July 6, 2010
Octavia Nasr Explains Herself
And she responded exactly as I expected she would:
My tweet was short: "Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah.. One of Hezbollah's giants I respect a lot. #Lebanon"
Reaction to my tweet was immediate, overwhelming and a provides a good lesson on why 140 characters should not be used to comment on controversial or sensitive issues, especially those dealing with the Middle East.
It was an error of judgment for me to write such a simplistic comment and I'm sorry because it conveyed that I supported Fadlallah's life's work. That's not the case at all.
Here's what I should have conveyed more fully:
I used the words "respect" and "sad" because to me as a Middle Eastern woman, Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman's rights. He called for the abolition of the tribal system of "honor killing." He called the practice primitive and non-productive. He warned Muslim men that abuse of women was against Islam.
You can read the rest here if you're interested.
Posted by Michael J. Totten at July 6, 2010 10:14 PM
Comments
I'd appreciate those more knowledgeable helping my western perspective understand the following:
"Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman's rights."
"As I was ushered in, I was told that he would not look at me in the eye"
Posted by: Paul S. at July 6, 2010 11:11 pm
"Fadlallah took a contrarian and pioneering stand among Shia clerics on woman's rights."
"As I was ushered in, I was told that he would not look at me in the eye"
Again, as a westerner, calling honor killing "non-productive" seems like a strange euphemism.
Posted by: Paul S. at July 6, 2010 11:39 pm
The more the Internet allows me to understand about the rest of the world the farther away it seems.
Posted by: Paul S. at July 6, 2010 11:47 pm
I find it hard to forgive his blessing of the bombers of the US and French one day in Beirut.
Posted by: crosspatch at July 6, 2010 11:50 pm
crosspatch,
Short of denouncing it---by action as well as words--- this American has no forgiveness.
Posted by: Paul S. at July 7, 2010 12:08 am
Short of denouncing it---by action as well as words--- this American has no forgiveness.
Paul: The more the Internet allows me to understand about the rest of the world the farther away it seems.
Yes, well, he's a cleric. My wife has been around the Middle East with me and has never met a man who wouldn't look her in the eye. It's not even remotely normal behavior--especially for Lebanon--which is why Nasr had to be warned.
Funny that he behaved that way while championing women's rights, though, isn't it?
Needless to say, I'm not a fan of the man for all the obvious reasons.
Beirut might surprise you. It's a Mediterranean city and looks and feels far more Western than anywhere else in the region aside from Tel Aviv.
Take a look at this.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 7, 2010 3:00 am
Yes, well, he's a cleric. My wife has been around the Middle East with me and has never met a man who wouldn't look her in the eye. It's not even remotely normal behavior--especially for Lebanon--which is why Nasr had to be warned.
Funny that he behaved that way while championing women's rights, though, isn't it?
Needless to say, I'm not a fan of the man for all the obvious reasons.
Beirut might surprise you. It's a Mediterranean city and looks and feels far more Western than anywhere else in the region aside from Tel Aviv.
Take a look at this.
This is like saying you have 'respect' for a certain Soviet commissar in 1950 because he is not as bad as Stalin. Nasr, by now probably a US citizen, is saddened by the death of someone who hated the United States. In a less confused age, this would be totally unacceptable.
Posted by: Joe at July 7, 2010 3:15 am
I dont think she's explained herself at all.
Particularly as she seems to respect Fadlallah because he urged the Lebanese to stop killing each other and to kill Israeli's instead.
Being limited to 140 characters actually seems to have revealed the truth about this journalists views...
What sort of a name is Fadlallah anyway? Say it out loud quickly... Is someone having us on?!
Posted by: Cranky at July 7, 2010 4:22 am
Particularly as she seems to respect Fadlallah because he urged the Lebanese to stop killing each other and to kill Israeli's instead.
Being limited to 140 characters actually seems to have revealed the truth about this journalists views...
What sort of a name is Fadlallah anyway? Say it out loud quickly... Is someone having us on?!
"Being limited to 140 characters actually seems to have revealed the truth about this journalists views..."
The danger of tweeting is that it is designed to mimic the quick back and forth of close conversations. 140 characters lulls one into first impression responses when you really need to think more about what you write.
However, Nasr, as a journalist, should be better at this than most.
Posted by: Davod at July 7, 2010 5:08 am
The danger of tweeting is that it is designed to mimic the quick back and forth of close conversations. 140 characters lulls one into first impression responses when you really need to think more about what you write.
However, Nasr, as a journalist, should be better at this than most.
Who cares about her mealy-mouthed rationalization? Castro is in favor of women's rights too. A CNN producer- and by extension the Western social democratic establishment- support an Islamic terrorist.
Posted by: Thrasymachus at July 7, 2010 8:28 am
Hey Cranky, he is not American. Do you think everyone in the world should have names like Smith and Jones?
Posted by: Joe at July 7, 2010 9:26 am
She was talking about her views as a an arab woman and the liberating views on women's issues that Fadlallah favored. The truth is that he disagreed with Hizbullah on ideology but not on the principle of resistance against Israel and the west. In other words,he was very careful to walk that fine line between advocating social and cultural change in his religious community that did not necessarily agree with Hizballah, but he did so while openly supporting the anti-western position espoused by Iran and by proxy Hizb.
Posted by: Mason at July 7, 2010 9:43 am
"What sort of a name is Fadlallah anyway? Say it out loud quickly... Is someone having us on?!" Please apologize for this remark.
Her explanation was much like I expected.
MJT, my biggest beef with Sayyed Fadlallah was his irrational conspiracy theories. He is the only grand Ayatollah to so openly and frequently espouse them except for maybe Khamenei.
Fadlallah argued that there was an alliance between Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, Baa3thists, Jews, Mossad, Saudi Arabia, and Westerners. He argued that the Iraqi resistance was in cahoots with America. This perspective became widely believed among Iraqis 2003-2007, and was by far the single biggest cause of anti Americanism among the Iraqi public. Hell, an Iraqi American friend of mine heard Iraqi British and Iraqi American friends and family angrily denounce America for backing the resistance. These were anti resistance people of Iraqi descent living in the West!
The reason for the falling out between Muqtada Al Sadr and Bremmer related to Sadr's newspapers and magazines publishing articles describing how America was helping the resistance mass murder Iraqi Army, Iraqi Police, religious pilgrims, and Iraqi civilians. When Sadr's media outlets refused to stop publishing these stories, Bremmer ordered the newspapers shut down and the editors arrested. This confirmed the conspiracies in the mind of Sayyed Muqtada al Sadr Atari [never all that bright], and caused him to put down his video game machine long enough to start attacking coalition forces. Fortunately, when Sayyed Muqtada got his Wii machine it proved more seductive, hence the reduction in violence. OK. This is mostly in jest. Bud sadly not entirely in jest.
Fadlallah also argued that there was an alliance between the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, Mossad, Jews, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the West. Presumably to mass murder Afghans, Shiites, Sufis, Ahmedis, Iranians, and to steal something from some muslim people. [Please don't ask me what was being stolen and from whom, haven't figured that part out yet.]
Several people who I respect have described the widely held perception among Afghans that ISAF backs the Taliban as the single largest or one of the largest Information Operation challenges ISAF confronts today.
Sayyed Fadlullah was also a founding member of the 9/11 truther movement. [BTW, the truther movement remains very popular in the muslim world.]
One reason it was so hard to fight these conspiracy theories is because someone as respected and admired by the global Shia ummah as Sayyed Fadlullah was espousing them. Even smart rational Russians and Indians have been partially infected by them.
Sometimes Russians and Indians question whether NATO really is against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. They wonder if they should help NATO if NATO isn't seriously committed to fighting the Taliban [which both Russia and India see as a far greater threat to themselves than NATO publics believe.] One question smart Russians and Indians ask is if defeating the Taliban and AQ was such an important priority, why is so little being done to train the ANSF [whose members hate the Taliban]? Why is NATO refusing to accept Indian and Russian help to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban? Why isn't NATO reaching out to the Taliban's mortal enemy Iran? Iranians are lying schmucks sure, but not worse jerks than Pakistanis [from Russia's and India's perspective.] Russia and India have reached out to Pakistan, difficult though that is for them, and even offered substantial assistance to Pakistan. Shouldn't NATO reach out to Iran as well? Quid pro Quo?
It isn't an easy argument to counter. And it was made all the more difficult by Fadlallah's incessant conspiracy mongering. [Saw an article about an Indian Shiite leader angrily denouncing Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and then angrily denouncing America for backing Al Qeada and the Taliban. This is in largely pro American free democratic India.]
Posted by: anan at July 7, 2010 10:28 am
Her explanation was much like I expected.
MJT, my biggest beef with Sayyed Fadlallah was his irrational conspiracy theories. He is the only grand Ayatollah to so openly and frequently espouse them except for maybe Khamenei.
Fadlallah argued that there was an alliance between Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, Baa3thists, Jews, Mossad, Saudi Arabia, and Westerners. He argued that the Iraqi resistance was in cahoots with America. This perspective became widely believed among Iraqis 2003-2007, and was by far the single biggest cause of anti Americanism among the Iraqi public. Hell, an Iraqi American friend of mine heard Iraqi British and Iraqi American friends and family angrily denounce America for backing the resistance. These were anti resistance people of Iraqi descent living in the West!
The reason for the falling out between Muqtada Al Sadr and Bremmer related to Sadr's newspapers and magazines publishing articles describing how America was helping the resistance mass murder Iraqi Army, Iraqi Police, religious pilgrims, and Iraqi civilians. When Sadr's media outlets refused to stop publishing these stories, Bremmer ordered the newspapers shut down and the editors arrested. This confirmed the conspiracies in the mind of Sayyed Muqtada al Sadr Atari [never all that bright], and caused him to put down his video game machine long enough to start attacking coalition forces. Fortunately, when Sayyed Muqtada got his Wii machine it proved more seductive, hence the reduction in violence. OK. This is mostly in jest. Bud sadly not entirely in jest.
Fadlallah also argued that there was an alliance between the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, Mossad, Jews, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the West. Presumably to mass murder Afghans, Shiites, Sufis, Ahmedis, Iranians, and to steal something from some muslim people. [Please don't ask me what was being stolen and from whom, haven't figured that part out yet.]
Several people who I respect have described the widely held perception among Afghans that ISAF backs the Taliban as the single largest or one of the largest Information Operation challenges ISAF confronts today.
Sayyed Fadlullah was also a founding member of the 9/11 truther movement. [BTW, the truther movement remains very popular in the muslim world.]
One reason it was so hard to fight these conspiracy theories is because someone as respected and admired by the global Shia ummah as Sayyed Fadlullah was espousing them. Even smart rational Russians and Indians have been partially infected by them.
Sometimes Russians and Indians question whether NATO really is against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. They wonder if they should help NATO if NATO isn't seriously committed to fighting the Taliban [which both Russia and India see as a far greater threat to themselves than NATO publics believe.] One question smart Russians and Indians ask is if defeating the Taliban and AQ was such an important priority, why is so little being done to train the ANSF [whose members hate the Taliban]? Why is NATO refusing to accept Indian and Russian help to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban? Why isn't NATO reaching out to the Taliban's mortal enemy Iran? Iranians are lying schmucks sure, but not worse jerks than Pakistanis [from Russia's and India's perspective.] Russia and India have reached out to Pakistan, difficult though that is for them, and even offered substantial assistance to Pakistan. Shouldn't NATO reach out to Iran as well? Quid pro Quo?
It isn't an easy argument to counter. And it was made all the more difficult by Fadlallah's incessant conspiracy mongering. [Saw an article about an Indian Shiite leader angrily denouncing Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and then angrily denouncing America for backing Al Qeada and the Taliban. This is in largely pro American free democratic India.]
MJT, what are your thoughts how Sayyed Fadlallah's passing, may his soul rest in peace, be utilized to suppress conspiracy theories and to further isolate Khamanei?
Posted by: anan at July 7, 2010 10:37 am
Anan: my biggest beef with Sayyed Fadlallah was his irrational conspiracy theories
This is why you get into so much trouble around here. I have a few friends who believe in conspiracy theories, but I don't have any friends who support suicide bombings. One of those things is a hell of a lot worse than the other.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 7, 2010 10:41 am
This is why you get into so much trouble around here. I have a few friends who believe in conspiracy theories, but I don't have any friends who support suicide bombings. One of those things is a hell of a lot worse than the other.
Jesus taught to love and respect thy enemy. This is also the teaching of all the other major religions I know. I interpret this to mean that we resist our enemy with all our strength. But when the enemy passes on, we show respect to the dead. Everyone in this world has some good in them. We can respect and admire the good in our enemies while disagreeing with the bad in them, and while fighting with them.
Did you notice the respect with which Gen Petraeus treated Sayyed Muqtada? He ordered that Muqtada be called with the honorific "Sayyed." This respect earned Gen Petraeus the respect of many Iraqis and helped defang Sayyed Muqtada.
The two actions Sayyed Fadlallah committed that caused the most harm were:
1) conspiracy theories
2) denying the holocaust
Sayyed Fadlallah's crazy conspiracy theories caused exponentially more damage to Israel, NATO, 200 million global Shiites, and muslim world, and the non muslim world more generally, than anything else he did. It disrupted cooperation and collaboration to solve the global commons, including defeating the greatest security threat the world confronts today, the Takfiri extremists.
Much of Sayyed Falalah's other wacko activity flowed from him believing his own crazy conspiracy theories. He believed that the Jews, Mossad and NATO were backing Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and Taliban linked networks, and Baa3thists. Therefore all the atrocities that OBL/AQ/Taliban/Baa3thists committed were also partly committed by the Jews, Mossad and NATO. Since these negative forces had mass murdered possibly close to a million muslims, Falalah and his followers were furious at the Jews and the West.
Falalah supported violent attacks against the IDF and NATO militaries. Did he also support violent attacks against Israeli civilians? I don't know. If Falalah did support violent attacks against civilians, that would significantly worsen my opinion of him.
Posted by: anan at July 7, 2010 12:28 pm
Did you notice the respect with which Gen Petraeus treated Sayyed Muqtada? He ordered that Muqtada be called with the honorific "Sayyed." This respect earned Gen Petraeus the respect of many Iraqis and helped defang Sayyed Muqtada.
The two actions Sayyed Fadlallah committed that caused the most harm were:
1) conspiracy theories
2) denying the holocaust
Sayyed Fadlallah's crazy conspiracy theories caused exponentially more damage to Israel, NATO, 200 million global Shiites, and muslim world, and the non muslim world more generally, than anything else he did. It disrupted cooperation and collaboration to solve the global commons, including defeating the greatest security threat the world confronts today, the Takfiri extremists.
Much of Sayyed Falalah's other wacko activity flowed from him believing his own crazy conspiracy theories. He believed that the Jews, Mossad and NATO were backing Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and Taliban linked networks, and Baa3thists. Therefore all the atrocities that OBL/AQ/Taliban/Baa3thists committed were also partly committed by the Jews, Mossad and NATO. Since these negative forces had mass murdered possibly close to a million muslims, Falalah and his followers were furious at the Jews and the West.
Falalah supported violent attacks against the IDF and NATO militaries. Did he also support violent attacks against Israeli civilians? I don't know. If Falalah did support violent attacks against civilians, that would significantly worsen my opinion of him.
MJT, the large majority of Shiite and Sufi anger against America and Europe probably flows from the perception that America and Europe backs Takfiri extremists, including Arab [especially Saudi] extremists and Pakistani extremists against them. This is also the greatest single cause of tension between Europe/America and Russia/India. For that matter, many Israelis have long been very uncomfortable with America's close relationship with what they see as Arab and Pakistani extremists. Israel was not pleased by America giving so many weapons to Pakistan and the Afghan Mujahadin in the 1980s. Israel approached India to propose a joint strike to take out Pakistan's nuclear program in the 1980s. There is also uneasiness among Israelis regarding US military grants to Egypt and Jordan, and US military exports to the Gulf States.
In part, this shared perception about America and Europe is a significant reason why Israel and India formed their alliance. It is also a major reason Israel is arguably Russia's closest ally on security issues. Both Russians and Indians trust Israelis more than they trust Americans or Europeans.
There is also uneasiness about Arab and Pakistani extremists among Malaysians, Indonesians and Turks.
I am not saying that this uneasiness is justified. 9/11 has changed a lot of thing.
Posted by: anan at July 7, 2010 12:42 pm
In part, this shared perception about America and Europe is a significant reason why Israel and India formed their alliance. It is also a major reason Israel is arguably Russia's closest ally on security issues. Both Russians and Indians trust Israelis more than they trust Americans or Europeans.
There is also uneasiness about Arab and Pakistani extremists among Malaysians, Indonesians and Turks.
I am not saying that this uneasiness is justified. 9/11 has changed a lot of thing.
anan: Israel was not pleased by America giving so many weapons to Pakistan and the Afghan Mujahadin in the 1980s.
That's not true. Israel actually supplied weapons to the Afghan mujahideen through the United States.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 7, 2010 1:30 pm
That's not true. Israel actually supplied weapons to the Afghan mujahideen through the United States.
MJT, aware of that. Israel was being a loyal ally and worked with the Egyptians, Saudis and other Arab League countries to supply the Mujahadeen. For that matter, Israel might even have worked with the Iranians to assist the Mujahadeen, even though I am unaware of evidence regarding this.
This said, I am pretty sure Israel was uncomfortable with the US supplying cutting edge technology, including F-16s, to Pakistan. If you find Israelis who tell you otherwise, I would be curious to know.
I would also be curious to find out if Israel was uncomfortable with some of the extremist Takfiri groups [for example Osama Bin Laden's group] getting weapons shipments [versus anti Takfiri Afghans such as Ahmed Shah Mashood.]
I think letting the ISI decide which Afghan Mujahadeen got what type of international assistance strikes me as a major error, especially in the late 1980s when Gorbachev was trying to achieve a negotiated national unity government between the Mujahadeen and Najibullah.
The ISI concentrated weapons into the hands of their own clients, often Takfiri extremists.
Posted by: anan at July 7, 2010 2:36 pm
This said, I am pretty sure Israel was uncomfortable with the US supplying cutting edge technology, including F-16s, to Pakistan. If you find Israelis who tell you otherwise, I would be curious to know.
I would also be curious to find out if Israel was uncomfortable with some of the extremist Takfiri groups [for example Osama Bin Laden's group] getting weapons shipments [versus anti Takfiri Afghans such as Ahmed Shah Mashood.]
I think letting the ISI decide which Afghan Mujahadeen got what type of international assistance strikes me as a major error, especially in the late 1980s when Gorbachev was trying to achieve a negotiated national unity government between the Mujahadeen and Najibullah.
The ISI concentrated weapons into the hands of their own clients, often Takfiri extremists.
"Funny that he behaved that way while championing women's rights, though, isn't it?"
Michael,
Never having been to Lebanon, I don't know what any nuances of eye contact might be there. Your having described Beirut as a cosmopolitan environment is one reason why the juxtaposition of those two statements caught my attention. If someone proclaims themself a champion of my rights and won't make eye contact with me I'm suspicious, and wondering, exactly which rights ARE you and I on the same page about?
Posted by: Paul S. at July 7, 2010 4:15 pm
Michael,
Never having been to Lebanon, I don't know what any nuances of eye contact might be there. Your having described Beirut as a cosmopolitan environment is one reason why the juxtaposition of those two statements caught my attention. If someone proclaims themself a champion of my rights and won't make eye contact with me I'm suspicious, and wondering, exactly which rights ARE you and I on the same page about?
Paul: Never having been to Lebanon, I don't know what any nuances of eye contact might be there.
None, really. Fadlallah is (was) an ayatollah and an extreme individual, and it would be a mistake to assume anything about regular people from his behavior.
Catholic priests aren't supposed to get married, but pretty much everyone else does. So the fact that they can't get married doesn't tell you anything about American behavior or culture.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 7, 2010 4:38 pm
None, really. Fadlallah is (was) an ayatollah and an extreme individual, and it would be a mistake to assume anything about regular people from his behavior.
Catholic priests aren't supposed to get married, but pretty much everyone else does. So the fact that they can't get married doesn't tell you anything about American behavior or culture.
Thanks for the context, Michael.
Posted by: Paul S. at July 7, 2010 4:55 pm
Well that didn't take long. CNN fires Octavia Nasr.
http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/cnn-editor-fired-saying-she-has-respect-hezbollah-cleric
Posted by: Joe at July 7, 2010 6:07 pm
http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/cnn-editor-fired-saying-she-has-respect-hezbollah-cleric
Maybe Ovtavia Nasr and Helen Thomas should marry one another
Posted by: Herb at July 7, 2010 7:15 pm
Jesus taught to love and respect thy enemy. This is also the teaching of all the other major religions I know.
Unless of course that enemy is Dick Cheney, George Bush, Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson, Zionists, evangelicals, Republicans, Rush Limbaugh, etc., you get the picture.
But to jihadis we apply "Jesus." Thanks for the memo.
Posted by: Carlos at July 7, 2010 8:22 pm
Unless of course that enemy is Dick Cheney, George Bush, Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson, Zionists, evangelicals, Republicans, Rush Limbaugh, etc., you get the picture.
But to jihadis we apply "Jesus." Thanks for the memo.
Carlos, European and I am ashamed to admit even American hard academic leftists are probably the most pretentious, racist, arrogant and condescending people on earth. To cite just one example, they are probably more anti Jewish than even most extremist muslims.
However, Carlos, don't even you crack jokes at Sarah Palin's expense? I mean, I know it is wrong morally. But she makes it so easy. :-) She has made many statements that seem to be from an SNL set.
Nasr's firing makes me very uneasy. Almost everyone, except for the occasional Buddha and Jesus, is a mixture of good and bad. Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah was no exception. He did a lot of good and a lot of bad.
Fadlallah praised President Obama and in doing so helped the global Shiite world rally behind Obama when Obama supported the Iranian green movement.
Iraq's Dawa party described Fadlallah as their spiritual leader and inspiration. This is the same Dawa party that ruled Iraq 2006-2010. Fadlallah remained loyal to the Iraqi resistance throughout its noble resistance against the evil Saddam, and supported the Iraqi Government, Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police 2003-2010. Fadlallah described the Iraqi government and legitimate and correctly criticized the Iraqi resistance for attacking it.
The efforts of muslim leaders like Fadlallah helped rally the global muslim Ummah behind the Iraqi government and ISF, and against the Iraqi resistance.
Doesn't this deserve at least a mention? [All the mistakes Fadlallah made are also part of his legacy and should also be mentioned.]
A serious question here in case anyone knows. Did Sayyed Fadlallah ever support violent attacks against civilians? If so, did he backtrack on this later in life? [I know he favored war against the IDF and therefore was guilty of favoring military aggression.]
Posted by: anan at July 7, 2010 9:20 pm
However, Carlos, don't even you crack jokes at Sarah Palin's expense? I mean, I know it is wrong morally. But she makes it so easy. :-) She has made many statements that seem to be from an SNL set.
Nasr's firing makes me very uneasy. Almost everyone, except for the occasional Buddha and Jesus, is a mixture of good and bad. Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah was no exception. He did a lot of good and a lot of bad.
Fadlallah praised President Obama and in doing so helped the global Shiite world rally behind Obama when Obama supported the Iranian green movement.
Iraq's Dawa party described Fadlallah as their spiritual leader and inspiration. This is the same Dawa party that ruled Iraq 2006-2010. Fadlallah remained loyal to the Iraqi resistance throughout its noble resistance against the evil Saddam, and supported the Iraqi Government, Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police 2003-2010. Fadlallah described the Iraqi government and legitimate and correctly criticized the Iraqi resistance for attacking it.
The efforts of muslim leaders like Fadlallah helped rally the global muslim Ummah behind the Iraqi government and ISF, and against the Iraqi resistance.
Doesn't this deserve at least a mention? [All the mistakes Fadlallah made are also part of his legacy and should also be mentioned.]
A serious question here in case anyone knows. Did Sayyed Fadlallah ever support violent attacks against civilians? If so, did he backtrack on this later in life? [I know he favored war against the IDF and therefore was guilty of favoring military aggression.]
First Helen Thomas, now Octavia Nasr. Is CNN trying to change?
Posted by: leo at July 7, 2010 9:38 pm
Anan: Did Sayyed Fadlallah ever support violent attacks against civilians?
Yes.
If so, did he backtrack on this later in life?
No.
Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 7, 2010 10:20 pm
Yes.
If so, did he backtrack on this later in life?
No.
"To cite just one example, they are probably more anti Jewish than even most extremist muslims"
But not nearly as anti-Jewish as you, you bloodthirsty annihilationist savage.
Posted by: Gary Rosen at July 7, 2010 11:56 pm
But not nearly as anti-Jewish as you, you bloodthirsty annihilationist savage.
"Anan: Did Sayyed Fadlallah ever support violent attacks against civilians?
Yes.
If so, did he backtrack on this later in life?
No."
Just replace "Sayyad Fadlallah" with "anand".
Posted by: Gary Rosen at July 7, 2010 11:57 pm
Yes.
If so, did he backtrack on this later in life?
No."
Just replace "Sayyad Fadlallah" with "anand".
"when Obama supported the Iranian green movement"
When did Obama support the Iranian green movement?
Is that the same Obama who acknowledged Ahmadinejad's "win" in the "elections"?
There appears to be this mythical second Obama who does everything right. He improved US relations with the allies and apparently supported the Iranian opposition. Who is that guy?
Posted by: Andrew Brehm at July 8, 2010 2:45 am
When did Obama support the Iranian green movement?
Is that the same Obama who acknowledged Ahmadinejad's "win" in the "elections"?
There appears to be this mythical second Obama who does everything right. He improved US relations with the allies and apparently supported the Iranian opposition. Who is that guy?
MJT - Anan: my biggest beef with Sayyed Fadlallah was his irrational conspiracy theories
This is why you get into so much trouble around here. I have a few friends who believe in conspiracy theories, but I don't have any friends who support suicide bombings. One of those things is a hell of a lot worse than the other.
BOOT IT NOW
=====
anan: I would also be curious to find out if Israel was uncomfortable with some of the extremist Takfiri groups [for example Osama Bin Laden's group] getting weapons shipments [versus anti Takfiri Afghans such as Ahmed Shah Mashood.]
....It is also a major reason Israel is arguably Russia's closest ally on security issues. Both Russians and Indians trust Israelis more than they trust Americans or Europeans. ....
CREEPY, JEW-OBSESSED ASSHOLE: GET OFF IT
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at July 8, 2010 3:12 am
This is why you get into so much trouble around here. I have a few friends who believe in conspiracy theories, but I don't have any friends who support suicide bombings. One of those things is a hell of a lot worse than the other.
BOOT IT NOW
=====
anan: I would also be curious to find out if Israel was uncomfortable with some of the extremist Takfiri groups [for example Osama Bin Laden's group] getting weapons shipments [versus anti Takfiri Afghans such as Ahmed Shah Mashood.]
....It is also a major reason Israel is arguably Russia's closest ally on security issues. Both Russians and Indians trust Israelis more than they trust Americans or Europeans. ....
CREEPY, JEW-OBSESSED ASSHOLE: GET OFF IT
Iraqi PM Nouri Il Maliki comes to Beirut to offer condolences on Fadlallah's passing. Can't we get him fired too?
Posted by: Joe at July 8, 2010 4:38 am
"Iraqi PM Nouri Il Maliki comes to Beirut to offer condolences on Fadlallah's passing. Can't we get him fired too?
Posted by: Joe at July 8, 2010 4:38 am"
PM Maliki is an actual ally and friend of America. His Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police lost 15 thousand dead fighting shoulder to shoulder alongside American GIs. I wonder, why would an American say something negative about PM Maliki?
Posted by: anan at July 8, 2010 7:11 am
Posted by: Joe at July 8, 2010 4:38 am"
PM Maliki is an actual ally and friend of America. His Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police lost 15 thousand dead fighting shoulder to shoulder alongside American GIs. I wonder, why would an American say something negative about PM Maliki?
PM Bibi on Larry King yesterday, indicated his support for the Iraq mission. I take this to mean that he implicitly supports the GoI and the GoI's leadership.
Posted by: anan at July 8, 2010 8:24 am
Anan -
Osama bin Laden's group did not receive any weapons shipments directly from any Western sources, nor would he have accepted them if they had been given. Certainly he would not have accepted any Israeli offers, of any kind.
See Steve Coll - Ghost Wars.
ISI was the 1980's go-between because none of the Western nations had any contacts or people in place that could do the job.
See Robert Baer - See No Evil
Pakistan created the Taliban from whole cloth, long after the West and the Russians had gone from the scene. Again...
See Steve Coll - Ghost Wars.
=
Positive, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Israel does not give any more of crap about Pakistani F-16's then it does about Pakistani Mirage's or F-7's. The Pakistani air force is afraid to fly any of them at night or outside of their own country.
Treaty notwithstanding, Egyptian F-16's and M-1 Abrams are a more pressing issue. As are Saudi F-15's and now Turkish F-16's.
=
You clearly do not understand that to attack Israel, as you have been doing non-stop for as long as I've been reading your on-line drivel, is to attack Jews who support Israel and its responsibility to exist.
Maliki is not a friend of Israel and only barely an ally of the US. Israel neither needs nor wants "friends" like you.
Anti-Zionist is anti-Israel is anti-Semitic.
DEAL
WITH
IT,
R
Posted by: Render at July 9, 2010 5:18 am
Osama bin Laden's group did not receive any weapons shipments directly from any Western sources, nor would he have accepted them if they had been given. Certainly he would not have accepted any Israeli offers, of any kind.
See Steve Coll - Ghost Wars.
ISI was the 1980's go-between because none of the Western nations had any contacts or people in place that could do the job.
See Robert Baer - See No Evil
Pakistan created the Taliban from whole cloth, long after the West and the Russians had gone from the scene. Again...
See Steve Coll - Ghost Wars.
=
Positive, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Israel does not give any more of crap about Pakistani F-16's then it does about Pakistani Mirage's or F-7's. The Pakistani air force is afraid to fly any of them at night or outside of their own country.
Treaty notwithstanding, Egyptian F-16's and M-1 Abrams are a more pressing issue. As are Saudi F-15's and now Turkish F-16's.
=
You clearly do not understand that to attack Israel, as you have been doing non-stop for as long as I've been reading your on-line drivel, is to attack Jews who support Israel and its responsibility to exist.
Maliki is not a friend of Israel and only barely an ally of the US. Israel neither needs nor wants "friends" like you.
Anti-Zionist is anti-Israel is anti-Semitic.
DEAL
WITH
IT,
R
Render: Maliki is not a friend of Israel and only barely an ally of the US. Israel neither needs nor wants "friends" like you.
Every once in a while I read how Iraqi politicians turn into dueling Israel-bashers, each trying to establish street cred by being more hostile to Israel than the next guy. It won't be long after the Americans leave that antisemitic populism trumps any sane voices and Iraq drives itself down into the toilet again.
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at July 9, 2010 6:29 am
Every once in a while I read how Iraqi politicians turn into dueling Israel-bashers, each trying to establish street cred by being more hostile to Israel than the next guy. It won't be long after the Americans leave that antisemitic populism trumps any sane voices and Iraq drives itself down into the toilet again.
Render: Maliki is not a friend of Israel and only barely an ally of the US. Israel neither needs nor wants "friends" like you.
I'm not convinced anan even knows what a Jew is, given his recent mantra that Jews are Arabs. If he doesn't want to know from the source, you'd think he'd pay attention to his Hamas and Hezbollah friends. They'll tell him how Arab the Jews are.
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at July 9, 2010 6:33 am
I'm not convinced anan even knows what a Jew is, given his recent mantra that Jews are Arabs. If he doesn't want to know from the source, you'd think he'd pay attention to his Hamas and Hezbollah friends. They'll tell him how Arab the Jews are.
Good Grief, anan!
Please be terse, pithy.
Repeat aloud to yourself....
"...I must be terse, pithy".
Posted by: Hrothgar at July 10, 2010 3:06 pm
Please be terse, pithy.
Repeat aloud to yourself....
"...I must be terse, pithy".
Post a comment
