What They're Teaching Saudi Kids

[Mycroft]

No.

At first, I wanted to just post this link:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060523_battlecry_ron_luce

I'm no fan of Battlecry, whatever that is, but the reporter Sunsara Taylor is just as whacked-out as the as the fundamentalists she's reporting on.

"Early on the second day of the Christian evangelical rock concert’s two-day run, a tribal drumbeat filled the stadium and a voice boomed out from the speakers: “The most violent people in human history.”

Which race of people, you’re probably wondering, might fit that bill? The Nazis during World War II? The U.S. slave traders? How about the George Bush White House?”

Wow, the George Bush White House in direct comparison to the Nazis and slave traders.

"In answer to that question, grainy images of indigenous Ecuadoreans running around and throwing spears appeared on the stadium screens. Proof of their “barbarism”? Forget for a moment that their land and way of life were destroyed by oil prospectors; these “savages” had killed five missionaries who came to destroy their belief systems decades ago. One of the supposed killers was brought on stage. He had been “civilized” by the Bible and called on the assembled youths to sign up for missionary trips to convert others in Ecuador."

Granted this preacher is nuts for claiming these indigenous people are “the most violent in history” just for killing 5 missionaries, but the casual way this writer excuses the killing is just as bad. Does prospecting for oil or evangelizing justify murder? No, it doesn’t.

I could go on picking apart the article highlighting her lunacy, but it’s faster and easier to just describe who she is. From the biography section:

”Sunsara Taylor writes for Revolution newspaper and sits on the Advisory Board of The World Can’t Wait—Drive Out the Bush Regime.”

Revolution newspaper, what a surprise! She’s a communist!

Her blog:

http://sunsara.blogspot.com/

Amazing, Bob Avakian, Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA right there on the first page., his books are among her favorites in her biography.

 

[Mycroft]

I mean jeeze, how long are you supposed to be mad about the Crusades?

I also think it's worth pointing out that while the Crusades are portrayed as something Christianity did to Islam, the reality is that they were something that happened between Christianity and Islam. The goal of expansion of territory and influence was just as important to the Muslims as it was to the Christians, and I believe any rational assessment would proclaim Islam the victor. If we believe Muslims have reason to still be angry, we should also agree that Christians should be as well.

 

[Tailgater]

Crossbow, this is precisely what people say about advertising. Ask anyone, and they'll give you a litany of reasons for their consumer choices, but will always remark that they "aren't influenced by advertising."

And they are, to a man, categorically and utterly wrong in this respect.

I think you guys kind of took a turn down the wrong road with this one. I wasn't sure where to start, so i went to the beginning of the arguement. "Advertising" is actually too light of an example for this. The big difference between you going to school and church here and not there is the choices around you. Here, you might have 30 kids in a room that all come from different backgrounds and teachers with all different political and religious ideas to throw around. There, every kid comes from the same type of home with the same set of ideas being handed down to every generation and teachers that don't put forth the idea to think for yourself but what they teach you. And if a teacher started spouting on about freedoms of politics and religion, what do you think would happen?

 

[BPSCG]

I am not changing lines, but please try to keep up with this next bit of data.

The foreign al Qaeda terrorists did not exist in Iraq until AFTER the US invasion of Iraq.

No, they didn't. For the most part, anyway; Saddam had some al Qaeda contacts before the war. But you're right, they were scattered all over the middle east and Africa. But they did exist; al Qaeda did not come into existence because of the Iraq war. All the war did was prompt them to gather in one place (where they're easier to kill).

By the same token, the indigenous Iraqi terrorists did not exist in Iraq until AFTER the US invasion of Iraq.

Yes they did. The difference is that indigenous Iraqi terrorists actually ran the government. Or how else would you describe Saddam and his thugs?

It was the US invasion of Iraq that has created and sustained these events therefore it is the US that is responsible for them.

Again, al Qaeda existed before the invasion; all the invasion did (other than overthrow Saddam and give Iraq at leasgt a fighting chance to become a legitimate democracy) was give al Qaeda a place to go and fight the infidels.

That is indeed the way many of them feel. Much in the same way that many Christians blame Jews of today for the killing of Jesus about 2000 years ago.

Assuming that claim is true - and I'd love to see your evidence of that - do Christians go around slaughtering Jews these days? Does anybody go around slaughtering Jews these days?

Well, yes, there is one group of people that goes about slaughtering Jews. Can you explain what that group's grudge against the Jews might be? I hadn't heard about the great Jewish Crusade...

For those of you who know a bit about history, I apologize for bogging down the thread with details, but some people [BPSCG] are just too lazy to do their own research.

Uh, yeah. Actually, I have some references that will have to wait until I get back home; the facts about the Crusades aren't as cut-and-dried as your wikipedia links suggest.

 

[Crossbow]

Wow, I'm sorry, I underestimated your relevant experience in advertising and marketing.

Well you were the one who asked about my qualifications, and I gave them to you in order to show that I am qualified to make my own purchasing decisions. Again, you originally said something about everyone can be made to buy things based on advertising, and I have to disagree with that sentiment.

You missed the point. Why would anyone buy them? Because they obviously do. Oh, BTW, McD's is doing quite well, with same-store sales up 7% in April. And their market share still hovers in the 42% range, in spite of increasing competition and aggressive territorial expansion. Why? Because they have the strongest brand. They invest in it heavily and it pays dividends.

I guess I did miss the point. I think that I would have bought the McNuggets regardless of the advertising because of their low cost and the fact that they were a new item. However, it does not matter to me how much money McDonalds spends on advertising, or what there market share is, or how many clever ads you write for them, or anything else like that, because they have bad food and as such I seldom buy it (by the way, I know several other people that feel the same way).

Sorry, but you're saying you don't think it's happening doesn't contradict my point that you're not SUPPOSED to think it's happening. Think of it like hypnosis... your behavior can be modified, tweaked and exploited, but not forced to do something it would never do consciously.

And that, in conclusion, is why radical madrasses are a real concern and a real threat. They exploit the prejudices, ignorance and fear found in the ir students' own homes. They don't create it, but they reinforce it.

Again, I think that is fair to say about advertising. Like hypnosis, advertising can be used to modify, tweak, and exploit buying patterns. However, hypnosis can only do so much, it cannot be used to change or create anything about a person that they do not want changed or created, and the same thing applies to advertising.

In order to get people to purchase a product, or in this case, accept a religious dogma, then those people have to actually want the product or they have to actually want, or they have to want to embrace the dogma being offered. Desires such as these are something that has to come from within the person: do you agree with that?

If so, then I would say that were are talking about the same thing.

 

[Tailgater]

And yes, we have loonies here too. But we have all kinds of loonies, not just one kind.

Any know how many non-sadam supporters were killed prewar?

 

[Crossbow]

I'm assuming you were typing the above before you saw this little gem of Crossbow's:Otherwise, you'd have probably had a few more choice names for him.

Yeah, I saw that. But unfortunately I don't think I do have quite the word to describe him - simple profanities can convey my emotional response, but they don't adequately capture his dishonesty. Crossbow has a bit of a language problem. Apparently, a terrorist in Iraq can blow themselves up and kill innocent bystanders, but that counts as Americans killing both the terrorist and the bystanders. Similarly, in Crossbowland, you can get fired with out actually, you know, getting fired. When you get to redefine the meaning of words (like "kill" and "fire") arbitrarily, you can make all sorts of crazy claims.

Well in my defense, I was working on a rather lengthily reply that was geared toward people who have little to no military experience that would show the different ways that a military officer can be "booted out of the door" without their superiors actually having to go on record and say that this officer is indeed being "booted out of the door". However, my life is rather busy most of the time and I have not finished this reply yet as I did not think that it was worth the effort.

To explain, I get the impression that neither 'BPSCG' or 'Ziggurat' was in the military, and while I do not hold such a thing against anyone, it can make it difficult to explain via these text messages how the military actually handles personnel issues which is rather special since military life is so much different than civilian life.

Further, judging by what 'BPSCG' and 'Ziggurat' have said in this thread and other threads where I have dealt with them, shows me that they are rather dense individuals who revert to the pattern of insults and silly questions when provided with data and facts.

But regardless of my personal impressions of 'BPSCG' and 'Ziggurat', I will post the response they seek just a soon as I can and hopefully it will stop their collective whining about this lack of information

 

[BPSCG]

Further, judging by what 'BPSCG' and 'Ziggurat' have said in this thread and other threads where I have dealt with them, shows me that they are rather dense individuals who revert to the pattern of insults and silly questions when provided with data and facts.

 

[Ziggurat]

To explain, I get the impression that neither 'BPSCG' or 'Ziggurat' was in the military, and while I do not hold such a thing against anyone, it can make it difficult to explain via these text messages how the military actually handles personnel issues which is rather special since military life is so much different than civilian life.

You want to claim he was sidelined for his comments? Fine. That's entirely possible. You want say he was treated badly or unfairly? Go ahead, there's probably a case to be made. You want to argue that his treatment had the effect of intimidating others within the military from speaking out? Hey, that's totally possible. But he was simply NOT fired. There's no subtlety about that, it's not a nuance, it's quite a plain issue. "Fired" is where you're relieved of your duties, your position, and your salary. Whatever else the military can do to your employment status, none of them can qualify as firing unless you lose all three of those things. Shinseki lost NONE of those. So when you continue to say he was fired, even after those facts have been pointed out to you and even though those facts remain undisputed, you're lying. It really is that simple.

And you call ME dense? Sorry, but you've got to do better than defer to some hypothetical unwritten post if you want anyone to swallow this bull.

 

[Jocko]

To explain, I get the impression that neither 'BPSCG' or 'Ziggurat' was in the military, and while I do not hold such a thing against anyone, it can make it difficult to explain via these text messages how the military actually handles personnel issues which is rather special since military life is so much different than civilian life.

Well, you've never worked in advertising or marketing, yet feel comfortable telling a veteran like me how they work WRT your lifestyle. I don't hold that against you; but it makes it difficult to explain what goes on behind the curtain.

 

[Crossbow]

How about an idiot? Let's try that one on for size.

You know, it's actually quite easy to get me to stop calling you names. All it takes is refraining from posting information that has already been discredited, ESPECIALLY after you've been called on it.



Wrong again. The UNDP figures are TOTAL excess deaths, from ALL sources. It includes Iraqi military and security forces (both those killed during the initial invasion and in subsequent fighting against terrorists), as well as terrorist deaths. I specifically said so. Are you so stupid that you couldn't figure that out, or do you think we're so stupid we wouldn't notice you were lying about my claims?



Well, the UNDP numbers and Bush's statement weren't given at the same time - I think Bush's statement came more than a year later, and it only represents an approximation anyways, so I don't know why you think it represents any kind of discrepency.



The media analysis is a different can of worms. Whatever its advantages or problems, it's a radically different way of measuring deaths. In fact, it's not actually even measuring the same thing - both the Lancet and the UNDP measure EXCESS deaths, the number of deaths (due to ANY cause) which can be attributed to a mortality level above prewar level. These media reports only report violent deaths, but they also have no method by which they can subtract a pre-war background level from the figures. You can prefer whichever metric you like, but they're simply NOT measuring the same thing.

The Lancet study, however, was EXACTLY the same kind of study as the UNDP study, with the exception that the UNDP study was more than 20 times as large, and didn't skip any provinces. Therefore the UNDP study is in ALL respects preferable to the Lancet study. If you think the media analysis is better than the UNDP study, fine, go ahead, but to continue to rely on a sampling study that has been superceded by MUCH more extensive and reliable results using the SAME methodology is simply inexcusable.



Oh, pardon me. I guess if you pick the right position, actually getting the facts right doesn't really matter. Sorry, but getting the facts right DOES matter, regardless of what position you want to take. But you seem perpetually uninterested in doing that.

Yeah, I think "idiot" works for today.

The term idiot works pretty good for you too!

Bush gave the figure of 30,000 about five months ago.
The data you use comes from from about a year before that.
Therefore your data is 17 months out of date.

Yet you state today "getting the facts right DOES matter, regardless of what position you want to take". That is great sentiment and it sure is a shame that it is wasted on idiot like yourself.

 

[Ziggurat]

The term idiot works pretty good for you too!

Bush gave the figure of 30,000 about five months ago.
The data you use comes from from about a year before that.
Therefore your data is 17 months out of date.

Yet you state today "getting the facts right DOES matter, regardless of what position you want to take". That is great sentiment and it sure is a shame that it is wasted on idiot like yourself.

Did I ever CLAIM that those data were the most up-to-date? Did I ever CLAIM that they represented a total as of today? No, I did not - I rather explicitly said it was old. So what, exactly, are you complaining about? The fact that I use a number which isn't current? Sorry, but there is no equivalent study which covers a time period up until today, so I make due with what's available, and try to take that into account. You, though, prefer to use the highest number you can get your hands on, regardless of its accuracy or reliability. Who do you think you're impressing with that pathetic line of argument?

 

[Crossbow]

Well, you've never worked in advertising or marketing, yet feel comfortable telling a veteran like me how they work WRT your lifestyle. I don't hold that against you; but it makes it difficult to explain what goes on behind the curtain.

Excuse me, but I really do not think that you follow what I am saying!

On the one hand you state things like everyone is controlled by advertising.
Sorry, but that is just not true and I do not have to be an advertising expert to know that.

Other times you state that people are influenced by advertising.
Yes, that is quite true and I do not have to be an advertising expert to know that either.

Just like you do not have to be an engineer to know how lever works.
Just like you do not have to be a woodworker to sharpen a pencil.
And so forth and so on.

Back to the case at hand, there can be very big difference between control and influence. Example: one can influence the results of an election by their vote, however that one vote is not going to control the results of that election.

Is that clear now?

 

[Crossbow]

Did I ever CLAIM that those data were the most up-to-date? Did I ever CLAIM that they represented a total as of today? No, I did not - I rather explicitly said it was old. So what, exactly, are you complaining about? The fact that I use a number which isn't current? Sorry, but there is no equivalent study which covers a time period up until today, so I make due with what's available, and try to take that into account. You, though, prefer to use the highest number you can get your hands on, regardless of its accuracy or reliability. Who do you think you're impressing with that pathetic line of argument?

Dear Stupid:

True enough, you never claimed that your data was up to date.

In fact, you failed to give any information on your data at all until I called you on it. In fact, you still have not adequately provided any background information for the data you presented.

I, on the other hand, provided THREE different pieces of data and links to the data in question so that anyone would be able to see for themselves.

I do not know what the actual number of people killed in Iraq is as a result of the US invasion of Iraq and probably no one will ever know it. However, it is fair to say that it will at least be in the tens of thousands so if you can you might want to consider that fact while you fret about what is being taught at school in Saudi Arabia.

 

[Ziggurat]

Excuse me, but I really do not think that you follow what I am saying!

No, Crossbow. I think he understood you. You just didn't understand him (more below).

Just like you do not have to be an engineer to know how lever works.
Just like you do not have to be a woodworker to sharpen a pencil.
And so forth and so on.

Well, yes. That was rather his point. He copied the form of the argument you had made about military knowledge, substituting in the equivalents regarding advertising. You correctly point out that one doesn't need to be an expert in a field to know basic information about it. But that was, in fact, exactly his point. It just went over your head, because you missed the obvious parallel he was setting up.

 

[Jocko]

Excuse me, but I really do not think that you follow what I am saying!

On the one hand you state things like everyone is controlled by advertising.
Sorry, but that is just not true and I do not have to be an advertising expert to know that.

Other times you state that people are influenced by advertising.
Yes, that is quite true and I do not have to be an advertising expert to know that either.

Just like you do not have to be an engineer to know how lever works.
Just like you do not have to be a woodworker to sharpen a pencil.
And so forth and so on.

Sorry Crossbow, I hate to beat the same dead horse but you say the same thing everyone does WRT advertising. You don't know what you don't know. You're not SUPPOSED to know what you don't know. Odds are, you probably wouldn't care about what you don't know.

That said, Zig is right about a poke at the "don't comment if you haven't been there" POV.

Back to the case at hand, there can be very big difference between control and influence. Example: one can influence the results of an election by their vote, however that one vote is not going to control the results of that election.

Sure, it's the difference between molding one consumer's choice and an entire segment of consumers choices. At the micro level (i.e., you) it makes no difference. You're still part of the equation and operate within it, no matter how much you choose to believe or not believe in it.

Is that clear now?

Perfectly; it always was. If it makes you feel any better, I'm part of that machinery and not even I am immune to its effects... in spite of my well-attuned sense of consumer cynicism.

 

[Ziggurat]

In fact, you failed to give any information on your data at all until I called you on it. In fact, you still have not adequately provided any background information for the data you presented.

"Called on it?" You never even asked about it. Here, let me show you what you could have done:

"Ziggurat, can you please link to the UNDP survey results?"

Easy, simple, straightforward, unambiguous. You didn't do that, and now you're pissed that I couldn't read your mind and figure out what you wanted? Well, I appologize. Here you go:
http://www.iq.undp.org/ILCS/overview.htm
Knock yourself out.

 

[luchog]

I mean jeeze, how long are you supposed to be mad about the Crusades? My great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents on my dad's side were enslaved by Egyptians. But you know what? I'm over it, and so is my sister.

Well, I'm not! I demand that the Pharoahs pay reparations for the enslavement and maltreatment of my far distant ancestors. Now!

But I'm not greedy, I'll settle for a plate of really good baklava, a few cases of pommegranates, and a couple really hot Egyptian women (they gotta be in those dancer costumes, like in those paintings inside the pyramids).

 

[Elind]

I mean jeeze, how long are you supposed to be mad about the Crusades? My great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents on my dad's side were enslaved by Egyptians. But you know what? I'm over it, and so is my sister.

And yet millions went to see that snuff movie (I hear, I haven't seen it) called the Passion and came away blaming you know who. That was how many years before the Crusades? When one reveres events 2000 or 1400 years ago, anything after is as good as yesterday.

 

[Elind]

Peace, love, and tolerance.

Read that in our local paper today. Really though, what can one expect?

This is a theocracy based on those teachings. The parents, the grandparents, the teachers, the judges, the preachers; all grew up with that education and what's more it's written so by the hand of God. Think we, even as atheists, would not have Christmas holidays if the ACLU said it should be banned?

Little by little it may change, after we here are long gone, maybe not.