The long-cherished ambition of Saudi Arabia’s ruling Wahhabi sect to smash up the ancient buildings of Mecca and Medina is nearing fruition.

But what sticks in the craw is the hypocrisy of Muslims who throw a fit if Israeli archaeologists carry out non-intrusive work underneath the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, “Islam’s third holiest place”, as we’re constantly reminded. Such anger would be more convincing if the first and second holy sites weren’t being ploughed up by a police state. Likewise, are cartoons of Mohammed really more offensive than reducing the remains of his life to rubble?

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

Why the silence from the Muslim world?

I'm not sure why you're asking the question; the answer is in the immediate next paragraph of the paragraph you quoted.

"As one Middle East expert put it to me: “Jews disturbing the Dome of the Rock fits into an anti-Western narrative, so Muslims can cope with that. The Saudi destruction of Mecca doesn’t fit into that narrative, and so there’s virtual silence.” Something worth bearing in mind, perhaps, when you wonder why the murder of Muslims by Muslims in Darfur or Syria provokes only limited outrage in the Islamic world."

What is it that you really want to talk about?

not to mention that anyone who complains will be visited by the saudi national guard and religious police, probably not to be seen from again.

Suicide bomb kills 50 today in Syria.

Approx. 30,000 killed so far in this conflict.

Some estimates suggest as many as a million have fled and are refugees.

Any humanitarian flotillas yet?

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

Suicide bomb kills 50 today in Syria.

Approx. 30,000 killed so far in this conflict.

Some estimates suggest as many as a million have fled and are refugees.

Any humanitarian flotillas yet?

The suicide bombing jihadis are part of the "humanitarian" activists. Just as they were in Libya. I wouldn't hold my breath for humanitarian flotillas. Tomahawk missiles on the other hand? They were an essential tool of Obama/Clinton and the west in empowering Sunni maniacs in Libya. We'll see if they are used in Syria to herald equivalent ethnic cleansing in Bab Touma and Midan to that which they gifted the people of Tawergha and Baghdad.

God bless America!

Allahu Akbar!

Happy Motoring!®

Well, one has to have posh hotels to house the faithful, when they make their haj.

Originally Posted by rcposter

The suicide bombing jihadis are part of the "humanitarian" activists. Just as they were in Libya. I wouldn't hold my breath for humanitarian flotillas. Tomahawk missiles on the other hand? They were an essential tool of Obama/Clinton and the west in empowering Sunni maniacs in Libya. We'll see if they are used in Syria to herald equivalent ethnic cleansing in Bab Touma and Midan to that which they gifted the people of Tawergha and Baghdad.

God bless America!

Allahu Akbar!

Happy Motoring!®

Your post seems to suggest that you have some knowledge and incite to the issues.

You seem to condemn the West for any support they may be providing to the rebels, but you also are silent about the Assad regime.

How would you solve Syria's problems?

Also, perhaps you can shed some of your incite on the question of this thread, regarding the relative silence from the Muslim world regarding Muslim on Muslim injustice, relative to (real and perceived) injustices by the West upon the Muslim world.

Shalom.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

Your post seems to suggest that you have some knowledge and incite to the issues.

You seem to condemn the West for any support they may be providing to the rebels, but you also are silent about the Assad regime.

How would you solve Syria's problems?

Also, perhaps you can shed some of your incite on the question of this thread, regarding the relative silence from the Muslim world regarding Muslim on Muslim injustice, relative to (real and perceived) injustices by the West upon the Muslim world.

Shalom.

As nearly all facets of the "Arab Spring", I supported the early protests in Syria (the Libyan affair being the only one I found troubling from the beginning). They were populated by a cross section of Syrian society. Then the jihadis got involved. Now, many of those early protestors are dead or running for their lives from the rebels. But frankly, I become most interested in these conflicts when my country and my tax $ comes into play, as it adds an element of personal responsibility.

As to the OP, I find the destruction of cultural heritage sites abhorrent, but I know nothing about the specifics of the OP. Wouldn't surprise me that our Wahhabist Saudi allies (like the Wahhabists who destroyed the statues at Bamiyan) would do so.

Solve Syria's problems? Stop adding to them, for starters. We "solved" Afghanistan's problems by creating al-Qaeda. We solved Iraq's problems by first killing 500,000 children in the '90s, then went in with our military to level the country and turn it into the most segregated sectarian hell hole on the planet. We bombed Libya in the service of jihadis who then ethically cleansed entire cities of black Africans. I assure you, my recognizing the grand accomplishments of my own country, for which I carry a measure of personal responsibility, is no endorsement nor condemnation of the activities of others. I don't say we should unequivocally "mind our own business," but we should at least mind our own business.

Paix

Originally Posted by rcposter

As to the OP, I find the destruction of cultural heritage sites abhorrent, but I know nothing about the specifics of the OP. Wouldn't surprise me that our Wahhabist Saudi allies (like the Wahhabists who destroyed the statues at Bamiyan) would do so.

Solve Syria's problems? Stop adding to them, for starters. We "solved" Afghanistan's problems by creating al-Qaeda. We solved Iraq's problems by first killing 500,000 children in the '90s, then went in with our military to level the country and turn it into the most segregated sectarian hell hole on the planet. We bombed Libya in the service of jihadis who then ethically cleansed entire cities of black Africans. I assure you, my recognizing the grand accomplishments of my own country, for which I carry a measure of personal responsibility, is no endorsement nor condemnation of the activities of others. I don't say we should unequivocally "mind our own business," but we should at least mind our own business.

Paix

The OP is not so much about the heritage sites so much as it is about the relatively quiet Muslim protest.

As far as your plan goes, you'd make a great politician. You sound great, said a lot, and provided no answer.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

The OP is not so much about the heritage sites so much as it is about the relatively quiet Muslim protest.

As far as your plan goes, you'd make a great politician. You sound great, said a lot, and provided no answer.

Arrogant politicians tend to have all the answers. Like I said in my previous post, I don't have all the answers (which is why I can't add substantive comments regarding the lack of outrage by others. I don't know the extent of what is or is not being razed by the Saudis). I do know that my country's "answers" which I enumerated earlier have provided no solutions and have wrecked havoc on tens of millions of people.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

Something worth bearing in mind, perhaps, when you wonder why the murder of Muslims by Muslims in Darfur or Syria provokes only limited outrage in the Islamic world."

It's like black-on-black violence you read about in the papers here in the USA..... "Oh well, as long as they're killing each other".

It's only when "Whitey" kills one do they make a fuss about it.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

Any humanitarian flotillas yet?

Is there oil there ?.

Originally Posted by rcposter

We'll see if they are used in Syria to herald equivalent ethnic cleansing in Bab Touma

It's NOT a Touma !.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

I'm not sure why you're asking the question; the answer is in the immediate next paragraph of the paragraph you quoted.

"As one Middle East expert put it to me: “Jews disturbing the Dome of the Rock fits into an anti-Western narrative, so Muslims can cope with that. The Saudi destruction of Mecca doesn’t fit into that narrative, and so there’s virtual silence.” Something worth bearing in mind, perhaps, when you wonder why the murder of Muslims by Muslims in Darfur or Syria provokes only limited outrage in the Islamic world."

What is it that you really want to talk about?

There is no hypocrisy, unless we are also to call ourselves hypocrites. Christians killing Christians in Northern Ireland for example, also only provoked limited outrage in the western world. Churches are demolished all the time, and nobody bats an eyelid. But when Muslims blow up churches or kill westerners, the outrage is on a different scale altogether.

The article says Muslim politicians are afraid to speak out against the Wahhabis because of their connections with terrorists. But that doesn't seem to apply to the ones in Iran, where Wahhabism is banned. Iranian media constantly criticises Wahhabis. For example:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09...ahhabis-siege/

The common denominator is that the Wahhabis are US allies, and no Muslim politician would speak out against a US ally unless they wanted to be treated like Iran.

Here's some more condemnation of Wahhabi terrorism.

The Center for Islamic Pluralism condemns unconditionally the murder of U.S. ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service officer Sean Smith, and two more Americans in an assault by fundamentalist Wahhabis on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, during the night of September 11-12, 2012.

The terrorist attack on the Benghazi consulate coincided with a reckless demonstration against the U.S. Embassy in Cairo organized by the so-called so-called Hizb Ul-Nur or "Party of Light" and Hizb Ul-Asalah or "Party of Authenticity," two Egyptian Wahhabi parties.

http://www.islamicpluralism.org/2101...ities-in-libya

Dusty

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

The common denominator is that the Wahhabis are US allies, and no Muslim politician would speak out against a US ally unless they wanted to be treated like Iran.

Dusty

I get it now; like so much else, you're suggesting it's the fault of the USA.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

I get it now...

So you don't dispute anything I said?

Dusty

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

So you don't dispute anything I said?

Dusty

Just because I may dispute, it doesn't mean I intend to argue.

Acknowledging what you say doesn't mean I agree with you.

The purpose of discussion in the case of a dispute is to try to solve that dispute. Considering you dismiss much of what I say, it is my opinion that it is generally impossible to find sufficient common ground for us to agree on anything substantial, therefore, I choose to acknowledge what you believe.