god damn that pisses me off.

Maybe all the aid flooding in from the U.S. will plant a seed in the creep's mind. Get him thinking about the whole Judeo-Christian Western returning good for evil thing....

we should donate a fuckin A-bomb

If they actually valued human life, tragedies like this would not occur.

i wonder how much foreign aid Osama will donate to Indonesia?

The tragedies would still occur, but the people in charge would actually give a flying fornication about the people at the mercy of the earth's power. I still think that all our aid is going to change some minds over there, maybe not dramatically, but to some measurable extent.

There is a kind way of assisting our fellow-creatures which is enough to break their hearts while it saves their outer envelope.
-- Joseph Conrad, _Chance_, 1913

Aceh is a strict conservative Islamic provence of Indonesia. Putting our women soldiers or aid workers in scarfs if the local government requests it is not a big deal. It is a gesture of respect for local customs. At the height of our power, in postwar Japan, US soldiers took off their shoes when invited into a Japanese home and were instructed to give polite half-bows if a member of the Royal Family went by. That was our way back then - friendly humility and respect - and it won us lots of friends.

These days, American travellers try getting into distinguished Eurpean restaurants wearing blue jeans, and whine about having to take their ballcaps off if going into a church....under a meme, it seems, that we are Americans, dammit, and if we want to flout local customs, we will.

Indonesia is a new democratic nation, the most populous Islamic country - trying to make a moderate path for Islam and fighting a radical element there trying to keep the old Islamic ways. The US has a great opportunity to make friends . The last thing we would want to do is get in an arrogant pissing contest over the right of American women to wear whatever they want anywhere in the world, or the right of our men to pop a beer in a Mosque if they feel like it, or the "right" to tell the locals that their homeland is shit compared to ours.

Cedarford-

Hold up a second. Nobody's talking about how our troops have the right to wipe their asses with pages from the Koran. There's an order of magnitude of difference between giving a half-bow to royalty or taking your shoes off when you enter a home and being forced to wear a constricting headscarf in tropical weather. Our female soldiers are not second-class citizens, and it's not right to treat them as such to appease some backwater bearded monkey. If they're going to demand that we degrade our soldiers in order to help them, let 'em suffer and die and give the money and aid to somebody else who is equally deserving and not nearly as sexist.

First of all, Cedarford, I'm not awful sure that the "Islamic Defenders Front" is the legitimate government of Aceh. Even if it is, I wouldn't be very inclined to listen to what they have to say. A quick Google search turns up some very interesting stuff about the Islamic Defenders Front. The BBC article includes this telling tidbit:

One such person was Saleh Mahmud Nasution, a member of the youth wing of the Islamic Defenders Front (IDF), a hardline group which used to send gangs to smash up bars selling alcohol, but more recently encouraged volunteers to go to fight a jihad against American forces in Iraq.

But, more importantly, this isn't about local customs. I'm all in favor of respecting the local culture, and you cite great examples of that in your first two paragraphs. But ultimately, this is about power.

I bet that a lot of people in that part of the world depend on their various governments for survival, or more likely, ideology. But now, a big disaster hits, and the government is powerless to respond. Instead, the biggest response comes from none other than the "Great Satan."

The United States of America is allowing these people to survive. That is causing hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of people to rethink their hatred of the U.S., and rethink the loyalty to their governments.

Yes, I may be hopelessly optimistic, and yes, I don't think well at Midnight (PST), but I guarantee that something like this is going through those terrorists' heads over there. Dress code is not the important thing to them: establishing power over the rescuers is.

You know, there's one other thing that rankles about Cedarford's comment. He writes:

The last thing we would want to do is get in an arrogant pissing contest over the right of American women to wear whatever they want anywhere in the world, or the right of our men to pop a beer in a Mosque if they feel like it, or the "right" to tell the locals that their homeland is shit compared to ours.

Look, the men and women we're sending over there to help with disaster relief efforts are professionals. It's not like our women in uniform are going to be stripping down to bikinis and making googly come-hither eyes at disaster victims, no matter what creed those victims follow. And furthermore, nobody is claiming that our men have the "right to pop a beer in a Mosque if they fell like it." Now that I think about it, the flippant tone you've taken there suggests that maybe you're the last person who ought to be lecturing our troops about respect. And hey, while I'd bet the Marines we're sending to the region are among the most patriotic of Americans, I sincerely doubt they'll be telling a bunch of tsunami victims what a comparative shithole their country is. Maybe I'm just naive about these things.

The fact of the matter is that we don't have to offer help, but we're going to. I suspect that the majority of the victims will welcome our aid, having lost what little they had, including friends and family. Are there going to be some people who are going to manufacture sleights and greivances like this Nasution guy? Sadly, there are. But you know what? He can take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.

On the plus side, way to keep Jews and tax cuts out of your rant. That was refreshing.

And by the way, ace, the headscarf is the hijab, not habib. As far as I can tell, habib is an arabic term of affection, like "dear."

Gotta love a government that can't supply aid to it's own people while the one that can is half a world away. Let Cedarford work in the hot sun with a scarf on his head.

Just to start some shit here, but I recall a dress code for getting into any of the Cathedrals or even the smaller churches in Rome. Women had to have their shoulders covered, men had to wear long pants, and I think that women aren't allowed to show their knees. We respect that tradition on the Catholic Holy sites, why not respect it in a Muslim country?

If they're well enough to place psuedo-cultural conditions on our aid I think we are somewhere we are not needed. Let's get out of there now and save our aid for people who WANT it. IMO, if you thought the food-for-oil scandal was big, just wait until this develops.

Brass has it correct. You respect the local culture. I cited Japan because back then we had utterly defeated them and were ruling over them in wake of unconditional surrender. We could have refused to bow in respect to any Japanese civilian accorded respect, said that taking shoes off was an inconvenience, but we didn't. We were seeking an new Japan friendly to us and Democratic, not trying to use our power to diss all aspects of Japanese culture we found personally inconvenient..And we did a great job.

And the same goes in Europe with Americans thinking they ought to be exempt from various cultural mores or dress codes. It needlessly antagonizes folks.

Wearing a lightweight silk or gauze head covering to respect the locals in a conservative Islamic country does NOT cause heat-related suffering - it is simply a measure of respect and part of being a goodwill ambassador. Avoiding public drunkeness and leering at local woman - serious affronts - are not that difficult for American men to avoid doing.

For soldiers and American businessmen overseas, those goodwill ambassador things and the necessity to avoid cultural affronts are translated into orders and job expectations. It can't be otherwise - and I know of careers ruined because someone insists that as an American they will do as they please and end up causing a major incident.

If you play the game and are accepted and welcomed as really helping out in a place like Aceh, then you are in a position to interact with the locals and request a favor, which likely will be granted on hospitality grounds....at that point perhaps you say that it really is an insult that the teenager over there is wearing a T-shirt honoring bin Laden, butcher of 3,000 of your countrymen. Chances are the locals will tell the kid he has to ditch the T-shirt, and they will be more favorable in their future opinion of Americans.

I think you're all leaping to conclusions here. For the past 50 or so years, the Indonesian Army has been fighting a separatist movement called the "Free Aceh Movement" (GAM) -- nothing to do with the 'Islamic Defenders Front'. Before the 1950s, the Acehenese were fighting for independence from the Dutch, the Japanese, and the Dutch (who didn't colonise Aceh until 1878 -- about 300 years after they colonised the rest of Indonesia).

The Acehenese converted to Islam in the 1200s -- a fair few centuries before Islam took a hold elsewhere in the archipelago -- and the Wa'habbiist fundamentalism that is the philosophical underpinning of the al-Qa'ida terror campaign has long fallen on fallow ground in Aceh (a Christian parallel would be, I suppose, that of the Eastern Orthodox churches compared to a fundamentalist Southern Baptist -- both are devout Christians, but both have no time for the other's reading of Christianity).

That America has sent a carrier strike force to Indonesia for disaster relief and are flying supplies into the region from a Thai base is -- and will surely be -- appreciated. However, we in the region (I'm an Australian) have seen that the U.S. has come into the operation relatively late. The USS Abraham Lincoln got its sailing orders last Wednesday, and the first tangible U.S. assistance wasn't seen until last Friday -- five days after Australian and New Zealand aircraft and personnel arrived on the ground in Indonesia and Thailand.

Cedarford: If the locals had a custom of making blacks use separate entrances to buildings, and of making them wear special clothes that the rest of the population didn't have to wear, would you urge us to play along with that as well? Or is it just women you are willing to write-off in that way?

Oh, I forgot to add: Fuck all of the anti-semites of Sri Lanka. Let them all die. They don't deserve the aid. Allah has a better plan for them and the sooner they meet the better.

Neal, what's this about the anti-Semites in Sri Lanka? I take it you're refering to their asking that Israel not send a 150-strong medical team into the country.

It might interest you to know that the Israeli news agency Haaretz has reported that there has been a team of four Israeli doctors in Sri Lanka since 28 December, that Sri Lanka have requested from Israel supplies that include blankets, tents, nylon sheeting and water containers. In addition, Sri Lanka has accepted a 50-strong Israeli Defence Force medical team, and the Israeli humanitarian organisation Latet are sending 18 tons of supplies, with additional shipments to follow.

I take it you call that "anti-Semitism".

When someone requests that women cover their heads, that’s one thing. When the local laws require that women cover their heads, and when those laws are a small part of a crushing system of sexual and religious apartheid, then we have reason to object.

Fully enforced Shariah laws are apartheid laws, and they should never be respected. If American soldiers were put into the position of having to provide aid to Germans pre-WWII, should the Jewish soldiers wear a yellow star to ‘respect’ the customs of the locals? If American soldiers had provided aid to South Africa during the ‘70’s and ‘80’s, should black soldiers have respected the local apartheid ‘customs?’

We shouldn’t respect religious & sexual apartheid in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, or anywhere else. Respecting oppression isn’t a matter of politeness – it’s tacit approval.

I say this respecting completely the desire to help, our moral obligation as human beings to lend a hand because we can, etc.

It doesn't matter what we do. It won't be enough, or done right, or whatever. It earns us precious little goodwill.

Sad commentary on a culture.

Roy - Kudos to Aus & NZ on the help. In hindsight, I think that Bush and his handlers wish he had not waited 72 hours to say something. It was great that you guys were there right away. I also compliment Australia on its great work with East Timor and taking the lead there. And for the humanitarian work with Oceania and New Guinea....and for the close work with democratic Indonesian elements. The whole WoT stuff is not All About America, after all...

Your posting on the differences between Aceh and the rest of Indonesia was welcome. I alluded to it by saying "traditional Islam, very conservative..." but you put some other history to it, so I will add my read.....yes, the Saudis found some fallow ground there for all the new Wahabbi mosques and mullahs they pay, but in other ways, the Aceh radical Islamists have some big things going against them. Their fellow Malays are booming in 21st century Malaysia. They were repudiated in elections and are seeing other areas of Indonesia advance like Malaysia is doing, with people in Sumatra wondering if extremism is holding them back from similar prosperity and raising of living standards. The radicals did not cope with the Tsunami aftermath very well, and now they are seeing Aussies, Americans, Javanese coming in to help and do good works. Conditions look favorable for a moderation of views in Aceh and a loss of radical Islamist influence if relief ops go well and regional trends continue.

All to the good.

On the US Navy, I would add part of the delay couldn't be avoided. The battle group had just pulled into Hong Kong for a port call and reprovisioning when the earthquake hit. It took a day for news to assimilate, a day to assess things like if they would have to take over missions from Diego Garcia or not due to Tsunami damage there, and cancel shore leave, another day to get some relief supplies added to the stores onboard. Then they were on the way. All things considered, a very fast turnaround.

On the Sri Lanka business, I think they told the Israelis that medical teams were welcome, but a pure military contingent the Israelis also wanted to send to provide security for Jewish tourists and the relief workers was not welcome. I believe the Indians and Thais told the Israelis the same thing.

"It doesn't matter what we do. It won't be enough, or done right, or whatever. It earns us precious little goodwill."

This is exactly right. That's why my post (that Ace linked in) points out the need for accountability. Where is the money going? Who will be using it, and for what?

Colin Powell argued today on Late Edition that it is in the US's self-interest to provide charity and financial support for the tsunami victims. I agree. If our support is based on pragmatism, though, we should follow through. If our support is based on indulgence (for lack of a better word) for our charitable instinct, then our indulgence should be tempered by awareness.

Mary and Deux ex Macrame -

All you seem to want is cultural imperialism in this case. The ability to impose your views on another people despite their laws and cultural differences. Because you are jigoistic Americans, dammit, and your ways are best!!!

So a dress code that requires head covering for women and for men to avoid tight-fitting jeans is terribly oppressive and must be fought at all costs? That is very insular thinking. You are guests in another country, even if you come proffering help and charity. You will not succeed trying to shove your values down their throats anymore than a Saudi tourist group at Disneyland will succeed lecturing Americans that our women should be more submissive, Snow White shows too much cleavage, and beer being offered at restaurants is deeply offensive and should end.

The other alternative is to declare any country that refuses to strive to be American in nature your enemy. Which would entail leaving Afghanistan and inviting the Taliban and bin Laden back into power because 3 years after, women there and their husbands still think Burqua attire is proper for a women in most areas of the country.

You have every right as Americans to tell the military recruiter or hiring manager that your selection is conditional on honoring your beliefs that all people you encounter outside the US should have American values and that you want to be free to refuse assignments that conflict with your feminist agenda, belief that you don't have to follow local dress codes. You also have a right as American tourists NOT to go to countries that fall short of your enlightened views.

Your equating complying with a modest dress code with Jim Crow, apartheid, sewing a Star of David on your coat - is ludicrous.

Best that your sort of arrogant Americans - "we respect no nation's laws or customs we disagree with while visiting or working there" - DO stay home.

Cedarford, you are a complete ass, not to mention relativistic and foolish. And wrong.

Auspex - Best you stay in America, too. You'll be serving the interests of your country best, that way.

Any comparison between tourists and emergency aid workers is not only invalid, it's really pretty silly. Let us all hope we can see that without having to explain it.

Ace made the ultimate point quite well with his "house on fire" analogy. Good GRIEF. What's next, are we going to listen to the homeless guy who complains when his free meal is served on a paper plate instead of porcelain?

I think there's a saying some ungrateful whiners need to be introduced to, and it deals with gift horses and mouths. If these people take our millions of dollars and thousands of work hours in aid, then they need to stuff a sock in it when it comes to the MANNER in which the aid is given. It's not like we're passing out pork rinds for them to munch on or insisting they drink holy water. If they're going to moan over the "lack of respect" when it comes to the religious aspects of their laws, maybe they should remember that we're there to help those in need which sounds pretty darned respectful to their religion to ME.

We -- and other countries -- are there to help victims, not simply be tourists or visitors. Some folks evidently don't GET that. And you know, we far too often do so without expecting even the semblance of gratitude in return. Welp, I am personally a tad tired of being a member of the World's Combination Most Generous Country and Punching Bag for other countries who can't get past their grudges -- which go much deeper than the possibility that our female soldiers won't wear scarves -- long enough to muster up a "Thank you."

So THIS Ugly American says, "Here's help, and here's how we'll give it. And if you don't like it, you can take it or not, but either way, don't sit there and complain and expect ANYONE to take you seriously. Got it?"

Later,
bbeck

bbeck - Despite people's need for aid, emergency disaster assistance - it gives you no carte blanche right to violate their culture and social mores.

Example #1 - We give Israel 3 billion a year. Does that give you the right to hold a pig roast on their beach or sneer at Orthodox Jews cautioning not to dress in a manner that violates their Shabbat?

Example #2 - You are in Vatican City. You argue with the attendent barring your way into the Cistine Chapel because your girlfriend is wearing a haltertop...saying that you have a right to have her go in because "We saved you from the Nazis, and your ingratitude pisses this member of the greatest most powerful bestest nation ever...right off!!"

Or do you just reserve that sort of outrage for little brown people asking you to respect their culture under any circumstances???

It helps to have pals in the Navy. Got a link to the pics they are running on the Tsunami Relief Operations. 84 pics so far, and some are 3-5 megapixel primo HI-RES shots. All from Indonesia and off Indonesia showing what the Navy is doing. And pics the MSM hasn't run. So I should tip Drudge..

I expect the Navy will be piling more pics into this gallery for weeks to come. Link:

http://www.navy.mil/view_gallery.asp?category_id=60

Hey, Roy down under! If you wake up soon and read this thread, you're right about Aussies being there. They are working with Indonesians in interfacing with Navy airlift, and the Navy has pics of the Indonesians, Aussies and Navy guys working together on relief supplies.

"habib" is a term of endearment.
"hijab" is a head scarf.

Cedarford – do you know anything about the Shariah laws that you’re defending? I'm guessing you don’t.

Here are some examples of Shariah law:

- Offensive, military jihad against non-Muslims is a communal, religious obligation;

- The penalty for a Muslim apostate (someone who no longer believes in or no longer follows the tenets of Islam) is death;

- A woman is only eligible to receive half the inheritance of a man;

- Non-Muslim subjects (Ahl al-Dhimma) of a Muslim state are subject to a series of discriminatory laws – “dhimmitude”;

A non-Muslim cannot testify against a Muslim in court; a person who is “without respectability” cannot give legal testimony; a woman’s legal testimony is only given half the legal weight of a man’s (and is only acceptable in cases involving property);

They're apartheid laws. If you’d like to know something about them, read the “Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law”. It’s on Amazon.

These are not obscure, religious laws – these are laws that outlaw equality, and they exist, on the books, in places like Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.

Human Rights watch described the effect of these currently practiced laws in their report, "The War on Women."

http://www.mafhoum.com/press3/112S23.htm

From the report:

"There will no doubt be significant and vigorous disagreement about whether the above examples are faithful interpretations and applications of Shariah. While this is being debated, millions of women living under Shariah contend with laws and practice that make a mockery of international human rights protections and endanger their lives.
There are varying interpretations among Islamic jurists about whether these applications are correct, but they are grossly unfair to women, antithetical to human-rights principles, and should be reformed."

Women are legally required to wear certian clothes, and this is part of a system of apartheid laws that (according to Human Rights Watch) endanger women’s lives. It’s not just a dress code. Yellow stars weren’t a dress code either.

Was Human Rights Watch acting like a bunch of ‘arrogant Americans’ when they protested these legalized crimes against humanity?

I can’t believe you used the ‘Arrogant Americans’ routine. What a cliche.

Cedarford, the examples you give do not even remotely address the point I made, just as your comparison of tourist behavior to emergency relief is erroneous. If you lack the ability to tell the difference between tourism and aid then explaining more complex concepts would be a complete waste of time.

I've made my point, which flew over your head. You've made yours, which has nothing to do with the article Ace was discussing. I think you're wrong, you think I'm wrong. You won't prove what you're saying because your argument is built on straw men. I won't prove what I'm saying because if you haven't gotten it YET after all the other posts and Ace's fire analogy, then you won't ever, ever get it. And that's that.

Later,
bbeck

This is to Ace,

I don't want to violate any of your rules by sinking to a level that was just broached, but I would rather not have someone bring up racism because I disagree with his blather. Is there some way to edit this in Cedarford's post above...

"Or do you just reserve that sort of outrage for little brown people asking you to respect their culture under any circumstances???"

...because quite obviously Cedarford, lacking an actual coherent point, is resorting to scum-like tactics and I'd rather not be a part of that. I know, free speech and all, but I think this kind of rhetoric is beneath him. I KNOW it's beneath me.

Thanks,
bbeck

Just a hypothetical;

Let's say the US was devastated, the tables were turned, and third world countries sent aid workers to us...(I know, cold day in Hell before anybody helps us, no matter what horror should befall)...
But let's just say.

And in our burning cities, among the suffering, there appeared angels of mercy from foreign lands. Bringing water and food to the survivors, and comforting the dying. Wearing only loin cloths, male and female alike.

What are the odds that the afflicted would give a shit?

I mean, we are the same country that passed a stone when Janet Jackson had her little mid-life crisis at the Superbowl.
But I don't think I would give a rat's ass, sincerely.

Now, after things got back to normal, its a different story...

bbeck - Since I have done military missions in the 3rd world and I have done a project on behalf of a notable NGO - I will tell you this - the expectation was high in both outfits that the missions would get done and that I and people under me represented our nation and our affiliated service. And that we would follow our "do'd and don't's" incountry briefings rigorously. Not ever go in with an arrogant attitude of; "You need what we have, and to get it, you will let us diss your local laws and customs, or you can kiss off your rescuers".

Contrary to what you think, people in need retain considerable pride, honor, and a need to be in control of as much of the very small spheres of life they own as they can, given the circumstances. NOTHING breeds resentment more than a smug foreigner's contempt for those poor folk's only harbors of dignity.

Mary - Having worked in Islamic countries, I know they have many things that rub us the wrong way. But Latin culture has aspects America doesn't like, so too black Africa, China....

If you are proposing never working with or giving aid to any country that has Human Rights Watch problems, I suppose we could end all aid, stop working with 95% of humanity, end all association with Human Rights Watch violators Israel, China, India, all Muslim countries....most of Latin America...

But that would be exceptionally stupid, Mary.

Oh, and what about the report Human Rights Watch has on America??

bbeck,

I really don't want to edit comments unless it's absolutely necessary. I understand that Cedarford played the "little brown people" card on you, which is sort of funny, because honestly, you'd have thought he'd have turned in his "little brown people" cards when he decided to become anti-semitic.

Still, I really can't go around editing the arguments the commenters get into. Anyone whose comments get edited would freak.

I'd just say to consider the source. He's a bit of an Arabist, it seems, and so he's playing the cards he's got.

"I'd just say to consider the source. He's a bit of an Arabist, it seems, and so he's playing the cards he's got."

Ace- Is that just your way of saying that Cedarford isn't playing with a full deck?

Okay, Ace, thanks. Some sites are pickier than others about racist comments and I wasn't sure about your policy. I didn't want to address it until I knew I could.

Later.
bbeck

Cedarford - I’m not proposing that we stop giving them aid. Of course I’m not saying that. I just disagree with your demand that Western soldiers & aid workers should be forced to submit to Shariah laws.

what about the report Human Rights Watch has on America??

I’m sure Human Rights Watch has reports on America, France, Britain, Australia, Canada, Thailand, etc. But none of these countries have laws that are comparable to pro-genocide, pro-slavery, apartheid Shariah law.

Cedarford, uh, so what? I hope you understand that you could be the director of the International Red Cross and you'd still come off as a twit. The fact that you were dumb enough to bring up race on this topic invalidates anything else you may have to say even if you did, by some chance, have a point.

And speaking of points, feel free to actually address the point of this article, which (pulling out the Clue Bat), doesn't have anything to do with the US' perceptions (whack) -- which you're positively hung up over (whack) -- but OTHER COUNTRIES' perceptions of voluntary aid (whack) and someone's inability to appreciate it (whack) because of their prejudice against Americans (whack) -- even those who are trying to help them (whack) -- since they automatically jump to the unfounded conclusion (whack) that any chick not wearing a scarf on her head (whack) is doing so for the specific purpose of disrespecting their culture (whack) and NOT because she's NOT A MUSLIM (whack) and wearing such a symbol may be offensive to HER religious beliefs (whack) or MAYBE perhaps that she's there for something more important than CULTURAL stimulation (whack) like keeping someone from starving to death (whack) hence a few cultural sensibilities can and SHOULD (double whack for emphasis) temporarily -- temporarily! -- take a back seat to certain priorities in emergency situations (whack) without protestations from the victim/s receiving help (whack whack whack).

JC on a PS, do you get that yet?

Yes, Francis, we ALL know that when you're visiting a country on vacation or a couple years' stay you abide by their customs. You've made that (highly irrelevant) point several times. Now, please don't make me pull out the Clue Bat again for you to REALIZE we all know that. But those situations are not the same as an emergency situation where you are traveling to another country to help someone for a few days. Please get that, too, because my arm is tired.

And stop the bragging about your 'credentials,' okay? You haven't done all that much and you're certainly no expert on the topic.

Later,
bbeck

I think bbeck's clue bat contains much wisdom.

Bear in mind, these people are not "visiting" a foreign land.

They're *working*. And attempting to deliver humanitarian aid to millions, who really ought to be a little more grateful, and who really ought to ease up on the "humiliation" bullshit.

ACE - funny to read you equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. Because that would make Israel and it's right-Wing supporters overseas that seek more land the only nation and supporters it is "bigoted" to criticize. Hit Vatican City as an awful entity, call Congo a subsaharan nightmare, ridicule the Rastafarian religion of Jamaica...slam Mullahs...whatever. Not racism, not bigotry...only criticism of Israel is "bigoted".

Perhaps you think that because you saw the Martin Luther King essay going around the 'Net that declared Anti-Zionism is morally the same as Anti-Semitism. Turns out that was faked..hatched by a NYC Zionist 5 years ago and inserted into a book by MLK.

Really ACE, you can criticize Saudi Arabia without being considered a bigoted Islamophobic. You can slam China without fear of being called an Anti-Asian racist, you can criticize certain American policies without fear of being called a traitor.........

So why should Israel be hald above all criticism? Does that make 189 of 191 countries "anti-Semetic"?
*****************
As for you, bbeck, I can't see you protesting the fact that you have to dress and comport yourselves in certain ways when visiting aid recipient Israel due to religious customs, or while restoring an Eastern Orthodox Church damaged in an earthquake you are asked not to walk in certain places or smoke, or in doing aid work in India, or how you would have had to act to avoid breeches in social harmony if you were a soldier assigned to occupation duties in postwar Japan.

I think not. So the rage you displayed about Indonesians having the temerity to request that local customs and dress code be respected comes from either (or both):

1. The fact that you don't think inferior "brown people" have the right to ask Americans respect their culture.
2. The fact that you don't think people believing in a religion you detest have the right to ask you to respect their ways while you are in their country.

I can tell you that in the military and in a single stressful, fast-moving NGO relief operation I participated in, we were drilled in the utmost importance of being non-judgmental and cooperating to the maximum extent possible with local leader's wishes. And when we had someone that couldn't work through a dangerously biased attitude they had towards the locals, we gladly left that person behind and went in short-handed to an assignment if we couldn't get a replacement...worth the extra work not to have to worry about a team member liability...

With all due respect, Cedarford, you do a bit more than criticize "Zionism."

I remember quite vividly a post of yours in which you declared that Jews were natural socialists and felt more comfortable under an antheist socialist tyranny than any other system of government.

How that was merely "anti-Zionist" is beyond me.

And you do that a lot. You may think you're not anti-semitic; I'm here to deliver the bad news, as someone who doesn't even dislike you, that you are. And if that stings, then perhaps you should correct it.

The "little brown people" thing is just silly. If Israel was demolished by natural disaster, and they forbade American troops assisting them from carrying around pork & beans MRE's while trying to help, I'd have a similar reaction: Get the fuck over yourselves already.

But yes, I admit that when it comes to Muslims, this reaction is a bit more pointed, because I've been told now for four fucking years that I "must understand" that the reason 3000 had to die on 9-11 was because of my "foreign policy" and the fact that I'm "ignorant" of how Muslims feel.

Look, I think by this point, we've all got a pretty good bead about how Muslims feel, as they really never stop telling us (and the dutifully-PC media never stops parroting it for us).

I know how they feel.

I just wonder at what point they'll show some curiosity as to how Americans feel.

And that maybe Americans don't want to be told that there might be "trouble" should an American servicewoman not wear a scarf while SAVING MUSLIM LIVES.

Bravo, ace. You sliced like a hammer there. Like a Viking.

And Cedarford, when you're the guy who recently proposed that American Jews ought to pay higher taxes because you think Israel was the main beneficiary of the Iraq war, well, maybe you could excuse the rest of us for thinking you might be a member of the Albert Speer fan club.

Cedarford, the Clue Bat did not have the desired effect, and I'd rather not spend the ammo in the Eye-Opening Uzi. Suffice to say that you just keep out-dumbing yourself when you mistake a fictional flogging for "rage," and don't get me started on your other straw men...but if you keep it up we'll soon have enough fuel for that pig roast you mentioned. Aw shucks, and here I am not in Israel...

And let me just add that you have even less of a clue about what motivates me -- incidentally, my opinion springs from "logic and common sense," but lo and behold, you left those terms, foreign to you, off your list -- than you do about the military and the real reason behind those briefings.

I shall leave you in the capable hands of Ace, who apparently sees a spider on your azz as he keeps on beating the crap out of it. Besides, I feel guilty about eating up his bandwidth 'cause I haven't donated to him yet.

Later,
bbeck

I'm wondering which aspects of Sharia law Cedarford believes American relief workers should not have to submit to. Should the female workers take care to always walk two steps behind the guys?

This Big Galumphing American Fuckups garbage is wearing on me.

My take on this is that it relates to the war on terrorism. That war has always had two fronts; military and diplomatic. The military side is there to show them that we can't be terrorized, and to prevent them from causing more damage. The diplomatic side is also twofold; to get other governments to help us against terrorists, and to show potential terrorists that we aren't the "Great Satan" that they make us out to be.

It's that final point that this relates to. The tsunami relief effort is a prime opportunity to make some good inroads in the area of showing moslems (especially that osama-shirt wearing kid) that even though he may hate us, we'll still help him.

I don't know the policy the US Navy has on this (if a servicewoman really has a problem with wearing a scarf, can she be reassigned?), but I see nothing wrong with respecting, even in a small token way, their local customs by conforming to a very simple dress code. I mean, we're not there to offer social critique on their culture, we're there to help them.

And if seeing a US servicewoman showing a token of respect by wearing a scarf will make that kid reconsider his feelings towards Americans, then I'd say it's certainly worth it.

Michael

Spongeworthy - there are rules that relief workers in Afghanistan, Africa have to follow that many who believe Americans should say and do as they please find offensive. Woman relief workers have to keep their hair covered. They have to refrain from being the one who is seen bossing or especially disciplining a hired group of Afghan workers - that is a man's lot over there. Men have to avoid loud, boisterous conduct in certain Asian relief operations because it really grates on the locals. Relief workers who find it offensive and rebel simply aren't invited or allowed to remain in country. In the 1st Gulf War some evangelicals that declared they had a religious duty to proselytize Saudis were busted in rank and sent home as a disruptive influence, and harmful to good order and discipline.

Michael - Exactly. And if some woman on a Navy ship has a cow over having to cover her hair, on feminist grounds, she can be assigned to other duties where she never interfaces with the locals...like staying in the ship's kitchen and making and baking bread for the next month. Not exactly advancing her feminist point...And, if it involves her defying orders - possibly fined and restricted to ship in the process.

ACE - Lets hope the day comes when any American is free to criticize any people or culture as freely as we do the French or Russians or Muslims. Kudos to Bill Cosby for showing one more group is not sacrosanct from being slammed hard. We are now down to only a few groups and one nation that PC wisdom says are not to be criticized in America. And despite the prohibition about saying anything negative about gays, the gay agenda, the gay lifestyle - publicly - the voters in the privacy of their booths said otherwise.

"(if a servicewoman really has a problem with wearing a scarf, can she be reassigned?)"

NO, Michael, she can't get reassigned. Doing such a thing would be discriminatory in today's military and the chick could get her CO in deep trouble.

Whoops, a PS...

"And if seeing a US servicewoman showing a token of respect by wearing a scarf will make that kid reconsider his feelings towards Americans, then I'd say it's certainly worth it."

Well, golly gee, I would think that the servicewoman saving this child's life would be enough to make that kid reconsider a few things. I also think that NOT wearing a scarf would be a symbol to a few oppressed women (and men and children) in these countries that the US stands for religious freedom and gender equality.

Later,
bbeck

Well, if servicewomen are to be required to wear a scarf, I want the locals forbidden to wear Osama bin Ladin t-shirts.

Would that be a problem, Cedarford? Or is respect for differing cultures an entirely one-sided affair?

The diplomatic side is also twofold; to get other governments to help us against terrorists, and to show potential terrorists that we aren't the "Great Satan" that they make us out to be.

The Islamist Ayatollah Khomeini called American diplomatic efforts to win hearts and minds the 'Headless Chicken' strategy.

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/8781

According to Islamists, submitting to anti-human rights laws and respecting those laws doesn’t make them like us. It breeds contempt and shows them that we’re weak.

Winning hearts and minds is a cold war strategy. It’s not going to work against radical Islam.

The CIA and our ‘diplomatic side’ is pitifully behind the times. According to this report, the agency was still training its spy recruits in the art of working embassy cocktail parties to find counter-operatives. The hearts and minds strategy is just as stupid.

As a political group, Radical Islam is more comparable to the Thousand Year Reich. Efforts to win German hearts and minds would have failed.

I think if it were part of Sharia to treat black people as inferiors, and make them cover their heads, we would have a different view; no way in Hell would we expect our black servicepeople to be accommodating to this sort of thing.

bbeck - Wrong on both counts.

Any soldier that thinks their individual beliefs trump the mission and good military order and discipline are sidelined and likely done with a career.

The Gulf War I soldiers that were trying to make personal religious statements on how much they disliked Saudis by proselytizing and trying to put religious affronts in Saudi faces jeopardized their mission, their comrades, and were ignomiously removed. Despite their claims that they were rescuing the Saudis, thus were entitled to offend them...

YOu should not view our rescue mission as a chance to forceably blackmail our rescuees. To consider it an ideal instance of dire circumstances opening an opportunity to engage in a little cultural imperialism to enlighten the backwards little brown people in your wiser ways - vs, what they have gone by for 400 years in their culture - regarding gender equality and religious freedom...or you will threaten to take your aid away....

ACE - Well, if servicewomen are to be required to wear a scarf, I want the locals forbidden to wear Osama bin Ladin t-shirts. Would that be a problem, Cedarford? Or is respect for differing cultures an entirely one-sided affair?

I assure you ACE, that if a planeload of Indonesians came visiting America wearing bin Laden T-shirts, we would tell them to ditch the T-shirts because they are guests in our country and we find such dress code deeply offensive.

Dare I say we would likely warn them that it disses the locals and there could be trouble of the Indonesians visiting our country decided to flout our reasonable request to dress less offensively???????

When in Rome, ACE......It was good advice 2,000 years ago and is still good today.

Lauraw - I think if it were part of Sharia to treat black people as inferiors, and make them cover their heads, we would have a different view; no way in Hell would we expect our black servicepeople to be accommodating to this sort of thing.

But it isn't, is it?

It wasn't even 50 years ago that women in the US were expected to wear veils in Church as a gesture of respect and Christianity imposed a dress code and other social norms on widows.

My advice on your higher expectations for a people with little education, newly emerged from a primitive culture - is to get over yourself - and stop expecting people well behind you on the civilizational learning path to behave better than the veil-wearing, Jim Crow Americans of 50 years ago...

Good Hi-Res pictures of Navy efforts (156) so far.

Looks like the Navy women wear ballcaps when off-base and interacting with the Indonesian public.

I know, I know. Forcing women to wear ballcaps! The inhumanity!

http://www.navy.mil/view_gallery.asp?category_id=60

Cedarford, LEARN SOMETHING...

You do not, DO NOT, have one single, solitary, stinking clue about the military. Your brief, 10+ year-old-stint did not cause you to learn Jack Squat about what the miliitary does...and...why. My military sources beat yours six ways from zero, AND they're RECENT. As of, like TODAY. As of, like, the last 18 YEARS as well...and that doesn't include the lifelong exposure I've had coming from a military family. You were doubtless some exlisted Lemming who got royally cheesed when you found out you had to actually WORK to earn that government pay. Fortunately, your ilk is few and far between, and the vast majority of soldiers are made of sterner stuff. Things have changed since you were disgracing the uniform, and a lot of it has to do with the scum-sucking PC types who are more concerned about treating women "equally" than practicing common sense.

You're ignorant on how the military is allowed to treat their female soldiers. You do not have the slightest idea and you really need to stop pretending you speak with any authority on the subject based upon decade-old and highly limited experience.

So, thank you SO much for the misinformed condescension as well as more straw men, but I'll stick to facts. I'll also not join you in your trips to Racist Land where you no doubt own a mansion on Bigotry Lane.

Now, I've attempted once already to stop posting to you because to correct all of your idiocy would take more writing than Ace has space, but you keep dragging me into your nonsense. Do us all the courtesy of not addressing me and lying anymore so I don't feel compelled to post something others know as the truth in rebuttal.

Later,
bbeck

lauraw - it is part of Shariah, and Arab tradition, to treat blacks as inferiors. They don't make them wear hats, they just enslave them:

http://www.swsahs.nsw.gov.au/areaser/startts/volunteers/transitions/iss4_a2.htm

"It is hard to believe that in the 20th century a person can become the property of another for life. Slaves are bought and sold, traded and inherited, branded and bred. A lucrative industry has been created. Modern day slave markets are thriving.

Like any commodity, the price of human flesh in Sudan and Mauritania has varied with supply. In Sudan in 1988, one automatic weapon could be traded for six or seven child slaves. In 1989 a woman or child could be bought for US$90, but the raids increased, the market was flooded and the price fell to $US15 per head. Not all slaves remain in Sudan, some of the children are exported to the Gulf States or to Libya, according to the US embassy in Khartoum."
...

So, Cedarford, where's the outrage?

bbeck - Perhaps then you might wish to not do a flame letter calling others clueless or disgracing the uniform they wore - while sniviling to the Blogmaster about things that make you mad, and weeping crocodile tears for your "abuse of bandspace"

What puffery! And what pervasive, subtle racism against cultures you detest showing in your past posts!

As I mentioned, by the links I provided, it appears the Navy has promulgated uniform of the day requirements as a cultural liaison necessity. I will look into it and see if going w/o headgear is authorized, or strongly recommended against for female sailors, or truly barred - and post that later on ACE's blog in another thread.

Things have changed since you were disgracing the uniform, and a lot of it has to do with the scum-sucking PC types who are more concerned about treating women "equally" than practicing common sense.

Hmmmn! It seems our 18+ year lower rating type has revealed his true stripes. After a previous Xenophopic tirade against 3rd World cultures, he disclosed that people who seek to treat women equally in the military are "scum-sucking PC types" rather than the (manly, manly, slightly racist against those brown types) commonsense practicioners of real military virtue.

We appear to have a guy who hates brown guys practicing a religion other than his own, and who appears to harbor big-time resentments over women in the military "violating commonsense".

bbeck, you are what we once called a "problem sailor"- someone who does his job but if put around minorities, women, or allowed into a foreign country is capable of killing the Captain's career path or the XO's with a single incident making it's way back to the Brass or political appointees at the Pentagon. Generally, a command would seek to get you out in the trash and limit their exposure.

.

Mary - So exactly what do you propose?

Sit on a street corner sputtering that you are outraged, just outraged about:

1. Islam
2. Latin machismo.
3. Chinese, N. Korean, & Russian human rights violations.
4. Blacks enslaving blacks.
5. France
6. Palestinians killing Israelis, and equally outraged about Israeli thefts of Palestinian land and water supplies

What do you expect from your outrage? Passers bye flipping a quarter in your hat?

Or do you propose a non-passive approach:

1. Restarting the draft and ending all tax cuts to form a mighty 16-million man American military capable of warring against 1.3 billion Muslims, 700 milion Africans, 1.2 billion Chinese - and after losing several million American men over years of war - , imposing your American values and culture everywhere??

OR

2. Start a movement saying that 95% of humanity fails to meet "Mary's Lofty Standards" and we really shouldn't be concerned when catastrophe strikes them.

A glib douchebag is still a douchebag.

Cedarford - umm...I was wondering if you were upset by the fact that Shariah law has inspired the extremes of slavery and genocide that we see in the Sudan.

Obviously, you're not. Sorry I asked.

Why on earth do you bring up "Latin machismo"??

Mary - No, most Americans should be upset about any range of things....

...But the issue is not how you feeeeeeeell, but what you would propose doing about it.

Clucking disapproval of the shortcomings of 95% of humanity is just feel good moral masturbation, unless you advocate a course of action.

Do you advocate a course of action?

Cedarford, stop whimpering like a victim and take a look at your own words before you pull out yer sanctimony. You've been implying racism since you started sliming this Comment Section...and now you're all bent out of shape because your sensibilities took a hit. Oh grow up, hypocrite.

You're a clue bag. Realize it. Embrace it. We're up to 60 posts now and you're still dancing around the Actual Issue of this thread like a hate-filled Barishnikov with a smaller package.

Over dinner, I told my husband about your military-induced spasms, and after an eye roll and a shared laugh, he said, "He must have been some enlisted guy without a clue." Which is what I've BEEN saying. And FYI, enlisted guys WITH clues are much more commonplace and would tell you that you, in fact and in practice, don't know anything about the military (and they would likely toss in how glad they were that you're ain't in it anymore).

Sailor? No, you're mistaking me for my uncle. Or my sister-in-law. We're AF here, dorcas.

And, since you're too dense to have figured out I am a FEMALE, I would think that this latest post would at least have opened your eyes to THAT fact, hence the whole husband thing. Which also sort of makes your last post pretty darn funny.

Thanks for all the jokes entirely at your expense. I discovered early on you weren't fit for anything else.

Later,
bbeck

PS to my buddy: hey dude, I told you he was.

Do you advocate a course of action?

I belong to this anti-slavery organization and I've attended some of their protests against the UN's perpetual inaction about this issue. If you're interested, visit the site.

I really don't have strong issues with the supposed shortcomings of 95% of humanity. 95% of humanity doesn't follow laws that are pro-slavery and pro-genocide. 95% of humanity doesn't support terrorism. Only Islamists, and Islamist states do that, and I have issues with that.

Mary - thank you for the honest response. But realize that fault can be laid to much of humanity in the present day, or in sins of the past...not just with Islam. Not just 5% - If you look at most nations, you see present or past misdeeds that fall under "terrorism". Jews, Irish, Indian, Nate Turner, Peruvian, Chinese.....

bbeck- Reading your posts I held back on politeness grounds the possibility of a Stateside military wife utterly ignorant of the world past the Atlantic, Pacific oceans - convinced that evil brown people and PC conventions allowing sexual rivals to vie for your man, vs. common sense....but you came in and said you were a military wife. And almost proudly asserting that you expect obsequiousness from backwards brown folks towards your man.

You're free in your loneliness to suck a bon-bon down with each Internet post. Think of each candy as your reward.

Please, continue. Your man will forgive your corpulence as long as you defend him against those inferior brown people and the women who have no business in the military try to get his precious bodily fluids...

Oh, for the love of everything holy, shut the fuck up.