Anger Management

@Boscobear
couldn't agree more. Include Iran and Pakistan, too. This is the real shame of all the fundamentalist Muslim world, not only the Arabs'. That's why we ought to support the moderate and secular ones, the silent minority (or majority, who knows) that is now caught in the crossfire of this fake west / muslim confrontation. This is the big real terrorism of the muslims, not the bombings here and there...is there any extremist movement, political, religious, nationalistic that has not used bombings as means of terror?

For real change to come to any male dominated Arab country the women have to size power. Once that happens real change will happen. Our diplomats need to meet with the few Arab women's groups and insist that Arab governments put an end to stoning of women, honor killings, sexual mutilaton young girls, etc., etc.

Alguneid, it is thinking like that that shall perpetuate the violence forever. The writer has a great point. Resistence has to stand for something that the other side does not wish to fight. A principle. Israel is split between the religious types that believe God gave them the land no matter what, and the secular individuals who believe in democracy and freedom. The Palestinians have the same split. Passive resistence like Dr. King makes Israel confront who they are and who they want to be. Bombings and rockets justifies the failure to do so and just prolongs the resolution. This is why the extremes of the Israelis and the Palestinians get most worked up the closer the possibility of peace, and why Rabin was assassinated. Arafat did not do a deal in Oslo for the same reason. His own people would have killed him.

Palastinians are under occupation. Occupation should be resisted. all free people should support resistance.
It is as simple as that.

Funny how people seem to forget that the so called civil rights movement was a major blow to freedom in America, specifically private property rights. Of course fascists and marxists think different.

SK,arabs have segregation by skin colour,just thought i would mention that.

bmd, there are lies, damn lies, and web posts. Any visit to the UNDP website will show that Arabs are an impoverished people. the overwhelming majority of them are colored or blacks. They are still waiting for the West to treat them as human beings instead of some backyard where they can invade and kill them at will and then write the mass murder off as collateral damage in the war on terror. Sudan, Somalia, Mauritanian for example are Black Arab countries. The rest are colored people. That's 300 million black and colored Arabs who live under US protected and sponsored dictators. I doubt any of them can afford to have slaves let alone find a decent job. If you visit HRW and Amnesty websites you will find the US to be a leading country on women sex slavery with Israel at top ten. So you gave up black slavery and replaced it with women sex slavery. And guess which Arab countries act as your traffickers: the oil-rich dictators in the tiny Gulf countries who barely make up 5% of the Arab population. They are protected by the West because they are a great source of energy and jobs and they do your dirty work, and these sex slaves entertain White workers in the gulf. Let's not even talk about White men who fund the child sex slavery in Asia.

many Arabs are black.Sudan and Somal and most of Egypt are blacks. 90% of Arabs are improviwsrihed oppressed colored people.

When did you become a expert on this. The whites did start showing respect to the black WHEN they started questioning the original premise that blacks were not the same as "us" The abolition of slavery in England (William Wilberforce) and the active engagement of the British naval forces helped put an end to that. You should be lionizing William Wilberforce. Case in point , you still have slavery in black Africa. All you have to do is Google images of slaves in Zanzibar, and see who is the slaveholder

Maybe the Arabs should start respecting blacks as equals, then we can make some headway.

An Al Queda leader today called for an attack on England in retaliation for what happened in Gaza. Are these people retarded? Most likely some zealot will blow himself up on the tube an end up killing one or many of the actual 50,000 people who were protesting outside of the Israeli Embassy. What animals! Dogs are more intelligent then these crazy b*stards

The fact remains every so called non-violent movement and leader had armed resistance backing its objectives:

- Martin Luther King: The Grey Panthers, Nation of Islam, and Malcolm X and other Black resistance groups we fighting for their freedom and because of that the US decided it???s better to turn MLK into the spokesperson for Black people since he was easier to deal with. History was rewritten to give the impression it was MLK who fought and won Black rights. Truth be said, it???s the race riots which crippled America that forced civil rights reforms.

- Nelson Mandela: Sure Nelson Mandela advocated non-violence, but that was after the African National Congress fought vicious battles with the White regime. And only after the sanctions started to cripple white South Africa and after the Whites' decision to end apartheid that Nelson Mandela called for end of violence.

- Dali Lama: the claim that the Tibetans and the Dali Lama are non violent is the most hilarious joke of the 20th century. When the Chinese invaded Tibet, the Tibetans fought them tooth and nail with guns and rifles and spears and whatever weapons they had at their disposal.

- Gandhi: The British don???t like to admit that Hindu and Muslim rebels battered their forces with guerrilla attacks. And that the British Empire was so broken after WWII that it could not handle another bloody engagement in India. The collapse of the British Empire was similar to the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Both were broke and broken and both knew they cannot afford more wars or they will suffer complete collapse. So the UK built up the Gandhi myth to give itself a face saving exit from India.

Fact is no people ever won their freedom without a fight or without the collapse of their enemies due to other factors such as complete economic collapse or devastating military defeat like the Ottomans and the Nazis.

So it???s about time we accept that without sanctions, resistance, or economic collapse no people will win their freedom. Imagine if the founding fathers of the USA decided to go non-violent. And look at what happened to Native Americans who allied themselves with Whites. The same fate as all native Americans. Fact is sometimes resistance against a far more powerful adversary is the most rational and logical decision, when the alternatives are as bad as non-resistance. At least there is a slim chance if you are willing to pay a high price. Ask the Vietnamese and Algerians and Iraqis, all were willing to give up everything in return for their liberation. All suffered million+ casualties. All three ended up changing the regimes and the political landscape of countries that have oppressed them. The Iraqis can take the honor of making it possible for the US to elect its first Black president.
If you wish to give advice on the virtues of non-violence, give it to those who invade and occupy and oppress.

The two very BIG differences between what MLK faced in the US is that firstly;the Arabs leaders have been controlled by the west and secondly; the Arabs and in particular the Palestinians are facing the Zionist Israel who are trigger happy while the Palestinians have only stones and pebbles to match.

What should they learn? That after nearly three centuries, a black man with a white mom has become president? Cool....

West Bank & Gaza were "taken" by Israel in 1967? Surrounding Arab states attacked Israel in 1967. I believe if true facts of history were discussed, there might be a better understanding of some of the reasons for what is going on in the Middle East today.

Batil, you think the U.S. and Israel are the most violent people in the world? Yeah, and Saddam was a muffin. He killed millions. No Arabs marched against him. Nasar was a cupcake. Hamas kills Fatah. Fatah kills Hamas. Hezballah has killed more Lebanese muslims and christians than Israel ever killed. Sunnis blow up Shia, Shia blow up everybody. Anybody marching to end the killing here? I thought there was a fatwa or something against a Muslim killing a Muslim. I must be wrong.

I really hope the Arab world keeps thinking just like you. Hezbollah and Hamas need to have more and more "victories" like the ones they just had. The rocket fire and suicide bombers killing Israeli children just makes Israel's use of force more legitimate. Yes, more martyrs for Islam! In every other religion a martyr is one that dies for his beliefs. Islam is the only one who not only wants to die, but wants to kill. So please, keep telling all your friends, no to non-violence. And, with Allah's will, all your children will have the honor of becoming martyrs! You and the mothers of the children will be so proud to watch them die.

It is amazing how the two most violent people in the world, i.e., the Americans and the Jews are always preaching to their victimes the joy of non-violent resistence. In Falluja, when people peacefully demonstrated against the siezure of thier school by the US forces they were machinegunned the the Americans, killing 18. Next day several more killed. On the third day they thew a grende at the Americans, killing one occupier. MLK and Ghandhi were effective becuase their oppressors were afraid of Communism, a very violent alternative. The British dinn't want India to go Communist, and the US didn't wan tht Blacks to become Communist. If Irqi and Afghan resistance had not bogged down the Americans they were going to attack atleast 9 more Muslim countries.

Civil disobedience worked for Martin Luther King, Jr., because White Southerners were not the all powerful rulers of the country. It was the consciences of White Northerners that the checked Southern tyranny and led to the triumph of the civil rights movement. Who will play the same role of White Northerners in the Middle East?

Looking at the discussion taking place here in the US on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I am struck by the antagonistic and absolutist tones displayed by extremists on both sides of the issue. And this is among Americans with no direct personal stake in the outcome. One can only guess at how obstinate and passionate the actual players on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides must be! I know Obama means well, and I wish him much luck in his quest to bring a peaceful solution to the Middle East. But I don't see much reason to hope for anything except a perpetual continuation of the current situation due to the inability of both sides to do anything except point figners and refuse to acknowledge the legitimate concerns of the other side. My suggestion to Obama: get us out of the Middle East, period. If the Israelis and Arabs want to kill each other, why should it affect us here in America any more than the millions of Cambodians, Rwandans, Darfurians, etc. who have perished and continue to perish in other tragic conflicts? We are paying rather steep strategic costs for our involvment in the Middle East, and I do not see any strategic benefits that would justify these costs. Perhaps we can better re-direct the American blood, treasure, and effort from there to addressing other national interests that affect Americans more directly. The economy, clean sustainable energy, health care, social security, the national debt, infrastructure, immigration reform, education, are all issues that are screaming for attention and resources, and which have a much more direct effect on the actual lives of Americans.

A message of peaceful resistance in the arab world will fall on deaf ears and barren ground.The age of jahiliyah continues,even Mohammed could not end it.