Nice to see acknowledgment of the problem.

...."kill fee". Now THAT is irony!

"I keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel" you fee?

The Huffington Post? Wow... WTF?

Money quote:

The point is not (and will never be) that some free person spoke, or wrote, or illustrated in such a manner as to inflame the Muslim community. The point is that only the Muslim community is combustible in this way. The controversy over Fitna, like all such controversies, renders one fact about our world especially salient: Muslims appear to be far more concerned about perceived slights to their religion than about the atrocities committed daily in its name. Our accommodation of this psychopathic skewing of priorities has, more and more, taken the form of craven and blinkered acquiescence.

And on HuffPo? Wow!

We live in an age of wonders.

The failure of the MSM sounds like a business opportunity to me.

Something tells me that if the Washington Post had to pay a "kill fee" every time it censored someone, they'd have to switch all their printing presses over to printing $100 bills.

Hezbollah Terrorizes Beirut--
Heavy Gunfire and use of Rocket Propelled Grenades Reported!

** Hezbollah declares the Lebanese Army an enemy!

** Hezbollah promises to open the gates of hell on the government!

Beirut to the Beltway reported that hooligans on motorcycles are touring Beirut neighborhoods, throwing insults and beating residents. Clashes between Hizbullah/Amal and March 14 supporters erupted in several mixed neighborhoods in the city.

Lebanese soldiers stand by burning tires during a protest in Beirut, Lebanon, Wednesday, May 7, 2008. Hezbollah-led opposition protesters blocked streets in central Beirut and on the road to the international airport Wednesday to enforce an anti-government labor strike that has turned into a showdown between the militant group and Western-backed Prime Minister Fuad Saniora. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)

Hezbollah leader Nasrallah is scheduled to hold a press conference from his hideout underground tomorrow.

Hezbollah thugs clashed with government supporters and blocked streets in Beirut this morning.
FOX News reported:

'...responded to my subsequent expression of amazement by offering to pay me a “kill fee.” I declined.'

Very principled stand. Although I'm not sure it wouldn't hurt to take the kill fee and then publish elsewhere, unless the fee came with (very unusually) some sort of rights acquirement.

That way you stick it to 'em twice.

Free speech use it or lose it.

I think islam is a dead end street.

By the way, Dante's Inferno has Muhammad in hell, cut in half, and shall we ban that book as 'insensitive'?

I wish newspapers chose articles on the basis of truth and importance, rather than whose feelings will be hurt.

I like how he correctly defines the problem as "traditional" Islam, not "radical" Islam.

I want to say unbelievable...but unfortunately it's not.

The commenters disagree with him.

Good morning Charles - great thread to start the day!
Hmmmm Kill fee? I wonder if that..........nevermind.

Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Bruce Bawer and Nick Cohen have been trying for years now to get the message out to the left, that liberals and libertines have the most to loose by capitulating to Islam out of some misguided allegiance to multi-culturalism at all costs.

BTW - Nick Cohen's great book What's Left is finally out in paperback.

Flying pig moment? Must be close.

re: #16 buzzsawmonkey

oh... that Sam Harris? Well, nevermind. He's speaking truth to moonbats in this case, at least, so more power to him.

Our Spineless Media

But not spinless.

re: #20 nikis-knight

Speaking truth to moonbats...I like it.

Now, the question is, did the moonbats learn from this?
Obliviousness is their middle name.

slow today

Harris' comparison of that breakaway Mormon polygamist sect with average everyday Islam is priceless. In short - Islam has polyagamy and child marriage (thus satutory rape) like the sect, but the universally condemned breakaway Mormon sect does not have certain features that Islam has, such as honor killings, female genital mutilation, a death penalty for apostasy, or jail for women who have been raped.

re: #15 marwan's daughter

That was predictable, I think.

But good for the HuffPo, anyway.

Here's the money line for you myhowmadans out there:

Muslims appear to be far more concerned about perceived slights to their religion than about the atrocities committed daily in its name.

When's that gonna change Al? Is it because y'all really ARE far more concerned about slights to your religion than attrocities against mankind in the name of it, or are you just scared of the radicals in your own ranks? Which is it? The west wants to know! You had damn near a thosand years to sort this out, and I for one wants some friggin' answers!

re: #16 buzzsawmonkey

It can be argued that Islam caused the dark ages in Europe, which is before the medieval period.

re: #21 zmdavid

But not spinless.

Good one!

the very worst of the cringing media

UWisconsin: Kyle "Terrorists Right-to-Kill" Szarzynski explains his "difficult exile" today;

There’s hope yet for social justice

Leftism is an ideology of opposition. Its ultimate value -- human welfare -- doesn’t elicit a lot of honest concern from the ruling ideology (the mainstream), so it can only find its niche in a difficult exile from acceptable thought. It is always criticizing the unacceptable status quo, which in turn unfairly brands it as an ideology of negativity and misguided anger.... there is always resistance. It can take diverse forms -- from Mr. Ellison's writing to the single mother's 10-hour workday to the tactics of freedom fighters branded as terrorists -- all of which share a heroic, if wavering, effort to improve the standard of living within a system that has the means to do so.

"heroic" terrorists... Professor Barrett must be so pleased.

#25

yes......arrest and make spectacle of the Islamic polygamists!

re: #28 Dianna

The high middle ages were a time of great civilization. The cathedrals were built then. Western civilization regrouped after the middle ages, but its goals were lower.

This part stood out to me:

Hirsi Ali has also observed that there is a quasi-racist double-think on display whenever western powers trumpet that "Islam is peace," all the while taking heroic measures to guard against the next occasion when the barbarians run amok in response to a film, cartoon, opera, novel, beauty pageant--or the mere naming of a teddy bear.

There's that soft racism of lower expectations rearing its ugly head again.

Time for whac-A-Mole!

I took a course on Medieval Literature in college, and the instructor was far from PC about the fear that Islam instilled in the hearts of Medieval Europeans. It was a constant dark presence, that was looming to engulf all of Christendom before and after the Crusades. Fear of the fanatatic "Saracen" warrior is common in Medieval writings.

re: #28 Dianna

It can be argued that Islam caused the dark ages in Europe, which is before the medieval period.

re: #11 Ojoe

He was in the circle of Schismatics. He was not cut in half per se but rather his front was sliced open from neck to groin. Ali was in the same circle except his head was cleft into two halves attached at the neck. The punishment in Dante's Inferno was symbolic of the sin they committed in life. Schismatics are split in some way to symbolize the splits they did during their lifetime. Of course, dear old Dante had more than a few popes in Hell too, so he was sort of an equal opportunity kind of guy.

Wow. Is this guy getting hammered at HuffPo? I wouldn't be surprised if commenters are ranting at him for his 'racism'.

At least when this guy had it happen to him he finally understood the implications. So many of them try to blame George Bush or LGF or those kwazy Christians.

We'll just see how long his eyes stay opened.

re: #34 Pyrocles

Since the middle ages we've invented the airplane, they have invented the suicide vest.

Several Muslim countries blocked YouTube and other video-sharing sites in an effort to keep Wilders' blasphemy Islamists from penetrating the minds of their citizens with sharp objects.

re: #35 Shr_Nfr

As I recall Mo gets cut repeatedly, too.

re: #36 kynna

Wow. Is this guy getting hammered at HuffPo? I wouldn't be surprised if commenters are ranting at him for his 'racism'.

At least when this guy had it happen to him he finally understood the implications. So many of them try to blame George Bush or LGF or those kwazy Christians.

We'll just see how long his eyes stay opened.

Oops! I left out Jooooos out of the blame. Sorry! I guess it's such a given I forgot to mention it.

Good for Arianna Huffington!
Remember she was once a champion debater at the Cambridge Debating Union, or some such group.

Ms. Arianna debated the great William F. Buckley, and respectfully too.

re: #37 Ojoe

Since the middle ages we've invented the airplane, they have invented the suicide vest.

...and they have to steal the parts to build them.

re: #32 Ojoe

The medieval period's getting much better study the last decade or two, and I'm pleased about it.
re: #34 Pyrocles

They had cause. The current rediscovery of medieval writings, and the better, more colloquial translations, are going to have some interesting implications in the current era.

re: #41 alegrias

Good for Arianna Huffington!
Remember she was once a champion debater at the Cambridge Debating Union, or some such group.

Ms. Arianna debated the great William F. Buckley, and respectfully too.

really. Too bad she can't speak a lick of English...she does a pretty good Zsa Zsa Gabor impersonation, though...

Must get back to work.

re: #25 Canadastani

Harris' comparison of that breakaway Mormon polygamist sect with average everyday Islam is priceless. In short - Islam has polyagamy and child marriage (thus satutory rape) like the sect, but the universally condemned breakaway Mormon sect does not have certain features that Islam has, such as honor killings, female genital mutilation, a death penalty for apostasy, or jail for women who have been raped.

yeah, I thought that as well. it was a nice way to juxtapose the contradictory standards applied to two similar twisted beliefs.

re: #43 Dianna

A beatific madonna from the middle ages.

BBL got to get to work.

re: #37 Ojoe

Since the middle ages we've invented the airplane, they have invented the suicide vest.

And they have learned to use our inventions against us.
If they want to live in the dark ages, they shouldn't have modern technology.

Washington Post and then rejected because it was deemed too critical of Islam.

re: #30 Terp Mole

Wow, is Kyle an idiot. Humanity is not altruistic by nature. We are nasty, individualistic, brutish, and selfish by nature. Anybody who thinks we are shiny happy people is fooling themselves.

History has shown over & over that among other things, Islam is nihilistic.
It only backs down when pushed back. This constant trammeling & pandering only emboldens them & confirms to them the inevitability of the ultimate triumph of Islam.

Washington Post and then rejected because it was deemed too critical of Islam.

In other news,,, the Posts movie section declined to review The Godfather because the movie was "too critical of the Mafia"

Buzzsaw,
Others would argue that reason drove our constitution as much as religion. Republic is a Latin word, Democracy is Greek. Both words pre-dated Christianity, but not Judaism. The Greeks even had their own version of NATO, it was called the Delian League. That was before the birth of Christ.

re: #48 Ojoe

Madonna? With a beard? I see a beard.

re: #15 marwan's daughter

The commenters disagree with him.

I noticed that. A few acknowledged an excellent essay, then the commenters immediately degenerated into Jew bashing and blaming the US for the whole thing because we're only in it for "the oil."

re: #51 acwgusa

Wow, is Kyle an idiot. Humanity is not altruistic by nature. We are nasty, individualistic, brutish, and selfish by nature. Anybody who thinks we are shiny happy people is fooling themselves.

I see we are both.

Sam Harris is a Christianophobe.
/Bible-based God Ackbar

The press is not only derelict with respect to its reportage on the savagery called "Islam" or terrorist Islamism -- it is also derelict in the political realm. The MSM has failed abysmally in terms, for example, of reporting on presidential hopefuls. Just the other day, on a CNN program, an individual (I don't have her name) mentioned how the press was in a swooning stupor over Obama. She had been absolutely appalled viewing, then reading, the MSM press reports on "the Anointed One." It's disgusting to consider at what lengths the press goes so as to white-wash and glorify the ugly (and it's being done -- not just with "Islam.") With certain parties, it's hear no evil, see no evil, and speak no evil. When will this end? When will the cringing and fawning stop?

re: #57 MandyManners

Ok, I'll agree with that. But Humanity resorts to its base nature before anything else.

re: #44 paxnhymn

LOL, you should have heard her on the West Coast "John & Ken" radio talk show, back when she was supposedly going to run for governor of California. John Kobylt mopped the floor with her, as she twittered and prattled and chirruped on, in that annoying (and incomprehensible) Zha-Zha accent. It was hilarious.

(I'm proud to say I always disliked La Huffington, even back when she was trying to pass herself off as conservative.)

The federal govt is little different vis a vis cringing fear of Islam.

In intelligence documents, the words jihad, Islamist, and even terrorist are either no longer used or are strongly discouraged.

Hell, now that Kosovo is independent & churches are being burned in Serbia, I wouldn't be surprised if the White House comes out with a big speech demanding Muslim Uighur independence in Western China & Muslim Kashmiri indepedence from India. Ya know... to demonstrate (yet again) we're super pro-Muslim and all.

re: #48 Ojoe

Thanks for the beautiful picture.

If Hussein Obama gets elected *cringe* the media's cover ups of anything Islamic will get completely out of control. PC dhimmitude will rule with an iron fist and it will take decades to undo the damage.

To all you moonbat trolls who are reading this - why do America's enemies desperately want Obama elected? Ever thought about that? Oh wait! I forgot...you don't like this country. God DAMN America!...vote Obama.

re: #65 obscured by clouds

If Hussein Obama gets elected *cringe* the media's cover ups of anything Islamic will get completely out of control. PC dhimmitude will rule with an iron fist and it will take decades to undo the damage.

To all you moonbat trolls who are reading this - why do America's enemies desperately want Obama elected? Ever thought about that? Oh wait! I forgot...you don't like this country. God DAMN America!...vote Obama.

In their eyes, the only enemy to America is a Republican.

re: #51 acwgusa

Wow, is Kyle an idiot. Humanity is not altruistic by nature. We are nasty, individualistic, brutish, and selfish by nature. Anybody who thinks we are shiny happy people is fooling themselves.

Who is this we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

re: #59 Carolyn

Yes. I like this article, and agree with him on many things, but I don't like the contempt he has for religion (not just Islam) in general.

Reading the comments on the HuffPo site is extremely depressing, by the way. I worry about our society.

re: #8 Diamond Bullet

Something tells me that if the Washington Post had to pay a "kill fee" every time it censored someone, they'd have to switch all their printing presses over to printing $100 bills.

It used to be, during the [Bill] Clinton administration, that they just fired or transferred people to minor Midwestern papers to shut them up. The stories that the WaPo refused to print were "accidentally leaked" to other media like the London Telegraph.

re: #58 ploome hineni

I'd still like to hear one "moderate" (oxymoron) admit that they're scared shitless of the radicals in their ranks. Ya know why we don't hear it? It's because I believe they are not only not scared of it, they secretly advocate this barbarianism, and that there really is No such thing as a "moderate" muslim...

re: #28 Dianna

It can be argued that Islam caused the dark ages in Europe, which is before the medieval period.

Oh? But the Roman Empire, especially in the west, had already petrified 400-600AD, and actually Christianity was busy over that period spreading through Europe through pagan areas, at the same time Islam was sweeping North Africa - and earlier Christian communities. Battle of Tours 732, so there was impact in that period and the threat was constant, invasion of Sicily 827, etc. I presume the argument is that the military needs trumped everything, leading to the dark ages? Seems a little thin. If the west lost Roman and Greek learning, I can't see that Islam did it.

OT, but Islamic-related:

Lebanon political conflict turns violent

Looks like Hezbollah's retooling has reached a critical phase.

This, published at Huffington Post. Wow.

Do I dare to begin to hope that the West is emerging from it's sleep? To unstrap the armor of my pessimism?

Not just yet.

re: #6 Dianna

And on HuffPo? Wow!
We live in an age of wonders.

Even a broken clock...

re: #15 marwan's daughter

The commenters disagree with him.

Well of course! You expect two miracles?

The position of the Muslim community in the face of all provocations seems to be: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn't, we will kill you.

How true.

I keel you!

re: #32 Ojoe

Yes, this is kind've off-topic, but it's high time historians did some serious rediscovery of the Middle Ages, and started refuting the idea that it was just a dark and horrible time when nobody bathed, and church prelates horse-whipped helpless peasants through the streets, etc., blah and so forth.

Such lovely comments from the HuffPo crowd:

Sam Harris claims to be equally against all religions, but in "The End of Faith" he portrays Jews at victims, victims of prejudice and abuse they brought upon themselves with their religion, but victims all the same, and he doesn't even mention Zionism. Has anyone ever seen Sam Harris really criticize Judaism or Zionism?

And how 'bout this one?

You are right. Sam Harris has a selective memory.

He is in the so call "humanist" movement, which tends to be a cover for self-worshiping Zionists. That is why they especially obsess with Arabs and the "Islamic bomb".

They drink the Kool-Aid that being an atheist along makes them morally superior. I"m an atheist and I don"t believe that. They are dangerous bigots.

re: #65 obscured by clouds

If Hussein Obama gets elected *cringe* the media's cover ups of anything Islamic will get completely out of control. PC dhimmitude will rule with an iron fist and it will take decades to undo the damage.

To all you moonbat trolls who are reading this - why do America's enemies desperately want Obama elected? Ever thought about that? Oh wait! I forgot...you don't like this country. God DAMN America!...vote Obama.

Hey now Barry is going to call a Muslim Summit, so that they can air their concerns. You see he is a master of negotiation.
On the other hand all of you bitter, clinging, gun totin, Bible thumpin, racist, xenephobic,anti trade crackers STFU.

The editors fail to understand that to Muslims, appeasement means submission, and merely emboldens the looniest. Thus their appeasement serves to quiet moderate and reform-minded Muslims and radicalize those that seek to dominate.

Wow, is Kyle an idiot.

Kyle's a perfect specimen of Leftism's true believer-- the self-righteous malignant narcissist extremist... what Professor Sowell described in "Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation As a Basis for Social Policy."

re: #77 David Simon

They drink the Kool-Aid that being an atheist along makes them morally superior. I"m an atheist and I don"t believe that. They are dangerous bigots.

Okay, so he thinks they aren't morally superior to judge, but he can judge them as bigots, even then they are all atheists.

Wow. Just. wow.

re: #70 paxnhymn

I'd still like to hear one "moderate" (oxymoron) admit that they're scared shitless of the radicals in their ranks. Ya know why we don't hear it? It's because I believe they are not only not scared of it, they secretly advocate this barbarianism, and that there really is No such thing as a "moderate" muslim...

You're right there, there is no such thing as a 'moderate' muslim.

Here's a good interview about it:
[Link: frontpagemagazine.com...]

re: #55 SummerSong

Medieval beard

#28 Dianna

Yes, over the past few months, looking at history, I've come to believe that the Islamic invasions did create what we call "The Dark Ages" (though they weren't really as dark as all that), and, in fact, played a large part in shaping the Christian west. (Of course, the Byzantine Empire wasn't quite as moribund as too many modern historians like to portray it. And you must remember that the Middle-East was choc-full of advanced civilizations, such as the Persians, before old Mo happened on the scene. The idea that the Middle East was a wasteland of barbarous, pagan cultures before noble Islam came along and put things right is sheer BS.)

Good Morning Charles!

Did they shut off the comments?

Earthquake in Tokyo

re: #77 David Simon

Yes, I know. I found most of the comments there extremely depressing----the anti-semetic ones in particular. Good ol' Zha-Zha Arianna, the queen of bigotry.

re: #83 yma o hyd

You're right there, there is no such thing as a 'moderate' muslim.

Here's a good interview about it:
[Link: frontpagemagazine.com...]

Loch Ness Monster. Abominable Snowman. Bigfoot. Moderate Muslim.

Often referenced & much discussed; seldom if ever seen.

re: #76 TalkinKamel

Yes, this is kind've off-topic, but it's high time historians did some serious rediscovery of the Middle Ages, and started refuting the idea that it was just a dark and horrible time when nobody bathed, and church prelates horse-whipped helpless peasants through the streets, etc., blah and so forth.

yeah, but it's not PC to consider early western Civ, which was essentially early Catholic civ, to be of any value.

I have read his recent book "Letter to a christian nation" and I found it great although it is an onslaught against religion from a Leftist perspective and I am an agnostic myself saying that. It was a refreshing read. He could have attacked Islam more though

re: #82 vxbush

Okay, so he thinks they aren't morally superior to judge, but he can judge them as bigots, even then they are all atheists.

Wow. Just. wow.

Yes, that passage gets my vote as the most jaw-dropping of all. And if you read through the whole thread, that's really saying something.

re: #77 David Simon

A lot of these supposedly reasonable, irreligious guys can be downright scary when they start spewing hatred for Jews and "Zionism". . .

"Kill fee"?

That's one of the wierder terms I've heard in a while.
/Back in the day, I think that was simply called "hush money".

re: #70 paxnhymn

I'd still like to hear one "moderate" (oxymoron) admit that they're scared shitless of the radicals in their ranks. Ya know why we don't hear it? It's because I believe they are not only not scared of it, they secretly advocate this barbarianism, and that there really is No such thing as a "moderate" muslim...

I will have to respecfully disagree. I know "moderate" Islamists, and they are in fact scared shitless of the radicals. They feel powerless as to what to do. To help me understand, they liken it to a law-abiding good citizen being trapped in an inner city ghetto with drugs and crime rampant around them. If they call the cops, they are in danger of retribution. If they try to do something themselves, they are in danger of retribution. Doing work in inner city ghettos ijn my past I found it a chilling analogy

re: #87 tokyobk

Earthquake in Tokyo

Yep, right here: Magnitude 6.2 - NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN

re: #28 Dianna

It can be argued that Islam caused the dark ages in Europe, which is before the medieval period.

the BLACK PLAGUE is credited with it, early islam esp in the early period of the ottoman empire wasn't as backward as todays islmo fascists. The current version is very reactionary.

re: #90 Vergeltung

I know, I know. . . the Byzantines, and Persians always get short shrift too. (Not to mention the pre-Islamic civilization of North Africa.)

re: #78 buzzsawmonkey

I wouldn't argue the point that "reason" drove our Constitution as much as religion--for that already gives 50% of the credit to religious underpinnings, including the overt identification of the Puritan-descended colonists with the Israelites.

But "reason" itself, the very Enlightenment, owes its existence to religion--more specifically, to the ideological clashes between Catholicism and Protestantism. That the ideas which undergirded the Enlightenment were expressed for the most part in Classical terms derived from Latin and pre-Christian Greek does not alter this.

Does it now?

An equal argument could be made that rediscovery of Aristotle and other Greek philosophers drove that, but it's lunch, I'm on short break and don't have time to discuss long with you.

Much of Christian philosophy can be traced to Greek and Roman philosophy - indeed if you go through Marcus Aurelius's maxims and change "gods" or "nature" to G-D in a few spots it would sound exactly like something you might hear in a sermon at Church on Sunday. There's a reason that one of Christianity's symbols is a Fish beyond that Jesus was a fisherman. (Gained it's first mass adherents as a slave religion among Greeks, mostly stoic in philosophy -- a philosophy that harmonizes well with Christianity.)

re: #76 TalkinKamel

Yes, this is kind've off-topic, but it's high time historians did some serious rediscovery of the Middle Ages, and started refuting the idea that it was just a dark and horrible time when nobody bathed, and church prelates horse-whipped helpless peasants through the streets, etc., blah and so forth.

Ahhh, those were the days!:)

re: #97 yochanan

Hmmmm, I thought the really big epidemic of Black Death reached the west long after the Dark Ages----more during the time of Boccaccio, and the early Italian Renaissance.

#96 Honorary

There was an aftershock right after that which was closer to me (right by the Tsukiji Fish Market) than the actual quake.

re: #95 sattv4u2

I will have to respecfully disagree. I know "moderate" Islamists, and they are in fact scared shitless of the radicals. They feel powerless as to what to do. To help me understand, they liken it to a law-abiding good citizen being trapped in an inner city ghetto with drugs and crime rampant around them. If they call the cops, they are in danger of retribution. If they try to do something themselves, they are in danger of retribution. Doing work in inner city ghettos ijn my past I found it a chilling analogy

Well, I think of this a little bit more like "High noon".

If the moderates are REALLY the majority, and they simply band together, they have nothing to fear.

If they all look out only for themselves, they'll be perpetually screwed.

Could it be possible that as this Bush presidency comes to a close that the sufferers of BDS may accept the concept that Sharia may be a threat?

re: #96 Honorary Yooper

HaShem bless, guard and keep Japan, and its people, during this disaster.

re: #98 TalkinKamel

I know, I know. . . the Byzantines, and Persians always get short shrift too. (Not to mention the pre-Islamic civilization of North Africa.)

yeah read your post above re that, you are spot on. I'm with ya.

re: #87 tokyobk

Earthquake in Tokyo

MAP 7.1 2008/05/07 16:45:17 36.076 141.857 35.0 NEAR THE EAST COAST OF HONSHU, JAPAN

re: #88 TalkinKamel

Yes, I know. I found most of the comments there extremely depressing----the anti-semetic ones in particular. Good ol' Zha-Zha Arianna, the queen of bigotry.

It IS depressing. To think how many people there are in this world who can no longer see black and white; only shades of grey.

re: #103 looking closely

Well, I think of this a little bit more like "High noon".

If the moderates are REALLY the majority, and they simply band together, they have nothing to fear.

If they all look out only for themselves, they'll be perpetually screwed.

The good people living in ghettos are also the majority. The average Russian citizen during the Stalins days,, as well as the avrerage Chinese/ North Korean citizen of toady are also in the majority. Fat lottta good numbers do against tanks and AK 47's

re: #101 TalkinKamel

Hmmmm, I thought the really big epidemic of Black Death reached the west long after the Dark Ages----more during the time of Boccaccio, and the early Italian Renaissance.

that is correct. the black deathn has nothing to do with any of it.

re: #105 TalkinKamel

Thanks, I talk to Hashem every day (though I call by his Ribbono shel Olam title). In this case, however, it was just a whole lot of scary shaking and no apparant damage so lets keep the big guy on Burma duty where they need the help!

re: #37 Ojoe

Since the middle ages we've invented the airplane, they have invented the suicide vest.

The west invented the airplane from scratch, while islamofascists have cobbled together bits of western tech to create the suicide vest...
Electrical conducting wires, modern batteries (if not cell phones etc), C4 (or most modern explosives), barely learning to use tech so it can used as weapons (ala airplane suicide runs/bomb building etc) and on and on... know them by their deeds, islam doesn't match up to the West in deeds to better mankind.

re: #96 Honorary Yooper

Looks like there are a series of quakes in the area, including the 6.2 you reference and the 7.1 I noted. The 6.2 might be more dangerous than the 7.1 because it was a shallower quake - tsunami threat possible. I haven't seen any alerts yet.

re: #112 tokyobk

Very glad to hear it was just "A whole lotta shakin' goin' on!" and may the Lord of the Universe continue to keep His eye on Burma, and have mercy on all the sorrowful and suffering everywhere.

re: #104 unrealizedviewpoint

Could it be possible that as this Bush presidency comes to a close that the sufferers of BDS may accept the concept that Sharia may be a threat?

In this world of moral equivalence? Not a chance. The "Progressive" left will never allow themselves to admit a flaw in their reasoning. Sharia will be an equal alternative to corrupt Western common law.

Re middle ages. An analysis of literature from the middle ages shows that all Greco/Roman literature was available in Europe and Byzantium. As one researcher pointed out, if you wanted to study Greek texts, they were no further than a short trip to Athens. On the other hand, the Muslims severely redacted and censored literature because it did not conform to the Koran or Arab superstition. As some of you also pointed out, Byzantium was not only a very strong repository of knowledge, but it was visited by 1000s of Roman Catholics on a daily basis. BTW, all that Islamic architecture? Byzantium.

re: #108 David Simon

I've got no problems with shades of grey; what I've got a problem with is the anti-semetism and hatred of "neo-cons" expressed there. That's not grey to me, it's a definite, icky shade of black.

re: #114 lawhawk

It appears that based on location and type of quake, no tsunamis are expected.

re: #16 buzzsawmonkey

But Harris, if cornered, still would be unwilling--likely, unable--to recognize that part of the fundamental difference between Western society and its civil traditions and Mahdi army seeking to turn those civil traditions against it lies in the difference between the Western religions of Judaism and Christianity and the unrepentantly medieval ideology which was born in the sands of Arabia.

Why?

I'm an atheist and I can clearly see that all religions are not the same.

There's nothing about atheism that demands moral relativism. The atheist might say that there are no absolute, transcendant moral values handed down from "above," but this does not mean he or she cannot recognize that some values are superior to others.

re: #114 lawhawk

The second was the slow rocking kind that at lengths is scary but ultimately safe. Thats how I experienced it but invariably when I go to work tomorrow and talk to people from other pats they will describe it as it hit their area. I did not even feel the first but I was in a taxi crossing the imperial palace/Hibiya Park area whish is exactly where I always say I want to be when the Big One hits. HopeI did not use up my one good luck card.

re: #89 firebreather

Loch Ness Monster. Abominable Snowman. Bigfoot. Moderate Muslim.

Often referenced & much discussed; seldom if ever seen.

I did meet a moderate Muslim. Really. He was from India, and was a VP at an Israeli-American company. He was my lowest-level VP (about 3 levels up from me) on 9/11.
I'm sure he's considered an apostate.

re: #121 tigger2005

well put

re: #118 pat

Absolutely right.

As an interesting aside, some biographers of William of Tyre, the great Crusader historian, believe that he deliberately copied his style from the great Greek historians, such as Herodotus. William of Tyre could read Greek, as well as Latin, and was also purportedly fluent in Arabic. He was working on a history of Islam, before he died. And he wasn't the only guy like that among Western thinkers.

re: #123 Kosh's Shadow

I did meet a moderate Muslim. Really. He was from India, and was a VP at an Israeli-American company. He was my lowest-level VP (about 3 levels up from me) on 9/11.
I'm sure he's considered an apostate.

As Bill Warner says in the interview at FrontPage Magazine today, he's a 'kafir muslim' ...

re: #112 tokyobk

"Ribbono shel Olam"---I like that!

re: #95 sattv4u2

I will have to respecfully disagree. I know "moderate" Islamists, and they are in fact scared shitless of the radicals. They feel powerless as to what to do. To help me understand, they liken it to a law-abiding good citizen being trapped in an inner city ghetto with drugs and crime rampant around them. If they call the cops, they are in danger of retribution. If they try to do something themselves, they are in danger of retribution. Doing work in inner city ghettos ijn my past I found it a chilling analogy

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.
Then again, are they truly "good " people, or are they just "aiding and abetting" the evil ones? Hmmm?

re: #120 lawhawk

Whew! Good to hear that.

Thank Ribbono shel Olam.

re: #95 sattv4u2

I will have to respecfully disagree. I know "moderate" Islamists, and they are in fact scared shitless of the radicals. They feel powerless as to what to do. To help me understand, they liken it to a law-abiding good citizen being trapped in an inner city ghetto with drugs and crime rampant around them. If they call the cops, they are in danger of retribution. If they try to do something themselves, they are in danger of retribution. Doing work in inner city ghettos ijn my past I found it a chilling analogy

This kind of thing only changes when people decide they'd rather die fighting for change than continue living in terror.

And as for the person who said "Fat lotta good numbers do against tanks and AK-47's," how soon we forget the spontaneous, almost completely bloodless collapse of the Soviet Union.

He's right on the money. Think about how the world would be different if the country were unified around his message instead of the message of appeasing Muslims and paying homage to White Guilt / American Guilt.

I support Muslim apostates!

re: #128 buzzsawmonkey

You can see that all religions are not the same, and that some values are superior to others? Good for you.

It appears that Harris may be able to see this also. But his writings--which gave him star media status last year--suggest that even if he is able to see this, his commitment to atheism mandates that he refuse to recognize that the specifically religious values of the West are of material importance in the West having come up with an open society that has a concept of impartial civil law.

In short, Harris may be able to recognize difference and even be able to make value judgments. But being in thrall to his ideology, he is almost certainly not able to give credit where it is due for the distinctions whose existence he recognizes.

Atheism is not an ideology, nor does it "mandate" that atheists refuse to recognize the contributions of specifically religious values to modern Western civilization. Perhaps Harris' personal philosophy does. I certainly have no trouble recognizing the contributions of Christianity and Judaism to Western civilization.

Harris is a lunatic, who iirc wrote in one of his books it might be necessary to systematically force religious people into gulags to kill or reeducate them. All for the sake of a peaceful, religion-free society you see.

re: #94 looking closely

Not really, it's the term used to compensate the writer if the editor 'kills' a story that has been agreed upon for whatever reason. A 'kill fee' is usually about 50% of the price.

re: #129 paxnhymn

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.
Then again, are they truly "good " people, or are they just "aiding and abetting" the evil ones? Hmmm?

I know them very very well , and for many years ,,, they truly are good people
A philisophical quote is wonderful, but as stated re: Russians during Satlins reign, North Koreans under the midget, Iraqis under Saddam, Germans under Hitler, it's hard to fight against tanks with quotes!
Unless you truly beleive that ALL Russians during the 30's, 40's and 50's were "aiding and abetting Stailn, that ALL Germans were aiding and abetting Hitler ,, ect etc

re: #131 tigger2005

This kind of thing only changes when people decide they'd rather die fighting for change than continue living in terror.

And as for the person who said "Fat lotta good numbers do against tanks and AK-47's," how soon we forget the spontaneous, almost completely bloodless collapse of the Soviet Union.

That was economic collapse from within,,, not revoltionary uprising from within

re: #109 sattv4u2

The good people living in ghettos are also the majority. The average Russian citizen during the Stalins days,, as well as the avrerage Chinese/ North Korean citizen of toady are also in the majority. Fat lottta good numbers do against tanks and AK 47's

That argument makes sense in situations where the radicals control the gov't and have the tanks and AKs.

But it doesn't explain the rise of global Jihadism in general.

After reading countless works of Medieval literature from The Faery Queen, The Decameron, Paradise Lost, to Dante's Inferno, it's obvious that Western civilization really is based on a very strong combination of both Judeo/Christian and Greco-Roman culture. Writers frequently mixed and matched Biblical stories with Greek mythology in framing discussions of morality and their Medieval view of history. Medieval scholars applied the logic and reason drawn from Greco/Roman thought to verify their belief in Christianity, and used latin poetic styles in composing works lauding mostly Christian values.

Since most of these Medieval writers were of the wealthy aristocracy or clergy of the time, I can't help but notice their attraction for the poorer members of society. Like today's leftists, they certainly had no desire to be poor and downtrodden themselves, but glorified the poor shephards and laborers in much the same "noble savage" way that today's elites glorify members of "oppressed" cultures like the Palestinians. The popularity of Medieval "pastorals" may point to this.

re: #125 TalkinKamel

Absolutely right.

As an interesting aside, some biographers of William of Tyre, the great Crusader historian, believe that he deliberately copied his style from the great Greek historians, such as Herodotus. William of Tyre could read Greek, as well as Latin, and was also purportedly fluent in Arabic. He was working on a history of Islam, before he died. And he wasn't the only guy like that among Western thinkers.

re: #138 looking closely

That argument makes sense in situations where the radicals control the gov't and have the tanks and AKs.

But it doesn't explain the rise of global Jihadism in general.

The "radicals" have control of the religion ,, it's totally analogous

re: #139 Pyrocles

Yes, reading medieval literature, and medieval historians, such as William of Tyre, it's obvious to me that the West did have some knowledge of Graeco/Roman culture, even before the Renaissance. And they were actually quite into reason and logic.

(And, of course, with the advent of things such as underwater archaeology, we moderns are actually learning more about Graeco-Roman culture too. Discovery is an on-going process.)

re: #134 combatwombat

Good lord, did he really?

re: #138 looking closely

That argument makes sense in situations where the radicals control the gov't and have the tanks and AKs.

But it doesn't explain the rise of global Jihadism in general.

FURTHER ,, the "radicals" controlled the gov't in Afghanastan ,,,, the "radical" controlled the gov't in Iraq (Saddam attempted to use his Islamic roots to rally the rest of the Arab world to his side during both Gulf wars)

re: #44 paxnhymn

really. Too bad she can't speak a lick of English...she does a pretty good Zsa Zsa Gabor impersonation, though...

Wait, I thought she was doing a Lily Von-Shtupp thing...

re: #71 itellu3times

Read Gregory of Tours. Check out the letter writing manuals.

The difference between 600 and 800 is striking.

re: #128 buzzsawmonkey

"In short, Harris may be able to recognize difference and even be able to make value judgments. But being in thrall to his ideology, he is almost certainly not able to give credit where it is due for the distinctions whose existence he recognizes."

Exactly. I read his screed ("The End of Faith") and I found his ideology as intolerant as any of the religions he was denouncing. (In fact, I think Harris poses something of a threat in confronting extremist Islam -- and it's because he sees all of Islam as "evil" -- in "The End of Faith" he takes particular issue with "moderate Islam", claiming that the "moderates" are as "dangerous" as the radicals. Daniel Pipes has repeatedly addressed the problems with adopting this kind of approach...it's counter-productive...as well as rabidly intolerant.)

Wow Huffpo huh? Am I just a pig or did that pic of Arianna to the right of the articld make her look real hot? I know they are the devil incarnate and all that bilge but, she still ain't too bad lookin is she or am I just so far out that anything goes?

It is a shame that no one actually read the text of Benedict's speech at Regensburg.
Those who believe that the Enlightenment (or sillier yet, the Renaissance) sprang full-blown from the head of Zeus are ignorant.
The rationalist and individualist traditions of the West ...and even the secularist ones....are a medieval legacy, as shocking as that may be to hear.
There is a reason, too, why the genius of Athens and Rome have penetrated the West to the core, but made no real impact on Islam, despite the fact that Islam had better access to the texts. The reason is religion.

re: #97 yochanan

Can't possibly be the Black Death; that's the 14th Century.

The Dark Ages can be dated 650-1050 (very roughly speaking).

re: #142 ploome hineni

Since the Victorian era, and the days of the British Empire, Islamic culture has been glorified and romanticized in a manner that, to me, is simply incredible! Yes, hareems were actually very unpleasant places, many of the Ottoman emperors were debauched, murderous fiends, palace intrigues had horrific consequences and Islamic heroes, such as noble Saladin, on closer inspection appear to have actually had a lot more common with religious fanatics such the Ayatollah Khomeini than some ideal, pure-hearted Paladin.

As you said, feh.

Yet we're always hearing about the purity of the Islamic faith (huh?), Islamic hospitality and whenever some Islamic prince or princess shows up in the states, he/she is given tons of flattering photographs, and puff-piece articles. Never mind the dhimmis, never mind the conquest of India or the African slave trade----just look at Taj Mahal! Just think of the golden age of Andalus! Just think of what a swell guy Saladin was! And, remember, Islam invented Algebra. And it had a great civilization, when everybody in the West was living in caves, and gnawing on bones! (And nobody else did anything much at all----just forget what you've heard about the Jews, the Persians, the Assyrians---they weren't doing anything! It was all Islam!

Feh.

re: #99 Thanos

The fish symbol comes from the acronym of the Greek letters for Jesus Christ Lord and Savior, Icthyos (fish).

re: #139 Pyrocles

Great post!
(I would not say that the writers glorified the poor in the same way that moderns do, but that's another story for another time!)

Love this quote

Many western scholars, like the much admired Karen Armstrong, appear to live in just such a place. All of their talk about how benign Islam "really" is, and about how the problem of fundamentalism exists in all religions, only obfuscates what may be the most pressing issue of our time: Islam, as it is currently understood and practiced by vast numbers of the world's Muslims, is antithetical to civil society.

It takes some balls to write that.

re: #141 TalkinKamel

Yes, reading medieval literature, and medieval historians, such as William of Tyre, it's obvious to me that the West did have some knowledge of Graeco/Roman culture, even before the Renaissance. And they were actually quite into reason and logic.
(And, of course, with the advent of things such as underwater archaeology, we moderns are actually learning more about Graeco-Roman culture too. Discovery is an on-going process.)

Bingo!

One of the best articles I have read in months. I am happy this is on the HuffPo. Maybe some of their blind deaf and dumb readers will wake up a little bit.

re: #134 combatwombat

Wow, I've never read his crap. I just have read quotes from his writings.
So....according to Mr. Atheist we are destined for rail cars?

I do hope Harris' piece will at least reduce the frequency of claims that atheists cannot be effective defenders of freedom, including religious freedom. Yes, I know not many people here believe that. I'm addressing the ones who still do.

re: #134 combatwombat

Better than him have tried it.

re: #147 Dianna

Read Gregory of Tours. Check out the letter writing manuals.

The difference between 600 and 800 is striking.

I'm stealing this image from someone....I think it's from Lynn white, the great expert on medieval technology.
The closer you are to a moving train, the faster it seems to be going. When the train is far away, it almost seems stopped.
The medieval period covers roughly 1000 years. That it is neither uniform nor static is a gross understatement!

One of you claiming that Sam Harris advocates herding all religionists into rail cars and rolling them off to the gas chambers might try posting the EXACT quotation you claim proves his guilt. What he said, not what you want to think he said.

re: #95 sattv4u2

I will have to respecfully disagree. I know "moderate" Islamists, and they are in fact scared shitless of the radicals. They feel powerless as to what to do. To help me understand, they liken it to a law-abiding good citizen being trapped in an inner city ghetto with drugs and crime rampant around them. If they call the cops, they are in danger of retribution. If they try to do something themselves, they are in danger of retribution. Doing work in inner city ghettos ijn my past I found it a chilling analogy

I do think you mean moderate muslims, not moderate Islamists, which I would take to mean one who wanted to impose Sharia through peaceful means, as opposed to moderate muslims, those who want to worship allah in peace.

re: #151 Dianna

Can't possibly be the Black Death; that's the 14th Century.

The Dark Ages can be dated 650-1050 (very roughly speaking).

The conventional dating of the Dark Ages (more often today called the Low Middle Ages) is between c. 400 and c. 800, between the sack of Rome by Alaric and Charlemagne. (Periodization is not written in stone. Some would start at the eclipse of the western Empire in 476.)

I will have to respecfully disagree. I know "moderate" Islamists, and they are in fact scared shitless of the radicals. They feel powerless as to what to do. To help me understand, they liken it to a law-abiding good citizen being trapped in an inner city ghetto with drugs and crime rampant around them. If they call the cops, they are in danger of retribution. If they try to do something themselves, they are in danger of retribution. Doing work in inner city ghettos ijn my past I found it a chilling analogy

I think it might help if all these so called moderates who are scared shitless and don't know what to do would merely express to the media on blogs, and letters, and calls, how censoring themselves is only making this worse. Write and call using the name Ahmed Mohammed. That would cover about 98% don't ya think?

Examples

Hello. My name is Ahmed Mohammed. I think you should publish the Danish cartoons. Thank You.

Hello. My name is Ahmed Mohammed. I do not think it is good that Mr. Wilders be killed for his film. Thank You.

Hello. My name is Ahmed Mohammed. I do not think it is good that you killed your daughter for looking at man. Thank you.

You know, a few of these every day. Problem is, there are none of these people who really think that way.

Hello Infidel. My name is Ahmed Mohammed. I would like to slice off your head. Thank you.

How nutty is Ahmadinejad? Even Iran's crackpot imams are more sane.

If Ahmadinejad wants to say that the hidden imam is supporting the decisions of the government, it is not true," sniped Gholam Reza Mesbahi Moghadam, the spokesman of the conservative Association of Combatant Clerics.

"For sure, the hidden imam does not approve of inflation of 20 percent, the high cost of living and numerous other errors," he said, according to the Kargozaran daily.

Ali Asghari, a member of the conservative Hezbollah faction in parliament, told the president not to link the management of the country to the imam.

"Ahmadinejad would do better to worry about social problems like inflation ... and other terrestrial affairs," the Etemad Melli daily quoted him as saying.

[Link: afp.google.com...]

re: #33 gman

This part stood out to me:

There's that soft racism of lower expectations rearing its ugly head again.

Time for whac-A-Mo le!

Sorry. Just had to.

re: #168 kansas

Christianity, Judaism, and all the other major world religions, except Islam, are constantly branching out with small reform movements. The difference is that these other faiths have gained a maturity with the pace of the modern world, and have the security necessary to carry on amid genuine lines of disagreement. Islam lacks the maturity and civility to allow this.

This is why I cannot take any "moderate" or "peaceful" Muslim seriously. They are all part of the problem until someone within Islam comes up with a substantive reform movement that defies the traditionalists.

re: #169 David Simon

Read: "Hey, none of us actually believe that shit. We're just trying to keep in power you lunatic."

It is quite scary how they cover up for the totalitarian (sp?) aspects of Islam.

re: #99 Thanos

There's a reason that one of Christianity's symbols is a Fish beyond that Jesus was a fisherman.

Well, you're coming along. Close, but no cigar yet. The first step to enlightenment is being able to ask the right questions. Keep it up - the light may yet turn on. You could ask a Christian what the fish symbol represents, instead of telling them what you think it represents.

Has this blog not reached around 3x more readers than the WP? They are rapidly becoming what we in the comm field call "in the noise". I always find it interesting when going to Washington that the Washington Times are hidden behind the counters, while the WPs are right up there in front. Won't help, though. It was a smarmy gossip paper when I attended GWU, and it's a silly smarmy gossip paper now - albeit with far smaller circulation.

re: #175 Da Coyote

Has this blog not reached around 3x more readers than the WP? They are rapidly becoming what we in the comm field call "in the noise". I always find it interesting when going to Washington that the Washington Times are hidden behind the counters, while the WPs are right up there in front. Won't help, though. It was a smarmy gossip paper when I attended GWU, and it's a silly smarmy gossip paper now - albeit with far smaller circulation.

* * *
No kidding about the WashTimes getting less respect because it was started by an IMMIGRANT so it's the case that--the Washington TIMES is doing the work the POST won't do!

Same with FOX news, started by immigrant Rupert Murdoch, to do the reporting domestic media wouldn't do!

re: #173 TS

It is quite scary how they cover up for the totalitarian (sp?) aspects of Islam.

* * *
If you saw recent interviews of women in pioneer prairie dresses from that whacked Texas outfit on tv, you'd agree they were brainwashed cult members unable to speak ill for the totalitarian outfit that sent them on TV in the first place.

re: #178 ploome hineni

The Washington Times is a daily broadsheet newspaper published in Washington, D.C., the capital of the United States. It was founded in 1982 by Unification Church founder Sun Myung Moon, Bo Hi Pak, one of his main assistants, and other church members.[2] As of March 31, 2007, the Times had an average daily circulation of 102,351,[3] about one-seventh that of its chief competitor, The Washington Post. The Times has several well-known writers, and has published stories which have attracted national attention.

* * *
Thank you Ploome~
Safe to say WashTimes is ANTI communist, since it was started by a South Korean.

WashTimes is staunchly pro-American and I understand President Bush reads it every day.

Bill Sammon was its White House correspondent until recently, now he's at the DC Examiner and probably syndicated across the nation.

#83 yma
Thank you for the link to Front Page Magazine and the Bill Warner interview.
It explains so much about them that has been confusing me. But for him to define OBL as a *moderate*, at least by his own definition, was a bit mind blowing.
It made chilling reading tho. If Islam can't be reformed then what are we to do with it? The media turning itself inside out in an effort not to offend them will not work. If intimidation works then they will keep doing it and they have got away with much too much in the last few years.
It's time the media and governments told the truth. The unpleasant unvarnished truth; and we need to plan to deal with the varieties of backlash we're likely to get.
It's not going to be good.

re: #145 buzzsawmonkey

At the risk of stating what should be self-evident, the absence of a belief is not a belief.

#158 ploome

I missed the first 10 minutes or so of the BBC Israel anniversary programme but watched the rest.
After I picked my jaw up off the floor and stopped snorting in derision -I got angry. Then I started yelling at my TV. By the end I was so angry I could barely speak.
To think I have to pay for the BBC and so by default employ Jeremy Bowen. The BBC are starting to make me feel dirty - that really offends me.
*spit*

re: #7 Roger

The failure of the MSM sounds like a business opportunity to me.

Oh yes. And a big one too.

.

re: #113 anotherindyfilmguy

The west invented the airplane from scratch, while islamofascists have cobbled together bits of western tech to create the suicide vest...
Electrical conducting wires, modern batteries (if not cell phones etc), C4 (or most modern explosives), barely learning to use tech so it can used as weapons (ala airplane suicide runs/bomb building etc) and on and on... know them by their deeds, islam doesn't match up to the West in deeds to better mankind.

What do you mean?

I thought Muslims invented mankind.

I read it in the NYTIMES.

re: #171 JohnAdams

Christianity, Judaism, and all the other major world religions, except Islam, are constantly branching out with small reform movements.

I don't know about "other religions", but the New Testament states clearly that,"The truth will make you free." That's why the Christian church is always boiling and appears weird to outsiders. It's always trying to figure out what the truth is and its life is one of relentless inquiry. Freedom of speech is essential to the process.

OTOH, Islam's central tenet is conquest and power. It can never be truth and freedom seeking because truth and freedom get in the way of conquest and power.

re: #181 Winslow

At the risk of stating the obvious -- Sam Harris is not without belief. In fact, Harris is quite laughable -- among other things, he believes in reincarnation, mysticism, and the paranormal. Yeah, that all meets with his personal "stamp of approval." It's rational...(and, as with so many other hypocrites -- what he allows for himself, he denies to others.) Oh, and he also professes to believe fervently in self-reflection and self appraisal...(as I laugh out loud).

re: #187 buzzsawmonkey

There are an infinite number of things which any person does not believe. There is not enough time to even list them, let alone actively choose each and every one, and specifically disavaow it. A lack of belief is exactly that - a lack of belief. To try to construe it as a belief in a lack, is to destroy any meaning of the words. Is the absence of an idea, an idea? Is the absence of food, food? Is non-A, A?

re: #44 paxnhymn

a grecian impersonating a magyar ...what a crazy world

re: #187 buzzsawmonkey

Atheists are not skeptics; they believe in the lack of a deity's existence.

All drug addicts, without exception, are atheists; they simply do not believe in anything - except drugs. I've never met an atheist who has the strength to believe in anything, let alone the belief in the lack of a deity. That's pretty advanced thinking for the average wacked out atheist!

I find it amusing that so many people here are making absurd claims about Sam Harris' alleged belief in "reincarnation", or the reading-comprehension-challenged assertion that he's ever even come close to advocating "railcars and gulags" for religious people. But hey, it's the INTERNET, where nobody has to know the first detail of what they're talking about in order to have an unshakable opinion about it, and that's just swell.

re: #191 negativ

Try looking here -- the Skeptic's Dictionary Newsletter (under Sam Harris: Man of Faith?) In footnotes to the "End of Faith", Harris provides "references" to pseudo-scientific, reincarnation nonsense. I would normally have no problem with this -- except that Harris poses himself as "the great rationalist" and the hard-nosed skeptic. Not to mention his claim to being self-reflective and critical. Well, not on all topics, obviously. And, while you're making your pet allegations -- note that I certainly have made no claims about Sam Harris speaking about gulags for religious people. The poster (above) who made that claim was (no doubt) referring to someone else -- not Sam Harris. Sam Harris has his own bizarre set of "problems" -- but that set of problems does not include advocating for reeducation camps for the religious.

re: #192 buzzsawmonkey

To not believe something is not an act; it is the absence of an act.
There is no point in espousing non-belief in anything in particular, unless someone else asserts its existence. (This is because there are limitless imaginable things that each person does not believe.)

re: #195 buzzsawmonkey

An espousal of non-belief is not a belief. It is an espousal. The absence of an ideology is not an ideology.

re: #187 buzzsawmonkey

The choice to not believe in something, however, is a belief.

Agnostics are skeptics; "well, gee, I don't know; I'm not sure." Atheists are not skeptics; they believe in the lack of a deity's existence. That is not "absence of a belief," but a commitment to a belief in opposition to another belief.

I am curious as to why you seem to feel so strongly about this "belief" classification. It seems as if you want to convince yourself that atheism is just another religion, and that atheists are untruthful when they disagree.

You are playing semantics with "belief". It can mean what it typically means in a religious sense; the belief based on faith in a god.

It can also mean the belief based on understanding of something more mundane, like logic and facts. For example I believe that the sun will rise in about 10 hours from now. Would you call that a religion?

Atheists simply don't ascribe to the "faith" part of your definition of belief. Why would you call that equivalent to a faith based belief?

re: #190 Digger Dan

All drug addicts, without exception, are atheists; they simply do not believe in anything - except drugs. I've never met an atheist who has the strength to believe in anything, let alone the belief in the lack of a deity. That's pretty advanced thinking for the average wacked out atheist!

That comment says only one thing; namely concerning the company that you keep.

re: #196 Winslow

"An espousal of non-belief is not a belief."

With all due respect, the above statement is ludicrous.

Let us proceed as follows -- there are propositions. There is the proposition -- "G-d exists." (A) There are negations of a proposition (insert the word "not"). "G-d does not exist." (not-A). Propositions and negations of that proposition cannot both be true (they contradict each other). Thus, "Carl is at home" and "Carl is not at home" cannot both be true. Now with respect to propositions which are non-falsifiable (these are metaphysical claims) one can express a belief in the truthfulness of a proposition (and by a similar corollary -- to be consistent -- express the belief in the falseness of its negation). Ok? So, an atheist will state the proposition: "G-d exists" is false; while stating that the negation ("G-d does not exist") is true. Stating that "Proposition X is false" expresses a belief. Stating that "the Negation of Proposition X is true" expresses a belief. That's how things work. (hence Buzzsawmonkey is correct.)

You are working from the premise that a belief in a deity is the natural order of existence, and that therefore any negation belief is equivalent to the former by the simple fact that it is related through negation.

Belief in the sun rising tomorrow because the sun is a god, waking from sleep, is a faith based religion without basis in fact or understanding of reality. Believing that the sun will rise tomorrow because of the understanding of celestial mechanics is a negation of the former, but it does not follow that it is therefore also a form of religion, in the normal sense of word meanings.

You are arguing semantics.

re: #199 Naso Tang

That comment says only one thing; namely concerning the company that you keep.

By the time you reach advanced age, you will find that you've known a lot of drug addicts in your lifetime. A few might be family members or co-workers. If you are a doctor or a lawyer, most drug addicts in your life will be patients, clients, or prison inmates. They're all around you, my friend. Regardless of your best efforts, they'll all be determined to remain atheists to the bitter end.

re: #202 Naso Tang

No Tang. This has nothing to do with semantics. Let us use instead symbols. Ok?

thus, I do not believe "A exists." That is the expression of a belief. To be consistent I must then state (to be logically consistent) that the proposition's negation "A does not exist" is true. And the latter also expresses "a belief." This is all just a matter of logic...recognizing patterns. Not semantics (you don't need words).

re: #201 J.S.

Sorry, but while your logic sounds logical, it is a self serving construct. Atheists may very well say "god does not exist" because they have come to that conclusion as being the most likely truth, but if pressed to elaborate they will be more likely to say "they see no evidence" for a god, or gods, or pink unicorns.

Surely we all agree that a faith based belief is different from an observation based belief?

Faith based beliefs may very well try to prove that belief by observation, but such observations, if found, will never eliminate the faith.

An observation based belief on the other hand will quite readily accept that it must be discarded for something else if further observations show the initial ones to be wrong, or misinterpreted.

There is a fundamental difference between these "beliefs", and it is well acknowledged by most people through the qualifier word "faith".

This argument would probably not exist if it were not for the semantics surrounding the word "belief".

re: #205 buzzsawmonkey

Precisely. The atheists become advocates for their position (as much as the theists can become advocates). to think that a Sam Harris is not an advocate for a position is ridiculous.

re: #203 Digger Dan

By the time you reach advanced age, you will find that you've known a lot of drug addicts in your lifetime. A few might be family members or co-workers. If you are a doctor or a lawyer, most drug addicts in your life will be patients, clients, or prison inmates. They're all around you, my friend. Regardless of your best efforts, they'll all be determined to remain atheists to the bitter end.

Actually, I am at the reasonably advanced age of 64, and I have indeed known people addicted to drugs, however I have not had occasion to have deep discussions about religious belief with them,and from what I do know of them, they have little mental capability to contemplate philosophical issues of existence, or gods in any rational sense.

I think you confuse lack of religion with atheism, and I think you are unfair in implying that there is any connection.

re: #205 buzzsawmonkey

Oh, puh-leeze.

How dreary it is that militant atheists don't have the guts to admit that they hold to a faith-based belief system no less than the believers in religion they oppose. That is an expression of dishonesty--not their choice to disbelieve in a deity or deities. It is as much a conscious prevarication on their part as the dodging and weaving that leftists typically engage in to avoid admitting, when questioned, that they are indeed leftists.

I have uttered not one word as to whether belief in a deity is a natural order of existence. All I have said is that those who commit themselves to argue on behalf of non-belief against those who have expressed belief in a deity have, by doing so, committed themselves to a belief system--"religion," in conventional terms--which takes as its article of faith the notion that a deity or deities do not exist.

The private atheist may or may not be committed to the religion of atheism; his lack of belief in a deity may merely be an absence. The public atheist--the arguer--is an evangelist for an alternate universe.

The only militant I hear here is you. I have never had cause to "militantly" try to dissuade anyone from their religious beliefs, and in fact I haven't tried to do so here. You however accuse me, and others, of dishonesty in a way that seems to serve your self interest. I tell you that I don't have a religion, and you say yes I do.

I've tried to explain the differences between a faith based (no evidence) belief and an evidence based belief.

I've tried to explain that most atheists will say they can't disprove a god, as in not being able to prove a negative. Atheism does not preach the non existence of god, only argue the non evidence of god.

I respect peoples' religious beliefs, all I ask is that they return the respect and don't try to legislate their religion on everyone else. That is what they do in places like Saudi Arabia.

re: #207 J.S.

Precisely. The atheists become advocates for their position (as much as the theists can become advocates). to think that a Sam Harris is not an advocate for a position is ridiculous.

Sam Harris writes books for a living. So do many other well known writers and of course they are advocates for a position. What is wrong with that anyway?

Ignore his books if you know they are unpleasant to you. We say the same to Islamists about certain cartoons.

re: #206 Naso Tang

The Western world (in arguing for or against the existence of, say, G-d) is called Metaphysics. In Metaphysics, one (typically) does not look to the empirical world to ascertain the truth or falsity of a Metaphysical proposition. (Metaphysics is a whole other branch of philosophy -- with its own set of tools/arguments.) Here's a Wiki article...(cosmology can be investigated using the tools of scientific inquiry -- the shape of the universe, for example, can give scientists the evidence to conclude that the universe is expanding forever or will expand, then contract.)

re: #211 J.S.

The Western world (in arguing for or against the existence of, say, G-d) is called Metaphysics. In Metaphysics, one (typically) does not look to the empirical world to ascertain the truth or falsity of a Metaphysical proposition. (Metaphysics is a whole other branch of philosophy -- with its own set of tools/arguments.) Here's a Wiki article...(cosmology can be investigated using the tools of scientific inquiry -- the shape of the universe, for example, can give scientists the evidence to conclude that the universe is expanding forever or will expand, then contract.)

You are changing the subject. You were, in effect, arguing that any "belief" amounts to religion since your logic above can apply to any topic, not just just a belief, or not, in the existence of a god. I don't call that metaphysics.

re: #212 buzzsawmonkey

Militant? Me? You jest, surely.

You said

"How dreary it is that militant atheists don't have the guts to admit that they hold to a faith-based belief system no less than the believers in religion they oppose. That is an expression of dishonesty--not their choice to disbelieve in a deity or deities."

That sounds about as militant as anything I've seen Sam Harris, or Dawkins, or Hitchens write.

Of course you have a religion, if you believe that there is no deity. That belief in the Great Void is itself a form of...belief.

We are now changing the subject to a discussion on the meaning of the word "religion". You seem to call any strong belief a religion. I do not.

Were you to argue, as agnostics do, that you cannot prove or disprove the existence of the divine, that would be something else. But you do not claim agnosticism for yourself; you claim atheism. The former is skepticism; the latter is faith--albeit faith in a negative. It appears, in your argument above, that you do not understand this distinction between agnosticism and atheism.

I repeat what I said earlier. Neither agnostic nor atheist can prove a negative. The only difference between them is how much time they've spent thinking about the subject, and of course it is somewhat more socially forgivable, by "believers", to call oneself agnostic if asked what one is. More PC, if you will. Most atheists, other than those who call themselves atheist simply because they don't think much about such subjects, will have called themselves agnostics first. It's a matter of degree of conviction, but it is not a matter of degree of "religion".

As to your concern about "people legislating their religion on everyone else"--where, pray, has that been raised or suggested in any way? And if it has not been raised here (I certainly have not done so), why is it you are raising this false flag?

You talk of "militant" atheists as if they are a threat to your beliefs. Unless you think the ACLU (I am no fan of them anymore. They have lost their way) suing to remove this or that religious symbol is a threat from atheism, I don't see why you seem so "militant". I mentioned legislation by religion as an example of militancy from faith belief. Do you need examples? Creationism in schools where children come from all religions as well as none, is a good example with real significance.

I apologize for suggesting you may feel your belief is threatened. Often people who express contempt for differing beliefs, and you did sound contemptuous, do so as some form of defense. It is always difficult in these discussions to separate the specific, various, positions of individuals, with those of the perceived average of the groups.

We seem to be at an impasse on the very topic that we started on; namely the meaning of the words belief and religion.

A "belief system" is not synonymous with "religion", nor is "conviction, and we are back to semantics again.

However, it is getting late here and I will have to call it a day for now, but I will check back again in the morning should you not wish to give me the last word.

Thanks for the discussion.

re: #213 Naso Tang

No. Look, Tang, you're going to have to document where you get these ideas -- these are misinterpretations of what I've (I thought) clearly written. How can you possibly conclude that I was arguing that "any 'belief' amounts to religion" -- you'll have to explain that one to me -- how do you derive this? The emphasis (what I was arguing) was about BELIEF. And this argument began with another poster who asserted that "An espousal of non-belief is not a belief" which I have characterized as simply ludicrous. No need to invoke "religion" -- where does "religion" enter? If I were to state "I do not believe in the tooth fairy" -- that is a BELIEF. To attempt to deny that that is a belief enters into the realm of utter absurdity. do you understand what I'm saying? Why invoke "religion" into this topic -- it has NOTHING to do with "religion." It's simply the recognition that if you state "I don't believe X" then, that's a Belief. This should be very simple and straight forward, don't you think?

Well, kiss the first amendments "freedom of the press" goodbye. When the jihadis can dictate what is written by the press out of fear, they will win. Again, the media, by their overwhelming hate of President Bush, has bit off it's nose to spite it's face.

I'd like to thank you gentlemen for being real gentlemen here tonight. It was an excellent debate, respectful, civil, and enlightening. The result was a draw - but that doesn't mean that you're both correct. Now I'm going to bed, too.

Expect slow, steady dribblets of sanity to start appearing in Leftish places.

They anticipate a Democrat in the White House.

That Democrat will have to protect this nation from terror assault and navigate the waters of a worldwide terror movement. The time to flog conservatives and patriots to death over "Islamophobia" is nearing an end, they will in fact need support for whatever measures they wish to implement to fight the war on terror. The war which they will rename and redefine.

Expect it.

It is political blackmail and brinksmanship--they will pay any price to gain hegemony. Watch them trash the Constitution for four years, they'll never be dislodged and we can enjoy our Gramiscian Marxist future under these velvet toned totalitarians. I'll vote McCain, be he will lose. We punish truth and accept whatever platitudes cushion us from facing reality.

Sorry. "Somebody needs a nap!"

re: #217 J.S.

No. Look, Tang, you're going to have to document where you get these ideas -- these are misinterpretations of what I've (I thought) clearly written. How can you possibly conclude that I was arguing that "any 'belief' amounts to religion" -- you'll have to explain that one to me -- how do you derive this? The emphasis (what I was arguing) was about BELIEF. And this argument began with another poster who asserted that "An espousal of non-belief is not a belief" which I have characterized as simply ludicrous. No need to invoke "religion" -- where does "religion" enter? If I were to state "I do not believe in the tooth fairy" -- that is a BELIEF. To attempt to deny that that is a belief enters into the realm of utter absurdity. do you understand what I'm saying? Why invoke "religion" into this topic -- it has NOTHING to do with "religion." It's simply the recognition that if you state "I don't believe X" then, that's a Belief. This should be very simple and straight forward, don't you think?

In case you are checking back; it seems that we were having several similar yet slightly different discussions here. I came in arguing that atheism is not a religion, and from that follows a discussion on what constitutes different usages of the word "belief". I am arguing that "belief" based on faith alone is sufficiently different from "belief" based on science or simple observation to warrant two different words.

It is my opinion that those who consider all beliefs to be equivalent in principle will readily say that if one belief is called religion, then simple lack of that belief is also called religion.

I disagree from logic and from having lived all those different forms of belief, and religion, throughout my life.

test