Maher And Rushdie On Real Time

My apologies: It's hard to format a reproduction of blog comments.  Anyway, here's a comment by "Bung" from a Salon article on Maher's "Real Time" program with Salman Rushdie:

"My own concern is primarily the terror and violence carried out by my own state, for two reasons. For one thing, because it happens to be the larger component of international violence. But also for a much more important reason than that; namely, I can do something about it.

"So even if the U.S. was responsible for 2 percent of the violence in the world instead of the majority of it, it would be that 2 percent I would be primarily responsible for. And that is a simple ethical judgment. That is, the ethical value of one's actions depends on their anticipated and predictable consequences. It is very easy to denounce the atrocities of someone else. That has about as much ethical value as denouncing atrocities that took place in the 18th century."
Noam Chomsky

Which prompted this, from "Basho":

I couldn't agree more.  Excellent quote.

And this, also from "Basho":

Here's an idea:  If you want to know why Islamic terrorists do terrorism, why not just ask them.   Well, it's been done - thousands of times.  And what is their universal and consistent answer?  It's Abu Graib.  It's Guantanamo Bay.  [Might I add: It's Fallujah. It's drone strikes killing innocents in Pakistan and Yemen. It's the plight of the Palestinians.] They don't say it's because the prophet said, "Kill the infidel."

Just think about the videos of ISIS beheadings.  Remember the victims wearing orange jumpsuits - just like the ones tortured prisoners at Guantanamo wear?  

And how does ISIS recruit new fighters.  Do they read passages from the Quran?  No. They show pictures of Abu Graib and Guantanamo as well as pictures of innocent Muslims killed by drones.  We are dealing with blowback, not rotten apples from a bad orchard.

We all thought GW Bush was stupid when he said they kill us because they hate our freedom.  Isn't it also stupid for Bill Maher to say they kill us because their religion teaches they should.

This prompted a reply by "carlos gonzales figueroa":

Ok Why the children murdered in Pakistan by the taliban are responsible for Guantanamo?, Why the girls kidnaped by Boko Haram are responsible for Abu Graib? What you have to understand is that is violence is due to the teaching of the Quran and the Hadith, and even more bizarre, the main victims of this madness are Muslims that are considered hypocrites by the fundamentalists,

To which "Basho" replied:

My post is based on empirical fact.  Yours is based on a vulgar prejudice and a vile theory you and Bill Maher pulled out of your butts.  The Quran clearly states that violence is justifiable only in cases of self defense.  Read history:  Islam has had centuries-long peaceful co-existences with non-Muslims.  Also, there is nothing in the Quran to justify what Boko Haram has done.  It is simply a coincidence that they are Muslims.

About the Taliban:  I don't like them, but quite frankly, the people of Afghanistan would be better off under the Taliban than under our so-called "liberation" - just as the people of Iraq would have been better off under Saddam than under the mess we have created.  And we are far from innocent.  We murder innocent women and children by having someone in Virginia sit at a computer and push a button.  Our secular government kills from a distance; they kill up close.  Both ways are reprehensible.  And it was we who invaded their territory, not the reverse.  Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

You condemn fundamentalists and so do I. I would add that the New Atheists who post on Salon are - as a group - fundamentalists and purveyors of irrational  hate.    

Pablogonzales15 chipped in:
"God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the Towers, but after the situation became unbearable—and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon—I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed—when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. Sixth Fleet. As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way: to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women."
— Osama bin Laden, 2004
7 July 2005 London bombings
--------------------------
Your democratically-elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people all over the world. And your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters. Until we feel security you will be our targets and until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people we will not stop this fight. We are at war and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation.
                                  Mohammad Sidique Khan
Pakistan was attacked because under international pressure ( people who are far away and safe from taliban retaliation pakistan will face) they took on the taliban  guys jumping the afgan pakistan border. ( not there mess ) which po the taliban off and they started to attack pakistan civilans and military

This brought a reply from "akasidney":

Sure, that works.  And to stay in the same vein Maher uses in his quote of Cheney, I guess you'd argue that to find out the real reason we invaded Iraq would be to ask them... Cheney and Bush and Rummy and all the neo-cons "Why did you invade Iraq" and take their answer at face value.  See where I'm going with this?  And how silly your argument is?

To which "Basho" replied:

Poor analogy.  A better one would be asking ordinary Americans why they support attacks against Muslim countries.  They would say it is because of 9/11.  Both sides defend their homeland, their culture, their neighbors and friends.

I'm not naive enough to take Cheney, Bush, and Rumsfeld at face value.  I will concede that Bush called the invasion of Iraq a crusade and one of our generals boasted that our God is bigger than theirs - but in a way that proves my point.  Flaunting religion and claiming God is on your side is never the real reason for attacks.  It's just a technique to win over hearts and minds.

It seems to me "Basho" has some good points.