Saturday, March 11, 2006

Motif and Motive, Emotivley speaking that is..

"An American aid worker taken hostage with three other peace activists was apparently tortured before he was shot in the head and chest and his body dumped near a railroad line in Baghdad, Iraqi police said Saturday. "

So sang the heavy headlines. Then, of course, the death was immediately blamed on insurgents.
The headlines also paint a fair picture of a religious man who had traveled around the world doing what he could to help those in need. Showing by example his convictions. He spent time in the west Bank to help the Palestinians with their cause. He had repeatedly gone to Iraq to help the occupied people there. It seems almost unbelievable that in the face of all this, those people would choose to torture and kill this friend.
Well, if it seems unbelievable, it's probably because it is. He was handcuffed to a chair, beaten, shot execution style then dumped on the outskirts of one of the few reasonably peaceful cities left in Iraq. If recent history has taught us anything, it is that dead Americans left near cities are a bell tolling for that city. 2 months from now remember the name "Dawoudi", I'm certain you will be hearing it quite a bit by then.
Why would the insurgency kill an ally to their cause. Quick answer, they wouldn't. Thus ends the motive part of sermon today, now onto Motif. In music a motif is a pattern or series of repeated progressions making up a song. Look into the patterns here... You will begin to experience what i like to call "duh". Keyword search while you can!


Hellpig said...

immediately blamed on insurgents and Why would the insurgency kill an ally to their cause

Whoa slow down there Rev,It's terrorists,insurgent is a term used by Flamming Libberals who wish to justify the killing of innocent children and women by what they see as freedom fighter or patriots if you will.

Now to enlighten you about your they wouldn't have statement


Tabari IX:69 “Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us.”
Tabari VIII:141 “The battle cry of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah that night was: ‘Kill! Kill! Kill!’”
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet had their men killed, their woman and children taken captive.”
Ishaq:489 “Do the bastards think that we are not their equal in fighting? We are men who think that there is no shame in killing.”
Qur’an 2:191 “And kill them wherever you find and catch them. Drive them out from where they have turned you out; for Al-Fitnah (polytheism, disbelief, oppression) is worse than slaughter.”
Qur’an 33:60 “Truly, if the Hypocrites stir up sedition, if the agitators in the City do not desist, We shall urge you to go against them and set you over them. Then they will not be able to stay as your neighbors for any length of time. They shall have a curse on them. Whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy—a fierce slaughter—murdered, a horrible murdering.”

Hellpig said...

to be Christian,in and of it self cannot be a Islamic ally


Qur’an 5:17 “Verily they are disbelievers and infidels who say, ‘The Messiah, son of Mary, is God.’”
Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.”
Qur’an 5:72 “They are surely infidels who blaspheme and say: ‘God is Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ But the Messiah only said: ‘O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’”
Qur’an 74:31 “We have appointed nineteen angels to be the wardens of the Hell Fire. We made a stumbling-block for those who disbelieve and We have fixed their number as a trial for unbelievers in order that the People of the Book may arrive with certainty, and that no doubts may be left for the People of the Book, those in whose hearts is a disease.”

Reverend X said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Reverend X said...

"Whoa slow down there Rev,It's terrorists,insurgent is a term used by Flamming Libberals who wish to justify the killing of innocent children and women by what they see as freedom fighter or patriots if you will."

No, by definition an
insurgent is:
2 entries found for insurgent.
To select an entry, click on it.

Main Entry: 1in·sur·gent
Pronunciation: -j&nt
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin insurgent-, insurgens, present participle of insurgere to rise up, from in- + surgere to rise -- more at SURGE
1 : a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government; especially : a rebel not recognized as a belligerent
2 : one who acts contrary to the policies and decisions of one's own political party

One entry found for terrorism.

Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
- ter·ror·ist /-&r-ist/ adjective or noun
:one who engages in violence or the threat of violence to coerce a nation or people

One entry found for patriot.

Main Entry: pa·tri·ot
Pronunciation: 'pA-trE-&t, -"├Ąt, chiefly British 'pa-trE-&t
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French patriote compatriot, from Late Latin patriota, from Greek patriOtEs, from patria lineage, from patr-, patEr father
: one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests

I did not make the words up. I use them properly. If you are fighting against a foriegn occupying authority you are an insurgent and a patriot to your country. If you invade, threaten to invade, bomb or threaten to bomb another nation in order to inspire a certain action, you are a terrorist. We can't simply redefine words just because they make us look bad. We must redefine ourselves

Hellpig said...

80% of the Terrorists"insurgent to the flaming lib" are imported from another country so by definition they can't be patriots ! and they also cannot call it foriegn occupation if they too are foriegn

your support for these terrorists is noted,do you ever back the home team or are you just all anti-american,anti-war all the time,was any war in your mind just?when is it OK to go to war?

Would you rather see "insugents" here in the USA,because that's where they would be if we weren't over there for them to insurge

Hellpig said...

so by your own posting of the definitions I am right,thx rev I knew you'd see it my way.

Reverend X said...

Of all captured or killed combatants in Iraq, under 4% were foreign fighters.

Bird said...

Hey Rev,
I'm one of those sick-minded liberals Hellpig so bemoans, yet I am surprisingly in agreement with him here - in part.(See Pig, there's hope yet...well, alright,not really!)

I am not convinced that all "insurgents" in Iraq are Iraqis fighting for their country. There's a lot of factions in the mix - not all insurgents are created equally, so to speak. I am not sure of Hellpig's 80% figure though either, but I believe the situation isn't as black and white as the two of you, in your opposite stances, paint it.

I also suspect that some Iraqis are not exactly pleased with all the actions of the "patriotic insurgents." To a mother, some terms become irrelevant when her child has been blown to bits, or injured by an "insurgent," a "terrorist," or a "patriot." Too many Iraqi innocents are dying at the hands of these folks - doesn't matter what you call them. (Sorry, a bit of a tangent, I know your post wasn't about Iraqi civilians being killed.)

Re: your comment over in my piece of sky about HR24 - I checked it out and am not getting your reference. HR 24 is about film preservation - I scanned it - did I miss some embedded element? Or did I retrieve the wrong HR? (HR 24, 109 Congress?)

Reverend X said...

I agree with you. It is not a good guy bad guy dichotomy. I was only arguing the straight definitions of the words involved. I have gotten sick of "Newspeak" on all sides. 500 years from now archaeologists are going to need a color-coded Rosetta Stone just to translate modern American English. As for the intent of the combatants... I can not make a judgement call. I can only explore the cause and effect relationship. That one puts us in a bad light.

Also just to clarify something from an earlier post. I have watched Bush use this cliche enough to notice his facial expression shift. It would appear to be an inside joke.

"We (the terrorists) fight them (The US Military)over there so we don't have to fight them here."

It's also the only way that statement makes any sense

Hellpig said...

Myths of Iraq
By Ralph Peters

During a recent visit to Baghdad, I saw an enormous failure. On the part of our media. The reality in the streets, day after day, bore little resemblance to the sensational claims of civil war and disaster in the headlines.

No one with first-hand experience of Iraq would claim the country's in rosy condition, but the situation on the ground is considerably more promising than the American public has been led to believe. Lurid exaggerations and instant myths obscure real, if difficult, progress.

I left Baghdad more optimistic than I was before this visit. While cynicism, political bias and the pressure of a 24/7 news cycle accelerate a race to the bottom in reporting, there are good reasons to be soberly hopeful about Iraq's future.

Much could still go wrong. The Arab genius for failure could still spoil everything. We've made grave mistakes. Still, it's difficult to understand how any first-hand observer could declare that Iraq's been irrevocably "lost."

Consider just a few of the inaccuracies served up by the media:

Claims of civil war. In the wake of the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra, a flurry of sectarian attacks inspired wild media claims of a collapse into civil war. It didn't happen. Driving and walking the streets of Baghdad, I found children playing and, in most neighborhoods, business as usual. Iraq can be deadly, but, more often, it's just dreary.

Iraqi disunity. Factional differences are real, but overblown in the reporting. Few Iraqis support calls for religious violence. After the Samarra bombing, only rogue militias and criminals responded to the demagogues' calls for vengeance. Iraqis refused to play along, staging an unrecognized triumph of passive resistance.

Expanding terrorism. On the contrary, foreign terrorists, such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, have lost ground. They've alienated Iraqis of every stripe. Iraqis regard the foreigners as murderers, wreckers and blasphemers, and they want them gone. The Samarra attack may, indeed, have been a tipping point--against the terrorists.

Hatred of the U.S. military. If anything surprised me in the streets of Baghdad, it was the surge in the popularity of U.S. troops among both Shias and Sunnis. In one slum, amid friendly adult waves, children and teenagers cheered a U.S. Army patrol as we passed. Instead of being viewed as occupiers, we're increasingly seen as impartial and well-intentioned.

The appeal of the religious militias. They're viewed as mafias. Iraqis want them disarmed and disbanded. Just ask the average citizen.

The failure of the Iraqi army. Instead, the past month saw a major milestone in the maturation of Iraq's military. During the mini-crisis that followed the Samarra bombing, the Iraqi army put over 100,000 soldiers into the country's streets. They defused budding confrontations and calmed the situation without killing a single civilian. And Iraqis were proud to have their own army protecting them. The Iraqi army's morale soared as a result of its success.

Reconstruction efforts have failed. Just not true. The American goal was never to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure in its entirety. Iraqis have to do that. Meanwhile, slum-dwellers utterly neglected by Saddam Hussein's regime are getting running water and sewage systems for the first time. The Baathist regime left the country in a desolate state while Saddam built palaces. The squalor has to be seen to be believed. But the hopeless now have hope.

The electricity system is worse than before the war. Untrue again. The condition of the electric grid under the old regime was appalling. Yet, despite insurgent attacks, the newly revamped system produced 5,300 megawatts last summer--a full thousand megawatts more than the peak under Saddam Hussein. Shortages continue because demand soared--newly free Iraqis went on a buying spree, filling their homes with air conditioners, appliances and the new national symbol, the satellite dish. Nonetheless, satellite photos taken during the hours of darkness show Baghdad as bright as Damascus.

Plenty of serious problems remain in Iraq, from bloodthirsty terrorism to the unreliability of the police. Iran and Syria indulge in deadly mischief. The infrastructure lags generations behind the country's needs. Corruption is widespread. Tribal culture is pernicious. Women’s rights are threatened. And there's no shortage of trouble-making demagogues.

Nonetheless, the real story of the civil-war-that-wasn't is one of the dog that didn't bark. Iraqis resisted the summons to retributive violence. Mundane life prevailed. After a day and a half of squabbling, the political factions returned to the negotiating table. Iraqis increasingly take responsibility for their own security, easing the burden on U.S. forces. And the people of Iraq want peace, not a reign of terror.

But the foreign media have become a destructive factor, extrapolating daily crises from minor incidents. Part of this is ignorance. Some of it is willful. None of it is helpful.

The dangerous nature of journalism in Iraq has created a new phenomenon, the all-powerful local stringer. Unwilling to stray too far from secure facilities and their bodyguards, reporters rely heavily on Iraqi assistance in gathering news. And Iraqi stringers, some of whom have their own political agendas, long ago figured out that Americans prefer bad news to good news. The Iraqi leg-men earn blood money for unbalanced, often-hysterical claims, while the Journalism 101 rule of seeking confirmation from a second source has been discarded in the pathetic race for headlines.

To enhance their own indispensability, Iraqi stringers exaggerate the danger to Western journalists (which is real enough, but need not paralyze a determined reporter). Dependence on the unverified reports of local hires has become the dirty secret of semi-celebrity journalism in Iraq as Western journalists succumb to a version of Stockholm Syndrome in which they convince themselves that their Iraqi sources and stringers are exceptions to every failing and foible in the Middle East. The mindset resembles the old colonialist conviction that, while other "boys" might lie and steal, our house-boy's a faithful servant.

The result is that we're being told what Iraqi stringers know they can sell and what distant editors crave, not what's actually happening.

While there are and have been any number of courageous, ethical journalists reporting from Iraq, others know little more of the reality of the streets than you do. They report what they are told by others, not what they have seen themselves. The result is a distorted, unfair and disheartening picture of a country struggling to rise above its miserable history.

Ralph Peters is a retired U.S. Army officer and the author of 20 books, including the recent New Glory: Expanding America's Global Supremacy.

Bird said...


(Warning: off topic on your current post)

I checked out HJ24. I can't say I'm really all that alarmed by it. Depends on perspective. I wouldn't have been so upset if Clinton had a third term (and I suspect he would have whupped bush's little butt had the two run against each other). Heck, when Clinton spoke at the last convention, I found myself thinking "Can we please have him again?" At least the man is intelligent and articulate, even if on occassion he thinks with the wrong appendage.

How many terms did FDR serve - four?

At any rate, I doubt, at this point, that anything will come of HJ24. It's just collecting dust.

Now, what I do worry about is the Bush dynasty - when will Jeb run? ACK! GACK! FREPP!

Hellpig said...

Didn't you hear Bird? Dick is running

Reverend X said...

If you look at the current state of voting along with this resolution, it should be alarming. Many dictatorships have elections on a regular basis. Bush will be President for life. This resolution will be stuck into some appropriations bill and we wont find out till it is too late.

I was gonna say "Damn, this guy talks like Baghdad Bob, the former Iraqi Information Minister." Then I realized that a lot of BB's quotes turned out to be true in the long run. This guy is a Neo-con writer. They also said we would be greeted with flowers and the whole affair would only cost $1.7 billion...

Bird said...

HJ24 is a red herring rev.

we are a long way from dictatorship. the pendulum hasn't swung that far and it will swing back shortly anyway (starting to now - just a bit). if you look at our history, we have never truly been the land of the free -it's always been a qualified freedom, and a severely flawed democracy.

i can't possibly imagine what makes me so ... equinanimous (sp) this evening. i think i must have aged quite a bit today and am feeling "wise." this too shall pass.

Hellpig said...

This guy is a Neo-con writer.

Actually he isn't sorry rev he's one of you.