I'd deplore either of those eventualities but if enacted by an elected
government... I mean, you either believe in the system or you don't.
Dana
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:54:17 -0400
Subject: Re: It's for the oil
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I think bin Laden is offended by Saudi ties to the US, which he sees
>as morally corrupt.
>
>Of course the Saudis are interested in internal stabilty, as are most
>regimes. They do face an internal challenge from the Muslim version of
>the religious right.
Absolutely, every government wants internal stability. The current
fight in the Muslim world is a fight between the extremists and the
reformers for control of those governments. Thomas Friedman wrote an
editorial in the NYT about this very subject several months ago. His
basic argument is that we are witnessing an age is Islam akin to the
Reformation in Christianity. I would add that the modern twist
includes 24 hour news cycles, instant worldwide media coverage, and
WMD. The vast majority of people that have died in all of these
political/religious/jihad battles have been Muslims, mostly as a
result of Muslim-on-Muslim violence.
I would draw a distinction in the U.S. between legitimate, though very
right-wing, groups like the Christian Coalition, and domestic terror
organizations like the one Eric Rudolph (aka the Olympic Park and
abortion clinic bomber) belonged to. I am perfectly ok with people
pursuing their own agenda through the political process, even
something that I disagree with like overturning Roe v. Wade or passing
a constitutional amendment banning gay
marriage.________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
