in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000. NOTE: That is NOT
me pictured at left. :)
| WSJ | World: Europe Girds for Greek Exit |
0 |
| Shark Tank | Developing: Wasserman Schultz On Verge of Being Cancelled at Temple Israel |
0 |
| T’graph | 0 | |
| NYT | Policy: Romney Calls Education ‘Civil Rights Issue of Our Era’ and Urges Shift |
0 |
| RCP | Campaign 2012: Why Tuesday’s Democratic Primaries Matter |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Diplomacy":
"People are saying what in the world is going on with North Carolina, we look like Mississippi." - NC Gov. Bev Perdue (D) on the passage of Amendment One, 5-11-12
A friendly reminder about acts of so-called “Christian terrorism”
As Norway tries to pick up the pieces from yesterday’s horrific terrorist attacks that have left at least 91 dead, many of them young people from a youth camp in Utoya, the mainstream media has turned its attention to the suspect the Norwegian authorities have in custody: 32 year-old Anders Behring Breivik. Of Breivik, CNN reports:
(CNN) — As Norway struggles to come to terms with its greatest loss of life in decades, all eyes are on the man charged in the explosion in central Oslo and the deadly shooting rampage at a youth camp.
While police have not officially named him, Norwegian television and newspaper reports have identified the suspect as 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik, of Norwegian origin.
A picture is emerging, gleaned from official sources and social media, of a right-wing Christian fundamentalist who may have had an issue with Norway’s multi-cultural society.
Norwegian and international news outlets have run photographs of a blond man with blue-green eyes and chiseled features, dressed in a preppy style.
The caption on the picture CNN has of him reads, “A picture is emerging of Norway attacks suspect Anders Behring Breivik as a right-wing Christian fundamentalist.” Is he really? That remains to be seen. But for purposes of discussion, let’s assume this is a fact.
We all know where this is going. After the widespread speculation yesterday that the attacks might have been carried out by Islamofascists – and as many pointed out, the speculation was entirely justifiable considering the growing Muslim fundamentalist problem in Norway – as soon as the news media started reporting about an alleged connection between Breivik and “right-wing Christian fundamentalists”, the left – fresh from lecturing people on not jumping to conclusions – smelled blood. Anytime the left can make any type of parallel between extremist Christians and terrorism, they foolishly believe that negates any valid arguments conservatives have made against radical Islam and the routine deadly attacks that we hear reported about in the media almost as often as we hear about disagreements between Republicans and Democrats. The common comment is, “Hey, Christians are terrorists, too!”
Unfortunately for them, the reality is quite different. As I’ve explained before:
There is no issue that brings out the blatant hypocrisy, illogic, stupidity, and duplicitous nature of activist liberals more than when it comes to Christianity and the left’s outrageous attempts at equating rare and isolated incidents of extremism committed because of the mistaken belief by a tiny few wackos that the Bible promotes violence against non-believers, to the routine, worldwide Islamofascistic terrorism that is both promoted and mandated by the Koran itself.
I expanded on that in a later post:
Isolated acts of “Christian” extremism are typically committed by loner types or small groups of disturbed individuals who have grossly perverted the word of God into something it is not: A call to arms against non-believers. In the Christian faith, there is no “punisher” of non-believers here on earth. ”The decider” – so to speak – is God Himself. There is no growing global, thriving network of Christian extremists plotting, scheming, recruiting by the thousands, intimidating, terrorizing, killing so-called “infidels.” On the other hand, the decades-old organized Islamofascism network has a number of “leaders” worldwide – the most infamous of course being Osama bin Laden, and their bases are scattered throughout Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and most anywhere else the Islamic faith prevails, because the Koran specifically gives the green light to Muslim believers to take up arms against non-believers, using any means necessary.
Also:
What global white/Christian terrorist network trained Tim McVeigh? How many instances can you point to where white Christians have trained to only fly but not land a plane? How many white Christian terror cells/plots have been busted up worldwide? What white Christian churches across the US and other countries provide safe havens and planning areas for white Christian terrorists? Who is the OBL equivalent amongst white Christian terrorists around the world?
Moral relativist liberals won’t answer that question because they can’t. There is no global organized Christian terrorist network anywhere remotely near close to being on par with the Al Qaedas, Hamas’, Hezbollahs, Talibans, etc of the world. There just isn’t. No matter how hard they try to justify in their tiny minds their strained, incredible moral equations between mainstream Christianity and these mainstream Islamofascistic groups, they can’t. This is something we all need to keep in mind in the coming weeks as hardcore left, in concert with the mainstream media, double down on their efforts to paint the Norway terrorist as representative of Christian beliefs worldwide – something they would never do if the suspect was connected to Islamofascism in any way, shape or form. We’d be hearing lots of tempered “Let’s not rush to judgment” and “this isn’t representative of mainstream Islam” from mainstream media networks, pundits, commentators, etc. Yet, oddly enough, when the perp is suspected of having Christian ties, the exact opposite rule applies, as I have written about before:
You read reprehensible [Islamic oppression] stories like this, and you scream out in outrage – yet at the first sound you make about how this is just one more example of the type of “acceptable” behavior that is prevelant amongst Islamists, someone on the left will jump in angrily and demand that you “acknowledge” that morally repulsive behavior like this is not characteristic of Islam on the whole – that acts like these are committed “only by a militant few.” Which is a lie. Yet, you have a few isolated incidents of extremist “Christian/right wing” (or whatever they’re calling it today) violence here in the US this year, and all of a sudden it’s a “widespread problem,” and one that “proves” what “they’ve” been saying all along about us crazy right-wingers, and as a result, we must be “watched a little closer” by DHS.
That the left can’t see the differences between a few acts of radical extremist fringe violence here in the US committed by lone, depraved sociopaths, and the worldwide, almost weekly incidents of Islamofascism committed against innocent civilians – some that are terrorist acts against the west, while others “acceptable” acts of “punishment” for Muslim men and women who allegedly have “broken” Islamic “law” – says a hell of a lot more about the left in this country than it does the right in terms of perspective and the ability to distinguish between good and evil and isolated versus epidemic.
I pray for the families of the victims of yesterday’s terrorist attacks. I cannot even imagine the horror of thinking your child is safe at a youth camp and then finding out later that they’d been viciously murdered alongside many of their fellow campgoers at a place any person would have naturally assumed was reasonably safe. I also can’t imagine thinking that when you go to work you have a reasonable expectation of being safe in your place of employment only to cruelly realize later that you were not. Even if terrorism doesn’t claim your body, it can claim your mind as you are never quite the same once you’ve experienced it – whether directly or indirectly.
At the same time, I also pray for the people whose heads are buried so deeply into the sand that they either can’t recognize or refuse to admit the difference between isolated acts of terrorism by lone extremists and routine acts of terrorism commited not by “fringe” groups but by mainstream terror groups like Al Qaeda who are getting their direction on terrorism straight from their “holy book” itself. There really is no moral equation here, and the sooner the left realizes that the more we can work together at combatting the real problem.
I won’t hold my breath on that happening anytime soon, however. After all, these are the same group of folks who still believe that Jared Loughner was some radical Tea Partier, in spite of the fact that the evidence suggests quite the contrary. This a group of people who steadfastly refuse to open their eyes and see the light when the facts have interrupted the little narratives they’ve created about conservatives in attempts to marginalize and demonize the political opposition. Why? Because misleading the American people, winning elections as a result, and getting your agenda shoved through state legislatures and the US Congress is something that must happen at any cost – including, sadly, at the expense of the truth and common sense.
No, Virginia. Ignorance is most certainly NOT bliss.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
All your points are valid Sister but unfortunately this is what the left and MSM have been dreaming about. From the ground zero mosque to Major Asan’s rampage, everything will be “relative” from now on. This incident will be trotted out everytime anyone speaks the viewpoint that islam is NOT a religion of peace.
Oh Great! Tea Party members especially, and Conservatives in general, are going to be classified as terrorists now by the Liberals. And at every rally, Janet Napolitano will make sure to post hoards of DHS agents.
Exactly what church does this guy attend? How have they concluded he is a “right-wing, fundamentalist Christian?”
Most “fundies” I know may object to your buying alcohol on Sunday but they don’t run around blowing up buildings and murdering kids at summer camp with automatic weapons…
I’ll need a bit more information before I make up my mind on this one.
…..b-b-b-but this goes so WELL with Barry’s “bitter clinger” view of things!
(See my comment on Phineas’ post at 1:31.)
This: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism#Examples_of_attacks :o
I think that your arguments are weakened by your ideologically based need to be “refuting liberals online” and what not.
I don’t know what you have to do to qualify as a “moral relativist liberal” because you decided to just toss that out there without definition. If you didn’t have a little bit of cover, I might accuse you of employing an ad hominem improperly. But I will answer the question you posed. No, there is no Christian counterpart to OBL.
I realize you felt the need to respond to the eminent leftist intellectual heavyweight Whoopie Goldberg who charged some Christians as terrorists. Her comment was as ignorant as yours are about the relationship between Islam and terrorism. You see….OBL….he was a heretic. He was not a practicing Muslim. I realize that you willfully ignore the number of imams around the world who have declared this to be so. You have to….if you did not embrace this septic notion of the religion of Islam….well…it causes you to question your own world view further. I get that.
Your notion that there are fringe terrorist groups and mainstream terrorist groups is sickening and sad. All terrorists are by nature and definition to be considered fringe groups because they kill people outside the bounds of a state. Duh.
I get it…you’re chagrined because one of your ideological brethren committed an atrocious act. Maybe you could use this moment to consider moderating your own views so that you might make a contribution to a civil society that is actually civil.
Good luck in the future….you have a very nice looking website.
Agree with you Sister! It’s a good thing that neither Hindus nor Christians, nor for that matter Buddhists ever, organize, preach and propagandize violence in the service of their religion. Only Muslims seem to do that. No, actually do that, and point to their book as the sole reason why.
But, the left will never let go of their fantasy. Nor of their lie that all religions are the same. Their narrative is very comforting for them, it reinforces their narrow minded liberal fascism.
Shorter version: When it’s Muslims, then Islam itself is the enemy and must be cleansed from the face of the Earth. When it’s a Christian… Well, we shouldn’t be so quick to judge.
David, tell that to Jared Laughner, tell that to CNN who did their best to tie him to Sarah Palin. Or Dan Rather, who still clings to a lie as if it were the truth. Talk about your “bitter clingers”. Speaking of that line, tell that to the President who is as bitter and partisan as every other leftist leader. For every Imam who denouces OBL, I will give you odds there are twice as many who support him if not three times. Tell that to the woman who created the line “it’s just a vast rightwing conspriacy”…. Who was lying when that line was uttered on national television?? How fast were we not to judge Major Asan?? But what exactly was he… just another muslim terrorist.
It is not our side that needs to moderate our position. It is the left who needs to come back from the brink, as their hatefilled rhetoric is exactly what is pushing us over the edge. – Lorica
Wisco?? What are you talking about?? When a Christian does something radical, we are the 1st ones to denouce their horrible behavior.
1st off do you know that this guy is actually a Christian? No you don’t, all you do know is exactly what places like CNN want you to believe. You have fallen into their very trap and are fool enough to believe it. – Lorica
@Wisco: If one reads the Bible, one will see where it is coming from, from a stance lead by the Ten Commandments.
If one reads the Quran, one will see where it is coming from, too, from a stance of “If one does not convert, force them to, enslave them or kill them.” And those are the only real choices offered by the Quran.
Now, about the moral equivalence of Islam and Christianity…
And BTW, nowhere in the Bible does it say not to judge, but that the same standards one uses to judge another will be used to judge him who is judging.
Maybe he was baptized, but there was nothing christian about what he did. That won’t matter to anti-christian bigots on the left.
David and Wisco need only look at the founder of Islam to see the truth. Muhammed is the ultimate example for Muslims everywhere; they regard him as such. Some simply do not pattern themselves as closely as others. He murdered for the “faith” and so others do as well.
Now compare him to Christ and tell me that each religion teaches the same things.
@Lorica: I think you are wrong about the number of imams who supported OBL. You should really try to back up your assertions with fact instead of conjecture.
This site is full of people who guess at things…suppose things…this site even assumed this killer was a jihadist.
The rest of what you posted was irrelevant to my point.
Yes I should back up my post with facts. Where exactly are your facts David??? I re-read your post and at NO point did I see a link to any CBS/NBC/ABC/USA/WSJ poll that shows how your conjecture is backed up. If you want to dismiss my point I could careless, but certainly don’t hold me to a standard that you won’t hold yourself too. I have seen the video tape of Muslim’s dancing in the street as the towers were falling down. I have seen Aljezeera glorify the assasination of our soldiers as they are trying to deliver food and medicine to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. People who begged the US to stop the regimes that ruled them with terror and atrocities. Look at how the people of Iran call out to the US to save them from the idiocy of their government. Yet some still support OBL and ALQ.
Infact, I have heard good patriotic Democrats give their support to OBL and ALQ. Aid and comfort to our enemies. Yet somehow, the people you support take this man, who committed horrible atrocities, whom we know nothing about and do their best to tie him to the right wing painting us all as radicals. Just like they did with Laughner, just like so many other times in the past. yet I need to get my facts together.
– Lorica
David bleats:
Yes. Because we all know there’s been very little connection between Islam and the incidence of worldwide terrorism. It’s only a coincidence that the vast majority of terrorist attacks over the last few decades have been carried out by the followers of Islam. Those fanatics who scream “Allahu Akbar” as they blow up buildings or crash jetliners into skyscrapers are obviously not Muslims….probably Presbyterians, right?
Your assignment is to look up one word: taqiyyah. And so you don’t get confused, it’s not the Mexican liquor used in margaritas. Have you not heard of the imams who condemn terrorist attacks in English for the cameras, while saying the opposite in Arabic to their followers? Or do you willfully blind yourself to that?
Really? Let’s see how much popularity terrorists have in the Muslim world. According to Pew Research, support for militant islamic fundamentalist groups ranges from 18% in Indonesia to 47% in Pakistan. Hamas is viewed favorably by 47% of the respondants in Jordan, and Hezbollah gets a thumb-up from 61% of the Palestinians. In Britain, fully 25% of the Muslims approved of the attacks in London on 7/7/2005. “Fringe groups” seldom command such support. By your standards, liberals like yourself must be a fringe group, since only 20% of Americans identify themselves as such.
In what way, David? ST has aimed a spotlight at nonsensical attempts by leftists like yourself to proclaim a moral equivalence between Christians and Muslims with regard to terrorism, and you clearly don’t like that spotlight one bit. So she should moderate it how….by turning it off? By pretending that this one atrocity means that the next time a jihadist incinerates a pizza parlor, that it’s no big deal?
What you’re missing – or deliberately filtering out – is that there is a huge difference in the Christian and Muslim worlds to acts like this. I can safely predict that you will not see thousands of Christians taking to the streets to rejoice over the attack in Norway and handing out candy to celebrate it. Just like you didn’t see marauding bands of Lutherans, Baptists, and Catholics destroying property and murdering people over a crucifix in a jar of urine. Or the current bit of bigotry popular on the left: anti-Mormon “art”.
No matter how you want to pretend Muslim terrorism is a “fringe” problem and not worth our attention, there remain these facts: Muslims today are at war with Buddhists in East Asia and with Animists in Africa. And none of that is close to the hatred they have for the Hindus in India, which in turn is a mere candle compared to the blowtorch of hate they have for the Christians. And even that is a matchstick compared to the supernova of hate they bear toward the Jews.
“Fringe”? I think not. ST has this one analyzed perfectly. Ironically, your screed only underscores her point.
@Lorica: There are no polls that address the fact I stated.
I said, and you quoted, that I think you are wrong about the number of imams who supported OBL.
You then suggest that I back that up with some sort of poll from an American polling service. That makes no sense at all.
That is not how you would go about tallying that number. So I have not held you to a standard that I would not follow myself.
The rest of your response in the 1st paragraph of response #16 by you is irrelevant because I haven’t spoken about Islam or Christianity. You do not seem to understand this.
As far as paragraph 2 goes…you are in error in both logic and fact. I am not speaking about Islam or Christianity at all. In fact, I pointed out that OBL is a heretic….it’s obvious that this guy in Norway is a heretic. One of the points I made was about the nature of terrorism, and I think you missed it completely. Also, you do not know anything about what “people I support.” I guess you think I am a Democrat…but you are once again in error.
And yes…you need to get your facts together. My claim was that you need to back up your assertion about the number of imams who supported OBL as opposed to those who did not. If you can do that, then you will be speaking to our conversation with good reason.
@Great White Rat
Let me answer your questions one at a time whether they advance your argument or not.
A) I never said there was no connection between Islam and terrorism, particularly with regard to the present time. (We can agree that terrorism is nothing new.) It’s a tactic. What I said, and you managed to quote it correctly, was that the OP’s comment was as ignorant as Whoopie Goldberg’s. These people are not practicing Islam…they are practicing heresy….just the same as anyone who kills in the name of a religion.
B)I looked up taquiyyah. I am familiar with double-speaking Imams, as few as they may be. I don’t think I am blinding myself to anything at all. Certainly not willingly as you ask.
C) Terrorists as Fringe groups: All the numbers you posted except 1 are under 50%. And the one number that reaches above 50% is about a group that only 7 nations in the world have declared is a terrorist organization. I’m not arguing whether they are or whether they are not. The point is that you have shown that even among Muslims worldwide, these groups are not in the mainstream. And when you consider the world view of the major religions and the member states of the UN, I think it is clear that terrorism, and the people who commit terrorist acts are fringe elements using asymmetrical means to complete their agenda.
Also, I am not a liberal. I simply said in my first post that I would answer the question. You are now making unwarranted assumptions. That sort of thing doesn’t do much for your argument.
D) Again. I am not a leftist. Also, I have not attempted to create a moral equivalence between Christians and Muslims. I have simply given my opinion that Christians and Muslims together need to be separated from those who would commit terrorist acts.
The point, as you so cynically write, is not that we should not condemn the jihadist who bombs a pizza parlor. The point is that we recognize that anyone who commits murder should be condemned. Duh.
E) Difference in the Christian world and Muslim world.: I recognize that there are differences between the Christian and Muslim world. I have not missed this, nor have I filtered this out. You didn’t really elaborate upon your point, so I don;t want to assume anything. I can tell you that I can speak to these differences if you would like.
F) I did not say that terrorism is a fringe problem that is not worth our attention. I never came close to saying anything like that. I said that the people who perform terrorist acts are fringe elements. Words are important. When you twist them, you build arguments that make no sense.
I think you made a nice response, but you decided to speak more about what you believe, and did not speak to what I actually said. I don’t see where you added much to the conversation. I think readers could pretty much get your point by simply reading the first post.
You can’t refute my points if you don’t speak to what I said or misrepresent what I said.
I had better consult with all the Muslim based charities around the world first. WAIT, There is no Muslim charities that aid other religions in time of need (earthquake,flood,fire.There are only Muslim charities that ACCEPT charity from anyone.
I am a volunteer fire fighter in Australia,and I have NEVER seen Muslims at disasters that are not Muslims in need of help.They only help other Muslims BUT will accept it freely.
It’s a shame,really.( I’m sure there are MODERATES out there that will help Christians). AND BE STONED TO DEATH.
David I am far from the illogical one. This thread is in regards to the way the leftist media treats acts of terrorism when a supposed Christian is involved. So my posts stay true to point. Yours on the other hand cling to a foolish reality that can only be justified in your own mind.
Also, then state an Aljezeera poll that backs up your so called fact. I only the other hand state clearly that I would give odds, which means I know it is conjecture, a fact that seems to go over your head.
As far as who you are, I only have one question. In a race for President who would you vote for Sarah Palin or Barack Obama?? – Lorica
Any progressives attempt at intellectual acuity must by definition become an exercise in futility. To become a progressive or whatever word they hide behind this month requires a tie between IQ and age. Phrasing in terms they sometimes understand, commies are stupid and vicious. A very warped guy blew up Oklahoma, a very warped guy shot Gabbie Gifford, Norway is not immune from having very warped guys. Very warped guys join the Dim party, does that make them evil? Yes.
@Lorica: You say you are illogical, but as I showed, you did not address the point I made. In that aspect, you most certainly posted a fallacious response. I’m not addressing the merits of your position, but your argument itself. That in turn reflects on the strength of your argument.
With regard to how you perceive the media, I think you make a valid point. I think the part of the media that has a left leaning bent does slant things against a conservative view, but in this case, I’m seeing more of a criticism of hard right political and bigoted views than I am reading a slant against Christianity per se. Ultimately, I do not think there is such an anti-Christian bias in the media as I see being claimed in many of the comments on various topics on this site.
My posts do not cling to anything, and there is no need to call my point of view foolish. I simply stated a fact regarding your inability to back up your comment with fact. You can’t provide me with any sort of evidence that the number of imams supporting Al Qaeda and OBL outnumber those who stated they did not. That was one of my points regarding our discussion, and it stands true.
The first sentence of the second paragraph of response #21 is not really a coherent sentence. I think you want me to use a poll from Al-Jazeera to back up my contention. No poll from any service supports my comment. There has been no poll of imams around the world regarding this. No service could really do that….asking me to produce a poll that does not exist makes no sense. You only need to search to find conventions and meetings and congresses of imams to begin tabulating the number of imams who condemned the actions of OBL and his thugs. Similarly, we could make a list of imams who have actually come out in support of OBL and his thugs. II suppose we could do this….but that really would be wallowing in minutiae, and I think it would not lead to fruitful discussion.
Regarding myself…in a race between those two…I would vote for neither. I have voted in presidential elections since 1988. I have voted for Paul, Marrou, Browne, and Nader at various times. I have a real problem with the dominance of the two parties in our political system. Asking who I voted for is a nice place to start if you are truly interested in engaging me in a civil discussion. I really hope we can. I’m not trying to win an internet pissing contest….I’m not trying to change your mind. I’m just trying to have a civil disagreement with you if you would like.
Thus far, I appreciate how this site is moderated. My opinions have not been edited or censored. I’ve cut down the descriptive adjectives….you might do the same.
We’re citizens of the same nation. We’re children of the same culture. I have your back. You should be able to speak to my front. The internet can be a nasty place, and I appreciate and recognize that you are not trying to simply blow me off.
Cheers,
David
@captaingrumpy: I am not a Muslim, nor do I speak Arabic, so I am very careful not to make absolute statements about the nature of Islam unless I have received an answer from imams of both the modernist and traditional schools of thought after an inquiry.
I have not done so in this case. However, my preliminary findings indicate that you are incorrect when you say that “Muslim based charities around the world” do not aid other religions in a time of need.
I think you probably mean nations where Islam is not the official religion or something like that. I don’t think, for instance that when Katrina hit Louisiana, some Christian organization in Europe said “We must help Christianity in the United States because God has sent this great tribulation.” That would be silly. Of course, that hypothetical organization would say “As Christians, we must help those people in the United States who are bearing this load.”
The first site I clicked on after a quick search brought me to one organization “Islamic Relief Worldwide.” http://www.islamic-relief.com/whatwedo/7-6-emergency-relief-and-disaster-preparedness.aspx
I realize the composition of the list of nations recently receiving aid, but that is irrelevant to the disinformation you posted. China and the USA are on that list. Islamic Relief Worldwide gave aid to the US after Katrina. You can spin why they did it anyway you want, but you should recognize that your post #20 is riddled with factual errors.
David, I think you have twisted this thread to what you want it to be instead of what our Dear Sister has originally posted. Quite frankly I am really tired of watching this dog chase it’s own tail. You talk about these facts that you have but then school me about how your facts cannot be backed up. Then you attempt to argue that I have said my statement of conjecture is a statement based in fact, when I have said no such thing.
As far as you having my back, that is something we have yet to see, and from what you have posted here, and what little I know of you, I am fairly sure, I would be left standing alone when it came right down to it.
As I have said originally, I am tired of treading the same ground, when it is quite clear to me, that this thread has become more about David attempting to prove to himself his thoughts than a true discussion regarding what is actually going on.
The reality is yes there are nuts in every walk of life, there is no refuting that. That these people do horrendous things, again no doubt. Is there a slant to how these things are reported in the media, absolutely. That is what this post is orignally about, and there is ample evidence to back up that assertion. As far as what David is arguing, I see nothing but his thoughts, and they have come to a point where I do not have anything left to say that I haven’t said before, so why continue to waste everyone’s time continuing this discussion.
With that a fine good day to you Sir. – Lorica
Let’s take this back to the beginning, David.
ST’s post had four main points:
- The MSM and the left (redundant, I know) will use the Norway incident to draw a generalized moral equivalence between Christians and Muslims.
- There is no global organized Christian terrorist network.
- Terrorism by Christians is therefore the work of isolated, deranged individuals. Terrorism by Muslims is by and large the product of an organized effort by groups that have signficant support among the population.
- Leftists refuse to recognize that distinction.
Your response was to:
- deny the first point completely, by claiming the term “moral relativist liberal” was possibly an ad hominem attack.
- agree with the second point
- quibble about the third point. Your logic is that all terrorism is committed by “fringe” groups – thus you unwittingly confirmed her first point.
- ignore the last point, although the rest of your initial post once again confirms it.
By the way, mainstream and majority are not synonymous. A terrorist group that draws support from 25% of the population can be quite fairly termed a “mainstream” organization. A fringe group would be more like the loons of Westboro Baptist, whose support outside of their own membership is microscopic. If terrorism is embraced as a tactic by a substantial part of the “Arab street”, it is not a “fringe” tactic. By your standards and mine, yes, it is. Not by theirs.
Nor does that imply that most or all Muslims approve of terrorism, before anyone jumps to that conclusion.
But when you lump the Norway terrorist in with AQ as “fringe”, you do exactly that.
As ST did, and everyone else who has posted here does as well. No one suggests anything different. Duh.
So once again, we come to the question you’ve danced around: how, exactly should ST change any of her points to comply with your idea of “moderating her views”? Stop pointing out the media double-standard? Pretend that there are no major organized Muslim terrorist groups? Accept the common leftist view that Christians are just as dangerous as Muslims? All of the above?
Recognizing and combatting evil requires people to stand up and speak up. Even if you consider that contrary to “contributing to a civil society that is actually civil.”
@Lorica: I don’t think I’ve twisted anything the OP said. You were the one that went off topic in responding to me.
You are incorrect, I did not say my facts can not be backed up, I said there is no POLL that could be used to back them up. You would not use a poll to back them up. I told you how to disprove your claim. That would be to account for the imams who supported OBL and those who condemned him. You are employing a red herring here. At least your recognize that your point was conjecture, and poor at that.
I’ve already had your back, I’m sure you slept safely.
“What is actually going on” you say? What is going on is that a person embracing the ideological beliefs of many of those posting on this site killed a bunch of people. Instead of condemning this person, many on this site would prefer to continue to argue his beliefs rather than admit that terrorism of any kind is abhorrent.
@Great White Rat
A) I think you’ve misrepresented my response badly. I did not “deny” the OP’s first point…I ignored it. Although I later touched on it obliquely with reference to Whioopie Goldberg. I see traffic most heavily being routed by the media toward the anti-Muslim nature of the killer, and the sources of his anger. Of course, many right wing sites are being targeted here. But there is relatively little being manufactured that speaks to the “generalized moral equivalence between Christians and Muslims)…..for an example…just go to memeorandum.com and check out what the blogs are babbling about. You will see that you are supporting an incorrect assumption made by the OP a couple days ago. If your response had any merit, I think it evaporated in the 24 hour news cycle a while ago.
B) Sweet! We agreed. I hope you can remember that.
C) So i guess we agree here in the main. I’m not quibbling so much as I agree with the OP; Terrorists, regardless of their motives, employ tactics that make them fringe groups within civilized society. I do not see how this makes me agree with the first point…but no matter, I just explained in A above why I think you’ve fumbled point A badly.
D) I can’t speak for leftists of any stripe, let alone some imagined monolithic movement, but I can say that I recognize that you have moved the goalposts by anchoring your point to the phrase “significant support” as a way to claim that terrorist groups are not “fringe elements”. You are trying to paint Islamic society as barbaric and uncivilized. You are trying to say that most of these people support terroristic activity and you are simply wrong. Even your own numbers showed you were stretching. The number is less than 50%….much less when you include all the Muslims in the world, and not simply the ones from nation’s that suit your point of view.
I don’t know what dictionary you are using, but the key word in the definition of “mainstream” is “prevailing.” The definition of prevailing certainly indicates that something in the “mainstream” is “greater” in significance or “amount.” Yes, the loons of the Westboro church are fringe groups….but so is Al Qaeda.
Now the use of terrorism as a tactic is another discussion altogether. It is used by the dispossessed people for centuries. I do not believe that it is something inherent to the religion of Islam. It is no more or less inherent to these people than to any others. It is terrible that some warped people are employing terrorism, and they must be stopped.
The reason you do not see this as a “fringe tactic” is simply because you more than likely do not live anywhere near what might be called a “fringe” part of the world. I imagine you have it pretty cushy compared to these people. But like I said, that’s a different discussion altogether.
I see the point you think you are making when you say I’m lumping the Norwegian with Al Qaeda. I think it is incorrect because I am not trying to tie Christians and Muslims together. I am linking terrible people who, should they be acting in the name of religion, are HERETICS. Neither are representative of the world’s great religions, they represent nothing but evil.
How should the OP moderate her views: I don’t know. I didn’t give that much thought. I would think a retraction and correction of some previous posts and comments might be a good start. Of course I don’t expect the OP to consider anything I would say to quite honest. I suppose it doesn’t matter, but at least I answered your question.
And to sure, I do not think it is the “common leftist view” that Christians are as bad as Muslims. I think that’s you projecting what you need to believe these people think.
You last paragraph is atrocious. Absolute twisting of words. I understand and have combated evil. What you decided to quote was actually the part of my response where I said people like you and me should speak in a civil fashion. Those who do not want to be a part of civil society (eg: terrorists) need not apply.
David, we must agree to disagree on “fringe” vs. “mainstream”. If you want to define any group that has public support of 49.99% or less as “fringe”, so be it.
Here we agree, for the most part, although there is more to islamic fundamentalism that supports elements of terrorism, as Marshall Art pointed out in his comment above.
Terrorists do not respect borders. On the morning of 9/11/2001, I was at a corporate conference at the Newark Airport Hilton. I had a very good look at the events of that day. On the way home, and the next morning, I saw the airport entrance ramps blocked by snowplows – the heaviest vehicles available – accompanied by one or more police cruisers with the officers out of the vehicles and rifles at the port in case they were needed. I was at church services for some of the victims. Do not presume to lecture me on the effects of terrorism.
No, I base it on what these people say. They’re wrong, and I think you’d agree with me there.
As for the rest, your failing remains that you’re still unable to say exactly how ST should take a more moderate stand on the subject, as you advocated in your initial scold here. But regardless, it’s been a good discussion. You’re wrong, but you’ve made this thread much more interesting and I do hope you return here.
A) Definition of fringe and mainstream: I think we can agree to disagree there. But you should at least note that I did not define “fringe”….I defined “mainstream.” I don’t know that I would say fringe means 49.99%…actually I never would say that. You said that. I would probably acknowledged further gradations. In any case, even by your logic, the number of Muslims worldwide supporting “Islamic fundamentalist groups” does not begin to approach 49.99%….so your opinion has not been sufficiently supported by fact. I’m not saying you’re wrong….I can’t prove that here. But it’s obvious that you have not proved the point and your rhetorical jab is invalid.
B) I skimmed past Marshall Art’s comment, thank you for directing me. And it’s nice to see we have found even more common ground.
C)I don’t think I ever said terrorists respect borders. So immediately, you have hoisted a strawman to punch around. I don’t think I lectured you on the effects of terrorism, that certainly was not my intention. I have been discussing the nature of terrorism. I simply pointed out that with regard to the word “fringe.” You certainly do not occupy or live in the hinterland of civilization. But no matter, sorry to touch a nerve there….this medium is not the best with regard to clear communication.
D) I do understand that you base these things on what people say. I spoke to that in my first response to the OP. I think you take something that a few, or some people actually say. I then think you extrapolate that to include what everyone on that side of the spectrum believes. The point in my response was that the OP quoted Whoopie Goldberg as an intellectual well-spring of the left. I give Whoopie Goldberg as much credit as a voice of the left as I do most of the people in the entertainment business. And that includes the talking heads you see on cable news networks dutifully parroting the talking points of their masters.
Let me speak to the point about taking a more moderate stand. It was something I said that I believe, but I didn’t think I needed to explain it. I was referring to a moderate stand primarily in the context of communication with other Americans. Look at the change of tone in our own conversation. The first verb you typed in this section was “bleats”…as if to imply that I am a sheep. That is insulting…it’s provocative….and it gets us no where. I was guilty of the same thing in my first post. My grandfather called it being “snarky.” And I admit, I’m really good at it, and I have to moderate my behavior so that I do not offend people in a medium like this. You have toned down, or moderated your stance yourself. Lorica did as well. However, I think you would recognize some other posters on this site who are probably not mature enough quite yet to do so.
As far as further moderation goes, I think that would come naturally for people who truly seek to accommodate each other. I think it comes to those who honestly to hear what the other is saying and at least recognize the validity of the argument. I’m sure you understand that something may be valid without being true. I want to get to that point. For me, I think meetings in comments sections like this are a success if I can get people to understand that we can disagree in a civil fashion by acknowledging the validity of another’s world view, while maintaining an adherence to our own truths. This is what I have been taught, this is my religious background, this is what I believe.
I think my ultimate point in this conversation, as it relates to the preceding paragraph is this. I do not think it is helpful to paint Islam as anything but a religion of peace. I think westerners look at Islam, and make assumptions about the religion without understanding much about it, how it is organized, how it is understood on the “street,” and where more moderate elements are trying to take it. I think we need to paint terrorists as terrorists….not as Muslim terrorists. We need to find ways to put all civilized people on one side of the divide….and the terrorists on the other. That is how you win a COIN operation. You marginalize the irregular fighters from the people. Terrorists can not operate without the support of some of the people. You need to build the divide….and I think one way we can do that is to recognize that Islam and Christianity do not HAVE to be at loggerheads moving forward. It will take many generations to undo thousands of years of perceived wrongs….but I have never seen challenges like that as futile.
Cheers GWR.
I might look into making this my home in the future. Just a couple posts a day. I hope you will keep me honest, but I would appreciate you providing a little cover too. I do not suffer fools…and I bristle when people dump on me with hatred and terribly formed arguments.
You and Lorica have made me feel welcome….I appreciate that.
–David
So that’s the first step
David, don’t consider making this your “home.” I don’t suffer fools gladly, either, and I find your obnoxious blather both insulting to me and my readers, and annoying.
That’s fine. I appreciate the reasons why you will not welcome me, I made them clear in my first response to you.
The phrase was an expression, my mailbox is my home page. I’m sorry you are insulted by reasoned discourse, I can not help that it annoys you.
In the meantime, let me offer an example of a conservative blogger who makes a ton of sense….and intuitively understands what I mean by moderating ourselves. (Not Frum…I mean Nils Andresen)
http://www.frumforum.com/oslo-killer-posted-on-my-site