Comments on: Martin Kramer Spouts Anti-Muslim Racism at Prestigious Herzliya Conference

By: PROFESOR UNIVERSITAS HARVARD DUKUNG GENOSIDA BAYI-BAYI PALESTINA « BaNi MusTajaB

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:38:05 +0000

[...] Argumentasi Kramer jelas mirip yaitu, bahwa tingkat kesuburan akan mendorong radikalisasi masyarakat Muslim dan berpotensi menjadi bahan bakar ancaman ke Barat. Maksudnya, ketika populasi Palestina bertambah, mereka akan bermigrasi ke Barat dan lalu menyebarkan virus radikal. [...]

By: Harvard Professor’s Shocking Proposal: Starve the Palestinians in Gaza into Having Fewer Babies | themcglynn.com/theliberal.net

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 14:57:19 +0000

[...] Kramer revealed his true colors at the Herzliya Conference, wherein he blamed political violence in the Muslim world on population growth, called for that [...]

By: Herzliya Conference Vs Davos Conference on Racism « Rehmat's World

Herzliya Conference Vs Davos Conference on Racism « Rehmat's World — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:58:06 +0000

[...] Professor Dr. Martin Kramer told his audience that the greatest threat Islam poses to the West and the Zionist entity is – not Al-Qaeda or Palestinian resistance, but – Fertility! [...]

By: mary

mary — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 23:01:48 +0000

hi fiddler, I was merely pointing out the interesting semantics; it was not meant as a criticism of anything you said. The word “terrorism” is so politically charged so as to have lost a lot of its true meaning. Resisting occupation is not terrorism per se; but some methods of resistance may be considered terrorism, but even then it is up to interpretation. In the case of Palestine, many forms of reistance have been automatically tagged as terrorism just because they are, indeed, acts of resistance.

By: fiddler

fiddler — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:05:54 +0000

Mary, I’m in no way defending Kramer, I find his remarks as disgusting as you do.

Main Entry: mil·i·tant
Pronunciation: \-tənt\
Function: adjective
Date: 15th century

1 : engaged in warfare or combat : fighting
2 : aggressively active (as in a cause) : combative
(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/militant)

This is roughly the definition I’m using. It’s only about the means or the attitude regarding their use. There’s no value judgement implied, least of all about the cause.

Now if you’re saying that’s not how the mainstream press uses the term, I agree, see the Newsweek discussion I posted the link to the other day. In this so-called War on Terrorism those guys see themselves as combatants.

By: mary

mary — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:08:18 +0000

Why is resistance considered “militant” but blatant aggression is nothing more than “defending ourselves”? I admit it’s a bit off topic, but nevertheless an interesting question.

The whole thrust of Kramer’s BS is nothing more than another sickening set of ideas on how to manipulate oppressed people and ultimately break their will. I thought this kind of thinking ended with the Nazis, honestly. The US defeated the Native Americans by spreading disease, decimating the buffalo herds, violently attacking with superior weapons (massacres), and ultimately, herding the surviving people like cattle onto locked reservations, after which they were given inadequate food and plenty of booze with which they could destroy themselves. I sense a pattern here.

By: fiddler

fiddler — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:39:10 +0000

The part of the resistance that uses violent means is by definition “militant”, though not necessarily “terrorist”.

By: Shirin

Shirin — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 07:02:50 +0000

That’s just the point, and just why Kramer’s thinking is so idiotic. If he really wants to lower the Arab birthrate, the most likely way to succeed is to promote a high degree of prosperity, not to starve people.

And by the way, prosperity and food supply are inextricably intertwined. Food is a factor always.