but his use stereotypes and misconceptions to prove it is offensive and irresponsible (see Reggie White's speech to the Wisconsin legislature). You seem to be operating under the misconception that 'positive' stereotypes are inoffensive.

He portrays Communism, Socialism, human rights(?), and Democracy as Jewish inventions crafted out of a desire for self-defense. Though historically inaccurate, it's not the assocation of Jews with those things that's offensive. It's the idea that Jews, motivated by self-preservation, collectively and surreptitiously foisted these institutions onto an unassuming Western world that's offensive. I don't know of any way to spin that concept into something positive. He's essentially saying "Hey look, the Jews tricked everyone into tolerating their existence, how so very crafty of them!" That's offensive even to non-Jews, who apparently aren't bright enough to realize on their own that respecting human rights is worthwhile. Of course, major historical events like WW2 are incapable of causing a quick, widespread change in values, it's really the Jews pulling all the strings. No wonder the Muslim world shows such an aversion toward Democracy, after all it's just a Jewish front. Boy, those Jews sure are smart...

Even worse is that he refers to all Jews as "the enemy." First of all, Israel != all Jews. Second of all, the enemy? Is there a war going on? Calling for peaceful Islam and the use of brains over brawn in conflict resolution is a 'good thing,' but Mahathir frames it within an 'us vs. them', 'we're fighting for our survival against an external enemy' theme that's totally inapproriate. Islam's biggest enemies are its very own fundamentalists.

And if the Jews rule the world by proxy, when can I start seeing some of the spoils of that? A shiny new car would be just fantastic. I did recently receive a shiny new G5 in the mail, thank you my Jewish brothers for sharing the spoils of world rule with me
( Last edited by itai195; Oct 18, 2003 at 06:49 AM. )
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 07:31 AM
 
Originally posted by itai195:
He portrays Communism, Socialism, human rights(?), and Democracy as Jewish inventions crafted out of a desire for self-defense. Though historically inaccurate, it's not the assocation of Jews with those things that's offensive. It's the idea that Jews, motivated by self-preservation, collectively and surreptitiously foisted these institutions onto an unassuming Western world that's offensive. I don't know of any way to spin that concept into something positive. He's essentially saying "Hey look, the Jews tricked everyone into tolerating their existence, how so very crafty of them!" That's offensive even to non-Jews, who apparently aren't bright enough to realize on their own that respecting human rights is worthwhile. Of course, major historical events like WW2 are incapable of causing a quick, widespread change in values, it's really the Jews pulling all the strings. No wonder the Muslim world shows such an aversion toward Democracy, after all it's just a Jewish front. Boy, those Jews sure are smart...
I see the point you are trying to make, but, where does he imply that these ideals were 'surreptitiously foisted' upon unassuming Westerners? He appears to be suggesting that Jews spearheaded a human rights movement to ensure that Holocaust type atrocities do not happen again - again, what's wrong with this? I read the passage again, I don't see any implication of trickery, he seems to be suggesting Jews stuck up for themselves and reaped the rewards - now he urges Muslims to do the same.
Even worse is that he refers to all Jews as "the enemy." First of all, Israel != all Jews. Second of all, the enemy? Is there a war going on? Calling for peaceful Islam and the use of brains over brawn in conflict resolution is a 'good thing,' but Mahathir frames it within an 'us vs. them', 'we're fighting for our survival against an external enemy' theme that's totally inapproriate. Islam's biggest enemies are its very own fundamentalists.
Where does he refer to 'all Jews' as the enemy? In fact, as I have already quoted once, he goes out of his way to make the point that all Jews are not the enemy:
We also know that not all non-Muslims are against us. Some are well disposed towards us. Some even see our enemies as their enemies. Even among the Jews, there are many who do not approve of what the Israelis are doing.
From many Muslims point of view there is a war being fought on many fronts; Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Pakistan and Syria to name just a few. This isn't just a 'Jewish thing'. Regardless of whether you think Islam is at war, many Muslims do, and the world has to learn to live with or deal with that. It is condescending to tell these people 'they have nothing to be pissed off about' - they are pissed off, for whatever reason, and there now appears to be some sort of movement to do something about it. If the world is unhappy at this prospect then it needs to reassess it's stance.
And if the Jews rule the world by proxy, when can I start seeing some of the spoils of that? A shiny new car would be just fantastic. I did recently receive a shiny new G5 in the mail, thank you my Jewish brothers for sharing the spoils of world rule with me
'Jews ruling the world' is an exaggeration, they hold a lot of power and influence - that is all. A bad thing? No - not by itself, it's the usage of this power and influence to the detriment of others that gives cause for concern. I'm pretty sure this is what Mahathir is getting at.
     
Uday's Carcass  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Frozen storage at Area 51, wrapped in pigskin. My damned soul is never getting out of the Great Satan.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 12:23 PM
 
Originally posted by eklipse:
From many Muslims point of view there is a war being fought on many fronts; Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Pakistan and Syria to name just a few.
And we hit home at a point that needs to be made: If Muslims view these as true wars--that the individuals fighting against the infidels are righteous and have Allah's backing--they are misguided. Afghanistan was run by brutal, murderous briggands and gangsters under Allah's banner. Chechen rebels are supported by Al Queda and other sponsors of terrorism, and a rebel victory in that region would create another Taliban-like Afghanistan. Pakistan is in a struggle for its soul and future--if it fails, it will succumb to the regressive values and posture of extremist Muslims. Syria is just flat-out terrorist.
it's the usage of this power and influence to the detriment of others that gives cause for concern. I'm pretty sure this is what Mahathir is getting at.
yeah, but what he doesn't 'get at' is that the failure of Arab countries and non-Arab (but Muslim) societies is their own fault, not the result of some Jewish conspiracy or Jews ruling the world 'by proxy'. His sentiments echo what Muslims have been doing for decades: making excuses for their own failures and the failures of their dictatorial, despotic governments, and the failure of their peoples to demand equality and democracy.

Linfidels harken! 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.'
     
RooneyX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 01:15 PM
 
Originally posted by itai195:

And if the Jews rule the world by proxy, when can I start seeing some of the spoils of that? A shiny new car would be just fantastic. I did recently receive a shiny new G5 in the mail, thank you my Jewish brothers for sharing the spoils of world rule with me
Our great Steve Jobs is Jewish. A lot of Mac people are. Lots of creative people are.

I live in Hollywood and see how hard my Jewish brothers and sisters work out here to be creative and inspirational to the world. And guess what? Lots of people from different backgrounds are breaking in. It's great. I'd like to see Muslims stop acting like twerps and join in. There are Jewish-Muslim-Hindu alliances with film productions in Bombay, London and LA and we need to see more business together.

But I'm going to wait for a G5 Powerbook.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 01:23 PM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
And we hit home at a point that needs to be made: If Muslims view these as true wars--that the individuals fighting against the infidels are righteous and have Allah's backing--they are misguided. Afghanistan was run by brutal, murderous briggands and gangsters under Allah's banner. Chechen rebels are supported by Al Queda and other sponsors of terrorism, and a rebel victory in that region would create another Taliban-like Afghanistan. Pakistan is in a struggle for its soul and future--if it fails, it will succumb to the regressive values and posture of extremist Muslims. Syria is just flat-out terrorist.
While it's fine to state your opinion, it is largely irrelevant in this matter - you are (as far as I know) an outside observer on these issues. Extremist Islam is borne out of the total lack of a clear and consistent Muslim voice to speak out against the oppression and wrong doing against it's society. It is because of this frustration and lack of any venting outlet that many turn to 'terrorism' (this is also why the war on terror is ultimately doomed to failure). If there were a legitimate, respected and authoritative focal point for Islam - that would take an active role in addressing the problems afflicting the Muslim world - I would venture that terrorist activities would not be receiving the level of support they currently do.

The problem, simply, is lack of representation - terrorism is a futile byproduct of this situation.
yeah, but what he doesn't 'get at' is that the failure of Arab countries and non-Arab (but Muslim) societies is their own fault, not the result of some Jewish conspiracy or Jews ruling the world 'by proxy'. His sentiments echo what Muslims have been doing for decades: making excuses for their own failures and the failures of their dictatorial, despotic governments, and the failure of their peoples to demand equality and democracy.
If that is what you believe then you have completely misunderstood the intention of Mahathir's speech. He is not blaming anyone but the Muslim people for the crisis they find themselves in. He is not whining that Jews are destroying Islam, he is stating that Islam is allowing itself to be destroyed because it's followers will not unite behind a common cause. He does not make excuses for the plight of his people, he does not suggest begging the international community for salvation, he does not advocate running to the UN holding one's panties - he calls for all Muslims to 'wake the fvck up', stop looking for excuses and to take a pro-active approach to choosing one's own destiny.
( Last edited by eklipse; Oct 18, 2003 at 02:17 PM. )
     
Uday's Carcass  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Frozen storage at Area 51, wrapped in pigskin. My damned soul is never getting out of the Great Satan.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 01:51 PM
 
that is the most enlightend post I've ever seen you make, eklipse. Not bad. I see my wisdom is rubbing off.

Linfidels harken! 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.'
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 02:00 PM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
that is the most enlightend post I've ever seen you make, eklipse. Not bad. I see my wisdom is rubbing off.
First iTunes-for-Windows, now this. Hell really must've frozen over.
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 02:08 PM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
that is the most enlightend post I've ever seen you make, eklipse. Not bad. I see my wisdom is rubbing off.
So you're admitting that your initial interpretation of Mahathir's speech was wrong?

eklipse's post is dead on correct. What's disappointing is the way the media picked up on this 'jews rule the world' segment, quoting it out of context and disregarding the main message carried within.
I'd encourage everyone to read the speech in it's entirety, because he was absolutely right in what he said about the current approach the oppressed Muslims are taking. It's time for the Arab world to wake up and use their brains to come up with workable solutions to the problems out there.
     
Uday's Carcass  (op)
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Frozen storage at Area 51, wrapped in pigskin. My damned soul is never getting out of the Great Satan.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2003, 02:23 PM
 
Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
So you're admitting that your initial interpretation of Mahathir's speech was wrong?
his comments about Jews are stupid and wrong. But if his intent is to place responsibility on Muslims themselves and to finally stop blaming Jews and the West for the Muslim world's dismal failures, then he's on the right track.

But his comments and thoughts about Jews are still hideously malformed.

Linfidels harken! 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.'
     
moki
Ambrosia - el Presidente
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2003, 07:35 PM
 
Originally posted by Uday's Carcass:
You infidels see what the Malaysian PM is spewing. Allah in Paradise, what a retard.
Well, Mahathir is an interesting person. Many times when reading his articles in the state-run papers in Malaysia, I was struck by how thoughtful the man was. But every now and again, he comes out and says such utterly ridiculous things that you wonder what exactly is wrong with the man.

He blamed the Asian currency crisis on "Western conspiracy" (read: America), and has made many other outlandish and ridiculous statements, though these certainly take the cake.

My guess is that he simply doesn't care anymore. He's been the veritable king of Malaysia for decades, and at 77, he's finally retiring, so perhaps now he's just letting it all flow. Or perhaps he's losing his grip on reality, who knows.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
     
moki
Ambrosia - el Presidente
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2003, 07:56 PM
 
This is a pretty accurate synopsis of Mahathir:

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/st...storyid=360829

But if Mahathir has something to say, he won't stint in saying it in public. He has an extraordinary reputation for tossing off the most outrageous propositions and then feigning the most childlike innocence when somebody takes offence.

[snip]

The economy has not just grown but been transformed. Kuala Lumpur is a modern wealthy city, not a struggling market centre.

It's an achievement which hasn't been lost on a man with 20 years' of reasons not to compliment the Malaysian leader -- Alexander Downer.

"I think Dr Mahathir in all his years as Prime Minister of Malaysia has done a very good job for the Malaysian economy," he said.

"When you look at modern Malaysia and compare it with the Malaysia of when he first became Prime Minister, it is remarkable what has been achieved over those years

[snip]

As his profile among leaders of developing nations grew, Mahathir's anti-West and anti-Australian remarks increased in frequency and nastiness. It was as if he was showing friends how to be politically independent as well as economically self-supporting.

His increasing silliness was just so much comedy until the new apprehensions following September 11, 2001, when religion entered the equation of international relations.

Mahathir has talked up the need for Islamic nations to resist Western campaigns against terrorism -- and his timing could not be more damaging. One of the objectives of the APEC summit is to discuss the economic harm which could come from terrorism.

The Bali bombing just over a year ago cost Indonesia 1 per cent of its economy. That means every 100,000 rupiah (about $20) held by an Indonesian has shrunk by 1000 rupiah.

That type of reduction could happen again, on a bigger scale, should moderate Islamic nations be convinced by Mahathir-type arguments not to join or assist the fight against terrorism.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
     
moki
Ambrosia - el Presidente
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2003, 08:26 PM
 
It appears Mahathir has apologized for his remarks. I'm quite sure he knew they'd cause controversy, though -- he had the speech prepared well ahead of time. If he *didn't* think anyone would have a problem with what he was saying, his views are so distorted that it's hard to believe. I prefer to give him more credit than that.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...364473557.html
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
     
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2003, 09:17 PM
 
Originally posted by moki:
It appears Mahathir has apologized for his remarks. I'm quite sure he knew they'd cause controversy, though -- he had the speech prepared well ahead of time. If he *didn't* think anyone would have a problem with what he was saying, his views are so distorted that it's hard to believe. I prefer to give him more credit than that.
yes, I'm the same with Bush and the State of the Union speech and those pesky 16 words. He had time to KNOW what he was going to say and what the impact would be. to back down afterwards after the damage was done was calculated. Mahathir made his point and Bush made his lies and voila! a war in Iraq.
presto.
     
moki
Ambrosia - el Presidente
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 01:30 AM
 
Originally posted by Lerkfish:
yes, I'm the same with Bush and the State of the Union speech and those pesky 16 words. He had time to KNOW what he was going to say and what the impact would be. to back down afterwards after the damage was done was calculated. Mahathir made his point and Bush made his lies and voila! a war in Iraq.
presto.
oi... heh. What "point" did Mahathir make about "Jews ruling the world" and "1.3 billions Muslims can't be defeated by a few million Jews" and other such highly inflamatory, borderline racist comments.

Bush said “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

...which was true:

Though the British have not backed off that claim (a British official told NEWSWEEK that it came from an East African nation, not Niger), CIA Director Tenet publicly took responsibility for allowing a thinly sourced report by another country to appear in the State of the Union. (The White House last week denied that the Niger reference had ever shown up in an SOTU draft.)
I mean c'mon, there's no analog here at all, unless you're a partisan trying to get in your shots.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
     
Lerkfish
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 07:53 AM
 
Originally posted by moki:
oi... heh. What "point" did Mahathir make about "Jews ruling the world" and "1.3 billions Muslims can't be defeated by a few million Jews" and other such highly inflamatory, borderline racist comments.

Bush said “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

...which was true:



I mean c'mon, there's no analog here at all, unless you're a partisan trying to get in your shots.
no, try upping your reading comprehension. you were making the point that the statements had their desired effect, even after the subsequent apology or backdown. I was saying that Bush's comment had its effect (garnering support for an invasion), even after he admitted the statement shouldn't have been used and blamed the CIA.
In other words, if you say something that is incendiary or plain false to get an effect, and then afterwards apologize or scapegoat someone else, the horse is already out of the barn.

I could try to re-re-reexplain it, but if you don't get it, I guess you never will.

a more interesting question is that Bush himself admits those 16 words should not have been used, and you are STILL insisting they should.....
     
DBursey
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 01:34 PM
 
Just to note, Mahathir didn't apologise to anyone. His foreign minister expressed 'regret that some may have been offended'. There was no apology, clarification, or retraction of his incendiary remarks.

Mahathir's venue gave him a podium from whence to highlight the need for a negotiated settlement in Israel/Palestine, to discuss the challenges inherent in advancing Muslim economies, and the costs to religious infighting within the Muslem world.

He did all of this, but in stitching his speech together with a strong thread of anti-semitism he succeeded only in promoting the type of hatred on which terrorism thrives.

This wasn't his first anti-semitic outburst, but it was the first that brought him a standing ovation from the assembled leaders of the muslim world.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 01:41 PM
 
Originally posted by moki:
I mean c'mon, there's no analog here at all, unless you're a partisan trying to get in your shots.
A lot of that seems to be going on in here. Not just in this thread.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 04:53 PM
 
Originally posted by DBursey:
Just to note, Mahathir didn't apologise to anyone. His foreign minister expressed 'regret that some may have been offended'. There was no apology, clarification, or retraction of his incendiary remarks.
Nor should he.

In my opinion, anyone who believes his speech promoted or encouraged anti-Semitism either: a) hasn't read the entire speech - just a couple of selective sound-bites b) didn't understand the speech and it's intention or c) has an agenda of their own.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where the incitement of hatred towards Jews can be found in his speech.
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 04:54 PM
 
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2003, 08:35 PM
 
Not sure if I commented about hate, just about the silliness of "Jews ruling the world by proxy"

Obviously he has racial issues.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:15 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,