As you perplex some of us at times, too, Mark.THIS event prompted police investigation and action -- not a war.That's a mighty major difference. It's not a matter of subtleties to note that terrorism requires something other than traditional large-scale war on other nations to effectively counter terrorism. It's also not a stretch to note resistance to war and much the Bush Administration has wrought in the name of the insane "War on Terror" (e.g., war on a tactic) does NOT equal support of terrorism. This isn't a good/evil, dualistic conflict. It is a need for rational counter-terrorism operations -- and there's been little rational about the Bush Administration's actions, which have bred terrorism anew at a scale impossible before we invaded/occupied Iraq in the name of pre-emptive war against a country and ruler who presented no threat to the US. Now, of course, Iraq is a breeding ground for a new generation of terrorists, fueling the plans against cartoonists everywhere!
See what I mean?
Do we need a police state to protect us from things that are already illegal, Mark? People plot to kill each other all the time- we've already kinda developed ways to deal with that.
No, I don't think we need a police state to protect us from things that are already illegal. Thanks for asking!
Religious fanatics perplex me, too. In fact, all religion in all of its pernicious aspects, perplex me.(Say that three times real fast.)
So, what are you saying, Mark? Exactly?
Jeez, aren't you on a cross-country family trip???If I hafta splain it - OK.Coming soon. I promise. Not that it'll do any good, but I'll splain it.
Nope, I'm home. Splain.
So many lefties and friends of mine think the Bush Regime is the most irrational, dangerous thing on earth. And/or they think the Religious Right is after them and hating them and out to rain on their parade.That article makes me think that the insanity and determination of radical Islam is not exaggerated. And that the real proponents of theocracy are there.If anything, that article makes it clear that you do not need Bush stirring things up for Islamic extremists to go off the deep end. Bush did not draw a cartoon of Muhammed.You can argue all the details, and I'm sure you will. But how that article can send Steve off on a tear about how Bush is creating terrorists, and "fueling the plans against cartoonists everywhere!" (which you can make some arguments for - but why here? Why at every drop of a hat?) and how my posting it can make Luke think that I want a police state...Perplexing to me.I know one argument that always pops up is that radicals are kooky individuals, and the Bush Regime is a regime. To that I'd just say that your typical American or Christian does not support Jihad and the deliberate murdering of innocents, or even protesting at soldiers' funerals because America is gay-crazy. But al quaeda, bin Laden, the Taliban etc have alarming approval ratings among Muslims.
Whoa, that's a major misreading of my thoughts and posts! NEITHER form of extremism is a positive; agreed. But my point is, our reaction as a country has only made it possible for "al quaeda, bin Laden, the Taliban etc have alarming approval ratings among Muslims" -- in this, we've (thanks to the actions of the Bush regime) only been our own worst enemies. Gotta run -- but thanks for explaining, and happy to read your thoughts. More later!
Post a Comment