Well, I'm beginning to agree with the fundies that the end times are here. Not so much because of the presence of so much banal, uninspired simple evil, but because so few people seem to give a shit.

The murderer of those Amish children wasn't making a statement about their schooling or the lack of religion in their lives. He was just mad and wanted to take it out on somebody. There's no moral to this story.

Yes, one thing history teaches us is that when people have religion, they stop killing other people.

The White House has made it clear: We have to be careful about what we say. Free Speech must be guarded by silence!

And, of course, they are right -- if not for the Fundamentalist Party Line I've taught Wittle Ally-kins, he would have married many gays by now!

How tiresome. What could Maher possibly have been planning to say that would have been further into the fringe than that?

Maher was going to say God is dead. That He supports abortions. That He supports Gay Marriages. That He supports flag burning. All of those things are more radical than what you quoted.

What's frightening (to me at least) is that the quoted attitude really isn't the fringe. A large segment of the US population would agree.

Assuming the reports are right, it's a terrible thing Maher was going to say, and it is unfortunate. And that's why -- this is a reminder to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do. This is not a time for remarks like that; there never is.

I saw that "Free Speech" segment last night and was appalled. I feel badly for the man whose child was murdered, but to blame evolution and abortion for the monsters roaming our country with legal lethal weapons in pursuit of killing children was pure American evangelical non-denomination big box nonsense. Unfortunately, many Americans believe it.

There will be a call for more school security. There will be questions asked about Americans' insanity. No one will question the legality of fire arms.

George Bush has kept us in an extremely violent state for the past 5 years. Does that not affect children, to be exposed to the level of violence that is war? I'm not blaming him for these school shootings, 2 of the 3 (CO and PA) were committed by deranged adults (the third was in WI by a student against a principal I believe), but constant violence can't be good for any society. War is constant violence and I shudder to think how the children of Iraq might perceive the world they live in let alone US children who see it through the media filter or hear about it 1st or 2nd-hand at home.

What did teaching morals in school have to do with this massacre? This is not a case of some students in the school going on a rampage because of some slight. This situation was spawned by something which happened twenty years ago in some completely different location between individuals who weren't even present at this assault, except for the shooter.

Where is the connection, to justify an attack on secularism? Doesn't CBS News even expect its commentators to apply logic - valid logic - to what they broadcast. Perhaps we should just accept that the modern CBS now stands for "Christer Broadcast System" and respond appropriately. But, it is getting tough to avoid any programs or networks which aren't affiliated with CBS or ABC these days.

I had been watching CBS evening news almost religiously for the lat 30 years.

I switched to ABC after the first day of aunt Katie.

Maher backs the party that kills babies and robs graves (with euphimisms like abortion and estate tax). It's not surprising that he would say something offensive to the American people.

Walter Cronkite would be spinning in his grave, if he was actually in it.

Maher backs the party that kills babies and robs graves...

How is that substantively different from bombing babies and digging graves?

From Rohrbough the deranged: "Our children have become a target of terrorists from within the United States."

It was a lone gunman who was no doubt even more deranged than Rohrbough, but now Rohrbough is saying kids are the target of "terrorists." That's one helluva non sequitur, but it shows how quickly the lines are being blurred between what is crime and what is terrorism, very conveniently paving the way for the police state that some would like to see in this country.

What Fox did to "fair and balanced" is what CBS is doing to "free speech."

The irony, of course, is that the current crop of "conservative" leaders operate from the position that there is no right or wrong, only winning. They have no coherent ideology--certainly not the traditional conservative view--and they scoff and call "quaint" the ideals on which this nation was founded. There is no moral standard--none--that they hold above the holy grail of further accumulating power, control and wealth. That is their single unifying principle.

That they manage to convince their base that it's all about the immorality of abortion, men in love and people who sleep in on Sundays is testament to their manipulative skill. Doesn't speak too highly of the base, either.

"Moral vacuum" perfectly describes the world of this administration the past six years. Immoral behavior without "moral consequence" perfectly describes the excuses this administration has laid before us in the past 6 years. Childrens lives described as "less than a comma" in the big book of history. All this from the least secular administration in recent history.

Maher also loved the Isreali bombing and shelling of South Lebanon and praised Bush for his support of such practices. Sort of a Bush Bad in Iraq, Bush Very Good in South Lebanon.

Sorry, the Maher story turned out to be a load of crap.

Next?

How is that substantively different from bombing babies and digging graves?

Democrats kill babies and rob raves on purpose. Republicans sometimes make mistakes on their way to introducing liberty to an opressed nation. IF you can't se ethe difference, you may be a sociopath.

George Bush has kept us in an extremely violent state for the past 5 years.

I have said that what really changed on 9/11 was that the US was no longer immune from retaliatory attacks for the crimes it commits against others. The US response to 9/11 was more violence, and the killer in Pennsylvania indicated he was acting out revenge for some past crime or insult. It is not secularism that creates mass murder, it is a desire for retribution. Retribution against a nation, society, class, and the sexes. Righteous retribution is recognized as a birthright of every American, who demand the right to weapons access in order to become the godly avenger for crimes both real and imagined, acted out with the same moral legitimacy as our nation's crimes against others.

I'm with American Hawk on this. I regularly wake up and say to myself, "I'm going to kill some babies today!" Then, after fortifying myself with a cup of strong, organic, free-trade coffee and a tofu scramble, I hop into my hybrid car and drive to the nearest place where I know babies will be (i.e. my neighborhood playground). Occassionally, I'll stop and clean my bumper stickers, one of which says, "Regime Change Starts at Home." Once at the playground, I crank up the Joan Baez, sip the latte I picked up at Starbucks on the way over, swerve to avoid the baby squirrel in the road, and then plow headlong into the playground, killing babies left and right. After wiping all the baby blood off my car, I go to the local rave and rob all those sweaty club kids with running mascara.

American Hawk nailed it! I'm a sociopath! Thanks for helping me realize that, man...by the way, do you ever offer opinions that are more than boilerplate wingnut rhetoric?

Al writes:

"Maher was going to say God is dead. That He supports abortions. That He supports Gay Marriages. That He supports flag burning. All of those things are more radical than what you quoted."

Radical? Really?

1. Atheists have comprised some portion of American society since the country's inception. Many of the Founders were closer to the atheist end of the spectrum than the Christian end. What is radical is denying one person's right to question the validity of religion while sanctioning another person's right to deny the validity of science.

2. Abortion is indeed an issue that divides the electorate, but it is hard to call the pro-choice position "radical" at this point in our history. What's radical is blowing up family planning clinics and murdering gynecologists who perform abortions.

3. Gay marriage is, like heterosexual marriage, the commitment of one human to love, honor and cherish another human within the framework of traditional domesticity. What's radical is demonizing gays and denying them the rights enjoyed by the rest of us.

4. Flag burning is protected speech. What's radical is advocating the abrogation of our first amendment rights.

Atheists are one of the few groups of people left that can be publically slandered. I highly doubt someone spouting similar nonsense about blacks would get a similar airing on CBS.

Republicans sometimes make mistakes on their way to introducing liberty to an opressed nation.

We liberated thousands of babies from their cribs, and introduced them to their coffins.

Unlike me, George W. Bush is no sociopath and only makes the occasional mistake. No doubt, he wakes up and says, "Oops, I started a civil war in Iraq! Now 100,000 men, women and babies are going to die. But atleast they'll die nominally free people."

A woman taking RU-486 is enough to drive any man to murder high school kids!

And think of poor Paris Hilton when you are out robbing her mommy's grave! Pay for the billion dollars a week in Iraq with taxes on middle class earnings, not out of poor Paris' pocket!

Everett wins. That was the funniest damn smackdown I've read in Drum's comments in a long time.

But I should thank American Hawk, Al, Thomas1, and other cycloptic trolls because they are such perfectly humorless straight men -- every comedy act needs one.

Maher is a smug schmuck. Just in general. Not very bright, opinions that aren't very interesting, not very funny.

That is all.

AkaDad, don't forget the tens of babies I've liberated from the oppressive confines of the playground with my hybrid bumper.

Maher loved the Isreali bombing and shelling of South Lebanon and praised Bush for his support of such practices.

Godly retribution is America's and Israel's example to the world and to their own citizens.

Republicans sometimes make mistakes on their way to introducing liberty to an opressed nation.

You've certainly liberated a lot of people from their lives.

If this segment was really balanced, Richard Dawkins would be the next guest. I won't hold my breath.

__________ is a smug schmuck. Just in general. Not very bright, opinions that aren't very interesting, not very funny.

Please choose one:
a) Bill O'Reilly
b) Sean Hannity
c) Bumrush Limbaugh
d) Ann Coulter
e) all of the above

Kevin Drum >"...What could Maher possibly have been planning to say that would have been further into the fringe than that?"

The truth of course

"A country which proposes to make use of modern war as an instrument of policy must possess a highly centralized, all-powerful executive, hence the absurdity of talking about the defense of democracy by force of arms. A democracy which makes or effectively prepares for modern scientific war must necessarily cease to be democratic." - Aldous Huxley

Well, ALL of the network news operations are a national joke, as well as all the cable news operations! I don't waste my time watching any of them any longer because their news coverage is superficial and their bias is clearly inimical to the long-term interests of our country. I don't why they now pander to the right-wing conservative fringe but they clearly have sold their soul to these devils!

AmericanHawk, the Republican Party has had it's sway for last oh-so years, would you say that has been great for liberty? If you do, your a fascist (welcome to your generalities).

Oh, and the Maher story has not been "debunked", let's be more intelligent in using our wording. Perhaps some more of the ABC's and less of the religious nonsense. It's time for you guys to grow up.

I am getting tired with this double-standard that conservatives get when they throw about their pet issues such as evolution, just because reason kept them from doing so in the first place. It is a textbook case of affirmative action, if I have ever seen one (like that?).

I say, bring them to the plate, but prepared to get burned. Closing your eyes and ears and shouting it does not make it so, and the American people are getting tired of this bull. Do your own thing, and leave me alone to mine, and things are better for it. When your savior doesn't "rise from the dead" and "end all evil" (sounds like some superhero), you'll be pretty embarrassed.

How Ironic that right-wing Social Darwinists who believe that the poor deserve to suffer would blame evolution for problems. After all, their party is all aobut the strong killing the weak. When has a republicans ever helped the meek inherit the earth?

...crickets...

What a lying hypocrite... and why is CBS trying to be FOX news all of a sudden?

Thanks,

Mike

Obviously some folks here need a lesson in the Constitution.

Censorship is when the government silences you.

For example - the whole Amendment to "ban flag burning" thing is censorship and it is wrong. So was much of what was in that bit of unConstitutional asininity foisted on us by McCain and Feingold in the name of campaign finance reform (which should have been rejected by Bush AND the Supremes).

Your rights to free speech in the public forum are only violated if the government does it.

If a private company decides it doesn't want your mouth to hurt its bottom line or that its owners object to your views then it has every right not to carry your crap - from whatever point of view you are coming from.

The Constitution provides for you to have a right to free speech but you do not have a right to be heard. Only Communists force people to listen to a viewpoint.

And neither did Maher. He should have helped to fund Air America and found a profitable audience if he was so interested in spewing his crap on the airwaves. That's how Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest of Conservatives did it.

You are correct wayne. CBS news should change the name of its "Free Speech" segment to "Profitable Audience Crap Spew."

That guy should be on free access TV, not a prime time network news program. I bet a calm reasonable interrogatory would have him foaming at the mouth in no time.

Couric is out of her depth. Can she(or CBS) possibly think that this free speech farce has any merit? Blogs comments, the pulpit, and talk radio are the proper venue for such disjointed preposterous assertions.

Her best feature was bubbly exuberance. In an effort to project gravitas, her behavior has become almost comically stoic.

What about killing innocent Iraqi kids, or Lebonses kids or Afghan kids, or Viet Cong kids. Apparently, that is OK. F your God and your moral rightiousness. I'll stand with sceince and evolution anyday.

AkaDad, don't forget the tens of babies I've liberated from the oppressive confines of the playground with my hybrid bumper.

I'm glad to see someone doing Gods work. =]

How can you have free speech if you can't say certain things? Its that easy, you are either for it so you can say what you want (real free speech), or against it and cannot say what you want because you might offend or scare certain neocons (the illusion of free speech). Bill Maher is absolutely correct when he complains about not being able to say what he wants. The real problem is the fact that you have these media outlets that are controlled by fascist religious asses who can't handle certain topics or attempt to control information. That is the real danger, not the fact that he might swear of talk about gay marriage. There is too much power in the hands of these people who have no balls and will not stand up and argue for what is right and what is in the constitution which is the right to free speech. Censorship blows at any time. Al blows too.

But reciting conservative talking points about secularism being responsible for school killings is OK:

Just think of it as affirmative action for the stupid.

"Abortion has diminished the value of children."

Now this simply isn't true. By decreasing the supply, you increase the demand, and thus the value. Simple economics, people.

Sort of a Bush Bad in Iraq, Bush Very Good in South Lebanon.

Bill Maher also said it "didn't bother" him that Bush invaded Iraq, but that he wished Bush would be honest about it, and admit it was because Saddam tried to kill his father.

I'm not going to deny that Maher leans left, but he certainly enjoys getting a rise out of both sides.

Wayne,

"Censorship is when the government silences you."

No, the definition of censorship does not specify the censoring entity. While a government may censor speech, other entities (TV networks for instance) can, and do engage in censorship as well.

Hey Adam Smith, what're you doing with those hands? Put 'em back on the table and stop that IMing!

I'm not going to deny that Maher leans left, but he certainly enjoys getting a rise out of both sides.

That's not it. Maher is anti-religion in general. He would have been one of Bush's biggest supporters if the Preznit wasn't such a fuckup.

Since it has recently been reported that the sick fuck who murdered those children had fantasies of child molestation, one could argue he was inspired by Mark Foley's actions.

To make a political issue out of this travesty is beyond the pale. I empathize with the "Free Speech" commentator who lost his son at Columbine, but one could just as easily blame school shootings on sexual repression of Republicans as they can on godless schools (just how an Amish school is godless, I can't figure out) and abortion.

How about the guy was just a sick fuck?

The folks at CBS were trying to protect your bacon and their ratings. Insulting one religion is as insulting, of not more insulting, than attacking one for their race or sex.

The networks are losing viewers fast enough without Mahers help and the last think they need is for him to chase more of them away. Politically the MSM understands three things about religious folk. They don't get mad. They do get even. They vote. While the libs own the elitist vote it ain't been doing them much good.

Your rights to free speech in the public forum are only violated if the government does it.

Except, wayne, that CBS uses airwaves, which are a public trust and licensed by the gov't. There used to be a Fairness Doctrine, and as flawed as it was, at least it prevented out and out lies from being spread.

That's how Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest of Conservatives did it.

Really??? What conservative radio network(s) did Hannity and Limbaugh fund? ABC and Premiere (owned by Clear Channel)?

Come back when you know what the hell you're talking about, Wayne.

There used to be a Fairness Doctrine, and as flawed as it was, at least it prevented out and out lies from being spread.

That's utter nonsense. The fairness doctrine limited free speech and did nothing about lies. It's comical listening to libs bitch about losing it and pleasant to hear them plan on bringing it back. Ain't happening. Talk radio and cable are entrenched and they're not going anywhere. The libs could of course compete but they know they're too incompetent. Air America is a joke.

Y'know, I've been reading this blog for ages. But for some reason, today's posts by Al and AmericanHawk irk me much more than usual.

Those make no sense. They are completely devoid of any rational thought. They are completely devoid of contributing anything to ... anything, really.

Just a sheer waste of electrons. How tiresome!

Now that secularists find no authority in religion-based morality, why not abolish laws that punish murder?

Why not punish murder, because, well, it's murder? One does not need religion to determine right or wrong. Laws are developed for the betterment of society, from preventing the strong from preying on the weak, and for bringing order to large communities of people.

To say that you need religion to tell you whether something is right or wrong is pretty sad.

mhr,

are you telling me that Christian leaders never sanction wars? That church courts have never sanctioned the execution (murder) of so-called heretics? That Christians don't commit murders?

Religion is not the font of morality, but rather an (imperfect) attempt to codify our moral impulses. Hard as it may be for brain-washed theists to understand, concepts of morality can exist independently of religion.

And yes, Jane Goodall can make at least as much of a contribution to our understanding of ethics and morality as Pope Benedict.

A religious person hasn't a moral bone in their body. They've simply given up.

How do secular leftists decide on what is right and what is wrong?

Emily Post.

That's utterly absurd. No one can fault this man for believing as he does considering his terrible loss, but the truth is his views are very right-wing and I seriously doubt most Americans feel the way he does. CBS is under no obligation to air those viewpoints either, and this is yet more evidence of the supposedly "liberal" media's desire to bend over backwards to appease right-wingers.

Btw, I'm no anti-gun nut, but does someone want to explain to me how it is that a guy goes into a school and kills children and nobody dares to wonder how the psycho managed to arm himself so well?

Abortion has diminished the value of children."

Now this simply isn't true. By decreasing the supply, you increase the demand, and thus the value. Simple economics, people.

Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Hands

Get this man a one way ticket, window seat.

It is not the job of public schools to teach morality, duh.

I thought right wingers were all about 'instilling values in the home'? Now they want that crammed down the kids throats at school? Too bad, send your kid to a private religious school with all the other fucked up rich kids.

I feel bad for this guy who lost his son at Columbine, but he is so far off base with his wild accusations about why his son died.

rdw: Insulting one religion is as insulting, of not more insulting, than attacking one for their race or sex.

"21st century Islam is absolutely unique in it's level of bloodlust and it's desire to find the youngest and most innocent. Posted by: rdw on September 1, 2006 at 2:53 PM | PERMALINK

Apparently only neocons are allowed to insult religion.

Apparently only neocons are allowed to insult religion.

Actually anyone can insult religions that promote extreme violence. That would be Islam. As Harvard professor Samuel P Huntington stated in his famous book. "Class of civilizations", the borders of Islam are very bloody. Unfortunately for liberals Samual had the documentation. It's in his book.

I sometimes forget I'm posting on a liberal site and the rules of P, C which are exactly contrary to common sense. Libs insult Christians and jews. You are not allowed to insult Islam.

It's a liberal truth that religion is the cause of all wars and all bloodshed has been due to christians. Of course this ignores secularists such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler but that's so 20th Century. It's the liberal habit of insulting christians that has caused them to lose their votes.

The MSM gets it if only the same activity causes them to lose market share.

Good news!

Oil below $59 and Unleaded at $1.45. Several are predicting the Sauds won't support the price until it falls to $50 which should bring retail unleaded in near $1.75 at the pump.

With the drops in heating oil and natural gas as well as interest rates we'll see the solid economic growth continue.

rdw,

then I take it you stand by your view that "21st century Islam is absolutely unique in it's level of bloodlust and it's desire to find the youngest and most innocent."

"Absolutely?" "Unique?" Compared to what? The Crusades? Crusaders routinely slaughtered women and children for the glory of their god. The Inquisition? Torture and obscenely innovative modes of execution devised in the name of Christianity. Islamic extremists are to be condemned for their horrific excesses, but to characterize their methods as "unique" is disingenuous in the extreme.

And I'm getting tired of having to point out that Hitler was no secularist. He was raised a Christian, and he exploited the longstanding fear and hatred of Jews prevalent among the Christian population of Europe to further his megalomaniacal ends.

It's a liberal truth that religion is the cause of all wars and all bloodshed has been due to christians. Of course this ignores secularists such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Hitler

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

Hitler was not a secularist. His speeches are riddled with explicit professions of his Christian faith and appeals to Christian values to protect the fatherland. You are a boob as usual.

Actually anyone can insult religions that promote extreme violence.

Really? Then we can hold Christianity to account for the actions of Hitler, and for the pogroms against the Jews by Eastern Orthodox Christians in Russia:

Many pogroms accompanied the Revolution of 1917 and the ensuing Russian Civil War, an estimated 70,000 to 250,000 civilian Jews were killed in the atrocities throughout the former Russian Empire; the number of Jewish orphans exceeded 300,000.

Of course, the entire history of Christianity has been bloody. And we don't even have to go back to Cromwell's time or the Crusades:

On Friday, Christians angered by last week's executions of three Roman Catholic militants set fire to three cars and a police station and hurled stones at a helicopter carrying a police chief.

Reports quoted witnesses as saying that the Christian crowds were angry about the executions of three Christian militants on September 22.

Fabianus Tibo, 60, Marinus Riwu, 48, and Dominggus da Silva, 42, were convicted of leading a Christian militia that carried out a series of attacks in 2000 on Sulawesi, including a machete and gun assault on an Islamic school where dozens of men were seeking shelter. At least 70 people were killed in the attack.

http://tinyurl.com/fov36

Here's the Fox News description of the event:

Christian mobs torched cars and police posts in restive Sulawesi province. Elsewhere, security forces fired warning shots to disperse crowds who blockaded roads, looted Muslim-owned shops and burned a prison, freeing hundreds of inmates. Four people were reported injured.

On the island of Flores, the executed men's birthplace, machete-wielding mobs ran through the streets, sending women and children running in panic, police and witnesses said.

Christian mobs setting fires to cars and burning buildings! Hmmmmm. I know, I know - it doesn't matter because people hate Muslims worse and libs will never win, tar sands tar sands kyoto.

You're a boob.

Compared to what? The Crusades

Zeke I'm trying to keep it in the last 100 years and if not the last 500. Using the example of the Crusades which occured 800 years ago versus todays Islam is stupid. You are an idiot. It's goes to the heart of why liberalism is so braindead.

Hitler was not raised as a Chritian and he was no Christian. He was anti-religion, the classic secularists.

What I also said was the borders of Islam are Bloody. That's a fact jack.

Here's another fact. Your cousins in Europe will live to see Europe return to religion. And guess what? It won't be Christian.

oil on 1/20/2001: $22.50 a barrel

oil on 10/3/2006: $58.66 a barrel

rc,

Christians fight back. That's the entire point about Europe. They're secular. They perfected diplomacy. They're going to negotiate with the islamic radicals. And then after a few of them get their throats slit the rest will convert to Islam.

American christians have an ace up their sleeve. It's called carpet bombing. According to Musarraf, the PM of Pakistan, the diplomatic term is "bombing you back to the stone age". The Europeans couldn't handle 15th Century Kosovo. We don't have a thing to prove. They know what we'll do.

rdw,

given your inerrant inaccuracy on virtually every matter you address, I am honored to be called a braindead idiot by the likes of you.

Though your disdain for me is evident, and even though I am no Christian, I will deign to turn the other cheek and give you a bit of friendly advice: if you are trying to limit the scope of one of your "arguments" to a particular time frame, using the formulation "absolutely unique" is not not the way to go.

As to Hitler's Christianity: it is generally acknowledged that he was brought up in the Catholic faith. And in his most famous literary tract he wrote:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

( Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 65. )

Now, he may have been a bad Catholic, a lapsed Catholic, or a cynical Catholic. But he certainly found plenty in the Christian tradition to rationalize the extirpation of the Jewish people.

it is generally acknowledged that he was brought up in the Catholic faith. And in his most famous literary tract he wrote:

Actually, no it isn't. Hitler was absolutely an athiest. As was Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and all of the other major butchers of the last century. The notion that war is a religious exercise is bonehead stupid.

if you are trying to limit the scope of one of your "arguments" to a particular time frame, using the formulation "absolutely unique" is not not the way to go.

It's absolutely the way to go. Reaching back 800 years to the crusades to find a relevent comparison to current-day Islam is an act of desperation. It's utterly and obviously nonsense.

Islam IS unique in the modern world regarding religion for it's embrace of extreme violence. The only recent comparisons are in the secular world.

Hitler was not raised as a Chritian and he was no Christian. He was anti-religion, the classic secularists.

Thus explaining neatly why Nazi soldiers in the Wehrmacht wore belt buckles embossed with the motto "Gott Mit Uns", and why the highest caliber of German military decorations continued their traditional cruciform shape under the Nazi regime.

I actually don't think that Hitler was much of a Christian. His beliefs were a hodgepodge. He was willing to parrot anything he had to in order to attain and maintain power. He invoked Christianity and the heritage of the Teutonic Knights in speeches to the masses; he called on Aryan and Norse racial mythologies to private audiences. He endorsed astrology at times. The pseudoscientific Welteislehre (World Ice Doctrine) and hollow-Earth theories crept in to his thinking.

But the overwhelming majority of Germans, high and low, ranking and vile, rich and poor, were in fact Christian both before and during Hitler's rise to power. And they followed him willingly and they committed atrocities without blinking.

It is to be expected that rdw, rather than providing any substantive factual basis for his argument in regard to Nazi beliefs, will instead rush to cite contemporary Islamic atrocities.

Here's a hint, rdw. You can argue that modern Islam is a violent and intolerant faith, and I'll agree with every word you say. That argument is in no way dispositive of the entirely separate argument that Christianity has been, for the overwhelming majority of its own existence, a violent and intolerant faith.

--

rdw at 2:51
"Actually anyone can insult religions that promote extreme violence. That would be Islam...the borders of Islam are very bloody."

rdw at 3:38
"Christians fight back. That's the entire point about Europe. They're secular...American christians have an ace up their sleeve. It's called carpet bombing. According to Musarraf, the PM of Pakistan, the diplomatic term is "bombing you back to the stone age."

Given your initial statement and your later characterization of Christianity, it would seem that your whinging about insults against Christians are unfounded.

That argument is in no way dispositive of the entirely separate argument that Christianity has been, for the overwhelming majority of its own existence, a violent and intolerant faith.

What Christianity was in the year 200 or 600 or 1200 or 1600 is utterly irrelevent today. Trying to confuse the differences between 2106 Islam and 2106 Christianity is a combination of politically correct cowardice and religious bigotry.

You are the classic shallow liberal who will try to blame the worlds ills on religion as long as the discussion area is christianity yet wouldn't dare say a negative word about Islam. Intellectually speaking you are a sleezebag.

I am still waiting on your discussion on Stalin or Lenin or Mao or Pol Pot, among the worst butchers in all of human history and their christian leanings. The suggestion that religion is the cause of the worlds wars isn't flawed. It's DUMB.

A little research goes a long way. Does secularism, as Dostoevsky feared, lead to violence, chaos, social decay? Do school shooters go berserk because of evolution? Or the availability of legal abortion? Well...take a look:

------------------
Indeed, countries containing high percentages of non-believers are among the most healthy and wealthy nations on earth (Paul, 2004). Of course, we must always distinguish between those nations where non-belief has been forced upon the society by dictators (“coercive atheism”) from those societies wherein non-belief has emerged on its own without governmental coercion (“organic atheism”). Nations marked by coercive atheism -- such as China, North Korea, Vietnam, and former Soviet states -- are societies marked by all that comes with totalitarianism: poor economic development, intellectual censorship, widespread corruption, ubiquitous depression, etc.. However, nations marked by high levels of organic atheism – such as Sweden, the Netherlands, and France -- are among the healthiest, wealthiest, most educated, and most free societies on earth.

What about the United States? While the U.S, is one of the wealthiest nations on earth, Norris and Inglehart (2004) are still able to account for its high degree of religiosity and religious belief. As they explain on page 108: “The United States…is one of the most unequal postindustrial societies…relatively high levels of economic insecurity are experienced by many sectors of U.S. society…many American families…face risks of unemployment, the dangers of sudden ill health without adequate private medical insurance, vulnerability to becoming a victim of crime…”

http://www.pitzer.edu/academics/faculty/zuckerman/atheism.html

rdw, Hitler was indeed raised a Catholic. (He was even in a church choir as a child.) He later abandoned Catholicism. However, his anti-Semitism found ready acceptance in a Christian Europe that had been conditioned by 1,900 years of anti-Jewish barbarism. Hitler NEVER ceased believing in what he called "Providence" and he believed God had preserved him for a great task.

I also agree that the words of the right wing trolls are particularly obnoxious today. What is modern conservatism other than a repulsive stew of Confederate flag worship, brain dead creationist idiocy, support for torture, greed, sickening moral hypocrisy, corruption,and a loathsome intolerance for anyone or anything conservatives happen to dislike? I abandoned the Republican Party over 15 years ago because of all of it, and I haven't looked back.

Given your initial statement and your later characterization of Christianity, it would seem that your whinging about insults against Christians are unfounded

I don't mind insults against Christianity. I mind moral and intellectual cowardice. Comparing Islam in 2106 with Christianity 1206 is pure cowardice. It's not an intellectual pursuit. It's just too stupid. The comparison is driven by a fear of insulting Islam and in some cases just anti-christian bigotry. Some people really are that ignorant.

The fact the USA will defend itself using carpet bombing, as we've proven often, has zero to do with Christianity. We don't carpet bomb because we're religious. We carpet bomb because we fight to win. We don't celebrate the deaths that result. In the Islamic world the reality is exactly the opposite. Suicide bombing a jewish family pushing a stroller is a religious experience. It's not just encouraged it's celebrated and rewarded.

The difference between secular Europe and Christian-judeo America is a matter of spine. Secularists have no culture or way of life to defend. All cultures are equal. They've also been spoiled by 60 years of US protection and have forgotten how to fight. They fear the intellectual battle to defend what culture they have left and the physical battle already at their door.

Given your initial statement and your later characterization of Christianity, it would seem that your whinging about insults against Christians are unfounded

I don't mind insults against Christianity. I mind moral and intellectual cowardice. Comparing Islam in 2106 with Christianity 1206 is pure cowardice. It's not an intellectual pursuit. It's just too stupid. The comparison is driven by a fear of insulting Islam and in some cases just anti-christian bigotry. Some people really are that ignorant.

The fact the USA will defend itself using carpet bombing, as we've proven often, has zero to do with Christianity. We don't carpet bomb because we're religious. We carpet bomb because we fight to win. We don't celebrate the deaths that result. In the Islamic world the reality is exactly the opposite. Suicide bombing a jewish family pushing a stroller is a religious experience. It's not just encouraged it's celebrated and rewarded.

The difference between secular Europe and Christian-judeo America is a matter of spine. Secularists have no culture or way of life to defend. All cultures are equal. They've also been spoiled by 60 years of US protection and have forgotten how to fight. They fear the intellectual battle to defend what culture they have left and the physical battle already at their door.

Given your initial statement and your later characterization of Christianity, it would seem that your whinging about insults against Christians are unfounded

I don't mind insults against Christianity. I mind moral and intellectual cowardice. Comparing Islam in 2106 with Christianity 1206 is pure cowardice. It's not an intellectual pursuit. It's just too stupid. The comparison is driven by a fear of insulting Islam and in some cases just anti-christian bigotry. Some people really are that ignorant.

The fact the USA will defend itself using carpet bombing, as we've proven often, has zero to do with Christianity. We don't carpet bomb because we're religious. We carpet bomb because we fight to win. We don't celebrate the deaths that result. In the Islamic world the reality is exactly the opposite. Suicide bombing a jewish family pushing a stroller is a religious experience. It's not just encouraged it's celebrated and rewarded.

The difference between secular Europe and Christian-judeo America is a matter of spine. Secularists have no culture or way of life to defend. All cultures are equal. They've also been spoiled by 60 years of US protection and have forgotten how to fight. They fear the intellectual battle to defend what culture they have left and the physical battle already at their door.

http://eedition.lancasteronline.com/pages/news/edition/IJAM/20061003/A/7/139983

Charles Roberts, the man who murdered the Amish children was home-schooled.

That's two home-schooled multiple murderers in Lancaster County, PA in the last year.

rdw, your task might be easier if you weren't so prone to making untenable assertions such as "Islam is absolutely unique in its bloodlust."

Your first problem is that you're talking about a religion and, presumably, it's cultural, textual, and doctrinal history. In as much as this history is long and complex, it's impossible to avoid comparing it with the three other monotheistic religions that arose in the Middle East and share similarly long and complex histories.

Your second problem is that given the long, complex histories of middle eastern religions, and the extent to which their intertwined, it's possible to find examples of both abject brutality and sublime beauty in all of them. As such, asserting that any one of them is unique in their brutality or their beauty is simply and easily disproved.

Finally, when talking about Islam, you ascribe the views of its most violent believers (i.e. Salafist, Wahabists, etc.) to all people of the Islamic faith. This is not only unhelpful when discussing policies as they relate to the Islamic world, but intellectually lazy. It would be like rejecting Judaism because Kach is fascistic and violent, or rejecting Christianity because of the white supremacy of the Christian Identity movement.

For these reasons, I think you'll find that most readers of this blog are dismissive of your posts regarding Islam, religions, world politics, etc. I don't think anybody here will argue that Islam doesn't have violent adherents and that it's history of misogyny and intolerance aren't disturbing. We'll just point out that Christianity (and Judaism) share similar traits, many of which it has overcome and some of which it continues to struggle with.

Joe,

Hitler was not raised a catholic. He went to public schools and did not go to mass. The relevent point isn't how he was raised but how he ruled and he was hard core anti-religious.

My point was that those who argue religion has been the source and cause of all wars, specifically christianity, are morons. I am amazed at how often I hear this ignorance. Tell me after Hitler, Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro and all of the other bloody bastards of the last century anyone could speak something so obviously stupid?

rdw, I'll repeat that not a person here has asserted that Christianity is the source of all wars. Given that non-Christians fight amongst themselves, this is easily disprovable. Yet, it is perfectly valid to assert that Christians are as prone to violence and war-making as any other people of different religious faiths.

Your first problem is that you're talking about a religion and, presumably, it's cultural, textual, and doctrinal history

No, were not. We've not talking about the twelth century nor making any doctrinal comparisons. We're talking about Islam in 2106 and the FACT that the borders of Islam are bloody. This is true all over the world throughout the history of Islam. The fact some muslims are pacifists doesn't change the fact the borders of Islam are bloody. The fact many Germans refused to participate in the holocost didn't prevent 6M jews from getting butchered.

"No, were not. We've not talking about the twelth century nor making any doctrinal comparisons. We're talking about Islam in 2106 and the FACT that the borders of Islam are bloody. This is true all over the world throughout the history of Islam. The fact some muslims are pacifists doesn't change the fact the borders of Islam are bloody. The fact many Germans refused to participate in the holocost didn't prevent 6M jews from getting butchered."

Thank you, you did an admirable job of proving my point.

It is to be expected that rdw, rather than providing any substantive factual basis for his argument in regard to Nazi beliefs, will instead rush to cite contemporary Islamic atrocities.

What Christianity was in the year 200 or 600 or 1200 or 1600 is utterly irrelevent today. Trying to confuse the differences between 2106 Islam and 2106 Christianity is a combination of politically correct cowardice and religious bigotry.

You are the classic shallow liberal who will try to blame the worlds ills on religion as long as the discussion area is christianity yet wouldn't dare say a negative word about Islam. Intellectually speaking you are a sleezebag.

See my prediction above regarding rdw's response and its expected lack of a "substantive factual basis" for his previous assertions. Quod erat demonstrandum. Emphasis on the final syllable of the last word.

My family and friends will, however, derive endless amusement from my having been described in the same breath as being "liberal" and as "politically correct". Try again.

--

rdw wrote: Suicide bombing a jewish family pushing a stroller is a religious experience.

Bullshit from a blithering bullshit artist.

The actual evidence indicates that the overwhelming majority of suicide bombers are not motivated by religion. The vast majority of suicide bombers are motivated by nationalism and the desire to expel foreign occupiers from what they regard as their homeland. This is the exact situation with Palestinian suicide bombers: they are trying to make what they regard as the Israeli occupation of their homeland untenable.

rdw wrote: "Secularists have no culture or way of life to defend."

That's one of the most inane and idiotic statements in your long career of posting the most inane and idiotic statements that anyone has ever posted on this site.

rdw wrote: "American christians have an ace up their sleeve. It's called carpet bombing."

Yes, rdw, we all know that the thought of murdering innocent people by the hundreds of thousands with carpet bombing or nuclear weapons excites you.

I think the Foley thing has pushed rdw over the edge into complete incoherence.

Your children will find moral and intellectual reward in the US Military. Your children will earn respect and discipline by enlisting and serving President Bush's mission in Iraq. Children want love and respect from their parents and peers. There is no better place for them to find acceptance and training than in the US military, where they will learn Christian values while fighting against the bloody doctrines of Islam that threaten our very existence.

The fact many Germans refused to participate in the holocost didn't prevent 6M jews from getting butchered.

Whew! At least rdw isn't a holocaust denier. Alas, that's about the best one can reasonably assert re his "bloody borders of Islam" tripe.

PS: To all--ever notice the growth "secularism" and the spread of free markets? Something to ponder for you lovers of "creative destruction". Relativists, indeed.

The suggestion that religion is the cause of the worlds wars isn't flawed. It's DUMB.

Religion is the cause of human stupidity. You personify it.

Yet, it is perfectly valid to assert that Christians are as prone to violence and war-making as any other people of different religious faiths.

No it isn't. It's dumb to make such an assertion. No Christian demonination celebrate suicide bombings and the claughter of innocents. Islam stands alone.

Don't take my word for it. Samuel P Huntington has already documented Islamic history and the current world map. The borders of Islam are bloody and have always been bloody. It's called "The clash of civilizations". You are a politically correct coward.

"It is in this that the monstrous crime of these enemies of Christian socialism lies! What the basest hypocrisy they carry before them the cross-- the instrument of that murder which, in their thoughts, they commit over and over-- as a new divine sign of Christian awareness, and allow mankind to kneel to it. They even pretend to be preaching the teachings of Christ. But their lives and deeds are a constant blow against these teachings and their Creator and a defamation of God!

We are the first to exhume these teachings! Through us alone, and not until now, do these teachings celebrate their resurrection! Mary and Magdalene stood at the empty tomb. For they were seeking the dead man! But we intend to raise the treasures of the living Christ!

Herein lies the essential element of our mission: we must bring back to the German Volk the recognition of those teachings! For what did the falsification of the original concept of Christian love, of the community of fate before God and of socialism lead to? By their fruits ye shall know them! The suppression of freedom of opinion, the persecution of the true Christians, the vile mass murders of the Inquisition and the burning of witches, the armed campaigns against the people of free and true Christian faith, the destruction of towns and villages, the hauling away of their cattle and their goods, the destruction of their flourishing economies, and the condemnation of their leaders before tribunals, which, in their unrelenting hypocrisy, can only be described as balaphemous. That is the true face of those sanctimonious churches that have placed themselves between God and man, motivated by selfishness, personal greed for recognition and gain, and the ambition to maintain their high-handed willfulness against Christ's deep understanding of the necessity of a socialist community of men and nations. We must turn all the sentiments of the Volk, all its thinking, acting, even its beliefs, away from the anti-Christian, smug individualism of the past, from the egotism and stupid Phariseeism of personal arrogance, and we must educate the youth in particular in the spirit of those of Christ's words that we must interpret anew: love one another; be considerate of your fellow man; remember that each one of you is not alone a creature of God, but that you are all brothers! This youth will, wit loathing and contempt, abandon those hypocrites who have Christ on their lips but the devil in their hearts, who give alms in order to remain undisturbed as they themselves throw their money around, who invoke the Fatherland as they fill their own purses by the toil of others, who preach peace and incite to war.... and on it goes."

- Hitler in Memoirs of a Confinant, p.139-140

SA,

Suicide bombers are ALWAYS muslim and are in fact motivated by religion. 9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with Palestine and the bloody borders of Islam are not limited to Israel.

rather than providing any substantive factual basis for his argument in regard to Nazi beliefs,

I never discussed or referred to Nazi beliefs.

Alas, that's about the best one can reasonably assert re his "bloody borders of Islam" tripe.

Except it's not my tripe. That would be the good professor of History from Harvard. Samuels book is one of the most famous of the last two decades and his assertions remain undenied. As you can imagine. A large majority of the faculty was very unhappy with him yet with nearly 15 years to disprove his data none have made a serious effort.

Suicide bombers are ALWAYS muslim

Wrong again.

Kamikaze (Japanese: 神風; kami = god, spirit; kaze = wind) is a word of Japanese origin, which in the English language usually refers to the suicide attacks by military aviators from the Empire of Japan, against Allied shipping, in the closing stages of the Pacific campaign of World War II.

In these attacks Japanese pilots would deliberately attempt to crash their aircraft into naval vessels and other ships. Sometimes laden with explosives, extra bombs, and carrying full fuel tanks, their objective was to stop the Allied advance towards the Japanese home islands by causing as much damage and destruction as possible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze

To all--ever notice the growth "secularism" and the spread of free markets? Something to ponder for you lovers of "creative destruction

Except the freest of free markets is the USA and secularism still hold minority status with even the Democratic party maintaining a safe distance. Highly regulated Europe is hardly free market territory proving and correlation flimsy indeed.

Europe is secular because they are weak. They've lost confidence and with it faith. They won't be secular for much longer.

where they will learn Christian values while fighting against the bloody doctrines of Islam that threaten our very existence.

Not my kids!!! They've already decided the military life is not for them although they are decidedly christian and very conservative. I've found I am the most liberal of my tribe regarding abortion.

But they that's the beauty of America isn't it? We are free to choose. That's why this is the greatest nations on god's green earth!

"We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls.... We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity... in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people. "

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Passau, 27 October 1928, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Zehlendorf, [cited from Richard Steigmann-Gall's The Holy Reich]

rc,

I know this is hard to try to focus in. We're trying to keep current. We are talking about the world we actually live in. We've not going back to the crusades or the inquisition or even WWII. We're staying in 2106 and maybe the recent past.

I'm saying that right now, this very minute, the borders of Islam are bloody.

BTW: Did you RDW fans see the news Shinzo Abe was in fact elected PM of Japan after making removal of Article 9 a referrendum on his election. The people have spoken and they said, "Get Rid of it"! Did you also know he visited the famous cementary of war dead that so upsets the Chinese just a month before the vote?

You've got to give me my chops here. I predicted this. Shinzo is a bigger fan of GWB than even Kouzimi and he will be by far the most aggressive Japanese PM of the post WWII era. By this vote Japan has decided the post-WWII era is over. They will not longer apoligize or feel guilty but will join all other nations with the same rights to pursue a military power commensuarte with their economic power and they're not about to ask permission.

Within one decade Japan will be the world. A few months back Russia shot on some Japanese ships near a disputed island. Russia has no shot at matching Japanese economic and technical prowess. Russia will soon come to regret that action. At a time of Japans choosing they will send more vessels near the island and if the Russian Navy attacks the Russian Navy will be destroyed. Not for the 1st time. Look it up.

Islam IS unique in the modern world regarding religion for it's embrace of extreme violence.

Remind me, which Islamic sect did the IRA belong to -- Sunni or Shiite?

Or could it be when groups lack the political or military power to find redress for their grievances they resort to asymmetrical warfare?

*Actually, that was just a rhetorical question meant to expose your foolishness -- no need to answer.

I know this is hard to try to focus in. We're trying to keep current.

Having had your points rebutted one by one, now you're concerned with "keeping it current."

The relevant point is that neither "extreme violence" NOR suicide bombings are unique to Islam. Thus your hyper propaganda is revealed for what it is; not worthwhile analysis, just the shrieking of a rabid harpy.

They will not longer apoligize or feel guilty but will join all other nations with the same rights to pursue a military power commensuarte with their economic power and they're not about to ask permission.

Like Iran?

The relevant point is that neither "extreme violence" NOR suicide bombings are unique to Islam

Yes they are and only Islam celebrates extreme violence. Islam is in religious wars all over the globe. The borders of Islam are bloody. That is a proven, well-documented fact.

which Islamic sect did the IRA belong to -- Sunni or Shiite?

Which religion supported and celebrated the actions of the IRA?

when groups lack the political or military power to find redress for their grievances they resort to asymmetrical warfare

That they lack political or military power speaks to their extreme backwardness. They are a medievil culture STILL trying to blame their endemic failures on the rest of the world. The Brits and French left them alone a long time ago as they did the rest of the world. It is only ISLAM that embraces terror.

The people who walk up to baby carriages to blow up little girls are by definition cockroaches. Those who support them in any way are by definition cockroaches. There can be no negotiation. Only extermination. cockroaches carry only disease. They must go.

Yes they are and only Islam celebrates extreme violence

No, you keep being shown other examples, you keep pretending they don't exist. Just two weeks ago Christian mobs had car-b-ques and burned shops to the ground in Indonesia, wielding machetes as they rioted in the streets. This was a result of a ruling about a massacre of 70 Muslims in 2000 by Christian militias.

The borders of Islam are bloody. That is a proven, well-documented fact.

No, it's just a meaningless phrase you keep repeating.

Like Iran?

Iran is attempting to punch well above it's weight. Which will in fact be quite interesting down the road. Egpyt, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, to name just three, will not allow Iran to exceed them in military capability.

You've obviously missed the elegance and brilliance of GWBs actions in Korea. With the world ready to wait for America to be the policeman and bad guy and then to accept the blame for anything and everything GWB has pulled a magic act. Before they even realized it, some still don't, he made Russia, China, NK, SK and Japan equal partners fully resposible for events and fully exposed to the results.

The whackjob will toy with the US and the UN knowing the US will be restrained. The whackjob will toy with Japan knowing they are constrained by their constitution. Except no more article 9. It'll take Japan a couple/few years to build offensive capabilities but NK absolutely understands the rules are changing. They may toy with Japan however history suggests that will eventually prove to be exceptionally painful.

China and Russia are not under any illusions either. Each knows Japanese technical prowess will soon allow them to destroy each and soon after that destroy both.

The most elegant aspect is liberals don't have to clue as to what's happened. GWB has remade Asia and they don't know.

This was a result of a ruling about a massacre of 70 Muslims in 2000 by Christian militias.

This really is not hard. It might seem by looking at Iraq and the west bank and southern lebanon and Afghanistan it's just muslim killing muslim. That's not true. The bloody borders of Islam are referring to Islams wars with virtually every other religion be it Christian. Jew, Hindu, buddha, etc. As you state above the war is christian vs Islam. As I've already stated christians fight back. it's the secularists who are the cowards.

The Brits and French left them alone a long time ago as they did the rest of the world.

Really? We didn't prop up leaders in Iran, Iraq, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, providing them with money and weapons to be good strongmen for us in return for access to their oil?

Saddam was OUR boy. The Saudi Royal family are still OUR boys (Bush and Bandar are, in fact, dating). The Shah was our boy.

The oppression of the peoples of those countries by our proxy leaders has built up decades of tremendous resentment, in addition to giving Israel weapons with which to kill Arabs, in addition our keeping foreign troops in the country where Mecca is located.

Either you missed a few weeks in history class or the Pennsylvania public school system is as backward as it's rumoured to be.

GWB has remade Asia and they don't know.

About the only thing GWB has ever remade is a sandwich -- and that's because he flubbed it the first time by putting the baloney on the outside.

The fact that Asian countries are arming or becoming more bellicose or are increasing their industrial output has everything to do with amorphous global factors and nothing to do with Bush.

By the way, he doesn't maketh the sun to shine either, just in case you thought that was him too.

it's the secularists who are the cowards.

you're a fucking psycho. Upthread you say it's the "secularists" like Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and Lenin who were responsbile for ALL the violence.

You can't even keep your bullshit straight. Does your family know you do drugs?

The borders of Islam are bloody. That is a proven, well-documented fact.

The clash of Civilizations - Remaking of the World Order - Samuel P Huntington page 254: section heading, Incidence: Islam's Bloody Borders.

Here's the last sentence:

Muslim bellicosity and violence are late 20th century facts which neither Muslim nor mon-Muslims can deny.

Here's a relevent footnote: No single statement I made in my Foreign Affairs article attracted more critical comment than, Islam has bloody borders. I made that judgement based on a casual survey of intercivilizational conflicts. Quantitative evidence from every disinterested source conclusively demonstrates it validity.

BTW: The essay in Foreign Affairs had until that time been their most discussed and commented on essay ever. It led to the book and major fame for this Harvard Professor. I'd write more about his accomplishments and positons but I'm too lazy.

reality check,

The claim the middle east has been victimized by European or American dominance is no more valid there than in Africa, South America or Asia. Yet they are not so bloody. The Brits, French and Exxon left very long time ago and the middle east gets ever more bloodier.

I know it's a lot to ask but at some point the Islamic world is going to have to accept responsibility for it's own behavior. I know in the liberal world there are only two possibilities. Either you are America or you are it's victim. In the real world it doesn't work that way.

Muslims kill Muslims and everyone else because they are a violent people. It's not our fault. It's not Exxons fault. It's not even the fault of the Euopeans although they did by far the most damage. It's islams fault. They still live in the 12th century.

Muslim bellicosity and violence are late 20th century facts which neither Muslim nor mon-Muslims can deny.

I have another more ominous observation for you:

Christian bellicosity and violence is a fact of the last fifteen centuries which neither Christian nor non-Christians can deny.

How did I reach this conclusion? Let me tell you, it was easy.

I made this judgement based on a casual survey of intercivilizational conflicts. Quantitative evidence from every disinterested source conclusively demonstrates it validity.

You may find those sources at your local public library or on the internets.

rdw: We're staying in 2106 and maybe the recent past.

So much for having a grip on reality.

Within one decade Japan will be the world.

Damn. Let's not bother worrying about those radical Islamic terrorists.

The claim the middle east has been victimized by European or American dominance is no more valid there than in Africa, South America or Asia. Yet they are not so bloody

Let's see: arguably more continuous warfare in Africa than any other continent.

So wrong again for the fifteenth time this thread. Reeallly wrong.

South and Central American countries have been having coups and rebel infighting and wars almost non-stop for the past fifty years. And of course the U.S. has been knee deep in supporting it at every turn.

And Asia is just coming out of a century of bloodshed from China to Japan to Laos and Burma and Cambodia and Thailand.

Next false assertion please?

rdw, while it's been fun deconstructing your argument that Islam is the worst evil ever and that Muslims must be exterminated like cockroaches, I don't have all day to play with you.

Another time.

Sweet dreams of genocide!

Damn. Let's not bother worrying about those radical Islamic terrorists.

I'm not worried about them. They're no threat to America. The threat is to Western Europe. There are 1.2B Muslims and they can't beat 5M jews in Israel because the Jews fight back and we help them. We've got example after example after example since 1948. The jews kick the crap out of them every time. They can't possibly fight the USA.

Europe will not fight. They've already made it clear they will negotiate. They have perfected negotiation. Unfortunately they've done less well with breeding. Western Europe will in due time become majority muslim. Sometime long before then the population under 25 will be majority muslim and then Western European culture will be replaced by Islamic culture.

Eastern Europe, Asia and America will never convert. Russia took carpet bombing to a whole new level in Chechyna. China would be even less civilized.

Africa - constant bloody struggle. Darfur ring a bell? How about Uganda? How about Liberia?

South America is a potboiler. Asia has it's share of bloody conflicts going on. War and strife are not an exclusively Islamic trait.

Muslims must be exterminated like cockroaches,

Terrorists and their supporters are cockroaches, not all muslims.

You've deconstructed nothing. You did know Samuel P is STILL on the Harvard Faculty and remains they're most famous professor of History and Political Science?

You should also know his chapter remains quite the centerpiece of discussion with the PC being consistently enraged yet he NEVER backs down. Sam keeps waiting for someone to prove him wrong. It's going on 15 years.

South America is a potboiler

GC,

The book will be in your library. It's very well known and I can assure up Huntington is very well respected. Neither South America nor Africa compare with the borders of Islam. Much of the strife in Africa is at the borders of Islam.

I am not saying there are no other wars. I am saying with about 20% of the worlds population they have a vastly higher proportion of conflict and the level of conflict is vastly more barbaric.

Islamic radicals brag about the face life or death means nothing in the islamic world because martyrdom is a higher state of being. They are happy to die and unlike the silly stereotypes liberals attempt to attack to suicide bombers they are neither uneducated nor poor. They see out value for life as our defeat.

I think in regards to Europe they are correct. Americans think like General Patton. If they wish to die in a suicide attack then we need to kill them, and their supporters, 1st. We'll negotiate later.

Not to be left behind, we are training up our own little blond haired versions of equally fervent and willling martyrs. Seen the promos for Jesus Camp. Made my little Jewish heart freeze up, lemme tell ya. I don't want either religion to force me at gunpoint to convert. And before you start, I am not going to spent the next five hours responding to screeds on how my liberty is threatened by a couple thousand nut-jobs hanging out in caves.

Africa - constant bloody struggle. Darfur ring a bell? How about Uganda? How about Liberia?

I understood the genocide in darfur to be muslims killing christians. Is that wrong?

BTW: I've always been for a more active role in Africa for the US military to protect the weak against genocide. The most serious downside to the political wars over Iraq is that by making the political cost of war so high the US will stay out of Africa for a very, very long time and millions more will die. This is especially true after rescuing Muslims in Kosovo and being attacked by Muslims on 9/11. The US has done more to protect and ace muslims than other muslims. You know as well as I there will be a genocide against some defensless muslim population and the US will be asked to intervene. It will be a political impossibility.

Seen the promos for Jesus Camp

You are so liberal. I've seen some specials on it. Two questions. How many kids? I didn't count a dozen in what I saw on ABCs good morn america. I also didn't see any suicide belts.

Am I missing somthing?

BTw: want something real to fret about. Demographics.

"secularism being responsible for school killings"

"For over two generations, the public school system has taught in a moral vacuum, expelling God from the school and from the government, replacing him with evolution, where the strong kill the weak, without moral consequences and life has no inherent value."

"Suicide bombers are ALWAYS muslim"

I lived for a number of years in Bath, Michigan. I've seen the graves that prove these statements to be ahistorical:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

Russia took carpet bombing to a whole new level in Chechyna. China would be even less civilized. rdw at 9:57 PM

Terrorists and their supporters are cockroaches… rdw at 10:02 PM

…They see out value for life as our defeat. …rdw at 10:11 PM

… Mr. Pape says his research indicates that, every major suicide campaign has what he calls a secular and political goal, to compel democracies to withdraw military forces from areas the bombers view as their territory.
"Iraq is a prime example of the strategic logic of suicide terrorism. Before the American invasion in March 2003, Iraq never experienced a suicide terrorist attack in its history. Since the invasion of 2003, suicide terrorism has been growing rapidly. Suicide terrorism has doubled in Iraq every year that 140,000 American combat forces have been stationed in the country, and we are on pace now to set a new record for the year."
Mr. Pape says suicide terrorism is not primarily a product of Islamic fundamentalism, although he says religion is used as a recruiting and fundraising tool.
He says the world's leading suicide terrorist group is the Tamil Tigers, a secular Hindu group in Sri Lanka.
Mr. Pape says the Tamil Tigers have committed more suicide attacks than the Palestinian militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
He says the objective of compelling countries to withdraw military forces from territory the terrorists perceive as occupied has been the central goal of suicide campaigns in Lebanon, Israel, Sri Lanka and among separatists in the Russian republic of Chechnya and the disputed region of Kashmir, which is divided between India and Pakistan...

…want something real to fret about. Demographics.: rdw at 10:23 PM

Shorter Brian Rohrbough:

"Charles Darwin, Margaret Sanger and Madalyn Murray O'Hair murdered my child."

Fuckin' kook.

American Hawk said: "Democrats kill babies and rob raves on purpose. Republicans sometimes make mistakes on their way to introducing liberty to an opressed nation. IF you can't se ethe difference, you may be a sociopath."

Spoken like a true Pat Buchanan-lite.

FWIW: The shooter of those Amish girls was home-schooled and he and his wife were active in their church.

has been the central goal of suicide campaigns in Lebanon, Israel, Sri Lanka and among separatists in the Russian republic of Chechnya and the disputed region of Kashmir, which is divided between India and Pakistan...

So Pope obvioisly sees this as an Islamic event since all of his citations include muslims

here is another appearance of blatant racism. Scratch a 'publican, uncover racism.

Mike, you are the classic sanctimonious lib. I love the racist charge. It shows how steeped in narrow minded stereotypical thinking. It also regularly serves as evidence of your elitism and ingrained cowardice. I think the way it's designed to work is I am supposed to be shamed at the mere accusation of being called a racist. Nothing is worse in your PC world. Too bad your PC world is dead.

A reference to Demographics is by definition generic. To read more into it requires the use of a small mind. Further, in my case the reference was to the shrinking pool of liberals (secularists) as evidenced by Europe and the red state blue state transition we've seen here.

While I've made it clear the pool of liberals is clearly shrinking I don't recall ever suggesting this is a bad thing. While the loss of western civilization in Western Europe should be something to lament I'm not a fan of what it's become. I hope they change and start defending themselves. Otherwise it's just another example of natural selection at work.

Religion is the root of all evil. Only a fool would be a believer.

Only a fool would be a believer

How ironic, only the fools reproduce. The enlightened Europeans are breeding themselves out of existance. Somehow I think Darwin would disagree with you.

It's called survival of the fittest.

monkeybone:

"Sorry, the Maher story turned out to be a load of crap. Next?"

Just like a wingnut. If you actually click on the link, you find out that "producer Rome Hartman in a statement said that Bill Maher was never told he could not discuss religion in a 'Free Speech' segment. Maher claimed that was the case last Friday on his HBO show."

In other words, in a classic non-denial denial, the producer of the show claims Maher was never told "he could not discuss religion". But never addresses the issue of whether the plug was pulled on Maher because of the content of his speech. "You can talk about religion all you want--just don't talk about atheism. etc..."

It's no wonder this stuff works so well on credulous dimwits like the original poster. You see this stuff all the time coming out of the white house--a prime example being Condi's recent statement that Tenet never expressed any "public reservations" about Al Queda policy leading up to 9/11. Of course he never expressed anything publicly, they were classified discussions of the NSC.

How stupid do they think we are. Oh, that's right. Never mind...

rdw wrote:

How ironic, only the fools reproduce. The enlightened Europeans are breeding themselves out of existance. Somehow I think Darwin would disagree with you.

It's called survival of the fittest.

Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.

Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.

That's a dumb statement even by liberal standards.

So what is the ideology of those breeding themselves out of existance?

Not really any point in having a conversation with someone who clearly sees the phenomenon of population and demographics as some sort of "race war" to be won by sheer force of reproduction. You and Nicolae Ceauşescu would get along like gangbusters. Also, you might want to read up on parallel construction while you're at it...

To learn more about Ceauşescu, and the elements of style, check your local library.

as some sort of "race war" to be won by sheer force of reproduction

You are babbling. No one said or suggested anything about a race war. There's no need for a war. The European secularists are breeding themselves out of existance. They are leaving of their own free will. It's not real hard. If you don't have kids there's no next generation. It's clear case of Darwinian evolution.

No one said or suggested anything about a race war. There's no need for a war. The European secularists are breeding themselves out of existance.

A distinction without a difference. Sure there's no need for a war, the dainty elites of Europe are surrendering, or as you say "breeding themselves out of existence."

I'll step out now. Surely there's no need for my part in this tete-a-tete, as the implications of your own arguments do a far more effective job refuting your position than anything I could say.

'night.

A distinction without a difference.

You are still babbling. I am not making an argument. I am stating a stark but clear fact. Europe is breeding itself out of existance. Birthrates in Spain and Italy are at 1.2 versus a replacment rate of 2.1. Worse rates have been below replacement levels for 3 decades and are still dropping. Virtually every European state is now shinking or will start within a decade. Once they start the rate of shrinkage will accelerate for the next 3 decades.

We know for a fact that excluding for immigration Italy and Spain will lose at least 40% of their population within 75 years and 64% within 150 years.

There's nothing to debate here. There are no distinctions to be made. These are clear, unambigious, simple facts. Where is does get complicted is who will be taking care of these populations as they age? Clearly immigration is a necessity but where from? Northern Africa? Islamic? Will they bring their own culture or assimilate? If they don't assimlate at what point do they become the majority? If they become the majority will they vote to enforce Islamic law?

The bottom line is Europe as we know it is headed toward extinction.

and as soon as we all start shrinking (Japan, Singapore and South Korea are already there along with Europe) thed world'll be a better place.