Hi Folks,
I started writing this message reluctantly because I was convinced that looking into the
So let's look at why the Islamic world might be annoyed by the West? thread would require that I issue some stern criticism of Jar. Instead, just the opposite has happened. If Jar has misbehaved it doesn't appear anywhere in this thread.
Jar begin the thread like this:
jar writes:
I'd like for us to have a discussion of how we ended up in the current situation in the Middle East. Since it's unlikely we can cover all the issues I suggest we start with the Ottoman Empire, and then step by step move on from there.
He followed it with messages like
Message 3:
jar writes:
Before WWI all of what we today call the Middle East was part of the Ottoman Empire. This had been the case for over four centuries and the borders between the Ottoman Empire and the West were relatively settled and peaceful...etc...
And like
Message 92:
jar writes:
The area we now call Iraq is one of the largest of the Nation States in the Middle east. It had never really been one country, even while under the Ottomans it was considered as three separate administrative areas, Mosul in the north west, Baghdad in the center and Basra in the south east. The peoples, cultures, religions and history of the three areas were also quite different...etc...
The Sykes-Picot Agreement recognized those ethnic, religious, political and cultural differences...etc...
Throughout the war the Allies, particularly the French and British, had used promises of true independance to gain the support...etc...
By 1920 the Arabs had grown weary of waiting for either the French or British to follow through...etc...
You get the idea. Pretty straight forward just-the-facts approach.
Now here's Faith's first post,
Message 4:
Faith writes:
Ha ha I see what's coming. Some European and British actions ticked em off a few centuries ago and that explains -- and JUSTIFIES -- their murdering Americans now. Oh and "we" ticked em off by daring to counter their imperialist conquests of previous European territory.
Jar requested a retraction, and Faith graciously granted one, but she continued posting to the thread from the standpoint that Jar was conducting a whitewash (for example,
Message 46), and as far as I can see she never added anything factual to the discussion, while Jar posted one jammed-with-facts message after another. He included his opinions and interpretations, and so far as Faith and Buzsaw and Iano the only replies were that this was a typical blame the west interpretation without foundation, and I could find few facts in their arguments.
Finally, after all the sniping, Faith goes over the top in
Message 96:
Perhaps you aren't familiar with jar's anti-Christian pro-Islam opinions.
Iano followed this a short time later with this in
Message 102 with this indirect reference to Jar:
Iano writes:
You are not in any way shape or form a Christian...But you are fighting behind enemy lines. You don the uniform of your Christian enemy and seek to wreak havoc from within the enemies camp...Such people, when found, are taken out and shot for the dishonourable way they chose to fight.
If I were Jar and had put all the effort into presenting the factual background for the discussion and had it not only ignored (indendent of the proper interpretation of the facts), but had to do yeoman's work trying to keep the 300-post thread to a manageable period of history, and then I got this, I think I might have completely lost it. Maybe Jar is only reaping what he has sown in other threads, but the
Forum Guidelines require that you address the content of a thread and not bring in issues from other threads, especially feelings and animosities, which is exactly what this looks like to me. It seemed like Faith and Buzsaw and Iano felt they knew exactly where Jar was going with his historical recitations, and even if they were right then the proper approach was the same one Jar had taken, and same one that everyone should take at EvC Forum: argue from the facts. Leave your personal feelings about others out of the discussion.
I find Jar to often be overly ascerbic, confrontational and cryptic in his discussion at times, and that's what I expected to see in this thread, but I saw very little of this. I also wish he would turn the other cheek a bit more when posting as a regular member since he's also a moderator, but he seemed to do a lot of cheek-turning and ignore-the-sniping in this thread.
I have limited time to investigate concerns about moderator misconduct. The complaints about Jar have probably wasted about all the time I have for such issues for the next month. Next time concerns about moderator misconduct are raised I encourage people to find a thread that actually exhibits the problem. Jar has made a number of the conservative Christians here angry with him, but the things that made them angry didn't happen in this thread - they happened somewhere else.
| -- | Percy |
| | EvC Forum Director |
™ Version 4.2