Don’t apologize … I just happen to believe that it is ok to sacrifice our civil liberties for the greater good (generally speaking). Truth-be-told, I fear the police more than I fear the CIA.

I appologize, I skipped a few steps in my thinking for the sake of brevity. Here’s the long form:

Working on the assumption that The Clash of Civilizations theory was basically “the West has irreconcilable difference with Islam.” Which it appears is not the whole story, but fairly close to some of the premises, and the ones most relevant to the discussion.

That’s the same general idea as much of the rhetoric surrounding the Cold War, but substituting Islam for Communism. To expand on that idea I put forth the theory that ALL wars are because of what are seen at the time as “irreconcilable differences.” After all, who’s going to go to war over something they think will get worked out eventually (other than the relatively recent class of leaders who wouldn’t actually be involved)?

Another part of the rhetoric involved in wars is that the enemy is always the worst ever faced, or as you put it “This enemy is like no other.” (I used foe instead of enemy, because I like the word better).

All this is in rebuttal to the your original comment is that since that this enemy is unique in history so we need to give up civil liberties to fight them.

Nothing at all!

Elaine:

Spelling misdemeanor …

Gyges:

Ok …

Gyges,
So wisely true and so unfathomable by those who respond to authoritarian personalities. Best musical statement in my opinion:

I have to keep asking who really hates America, those who believe in its potential to win without sacrificing its core principles or those who preach that we’re too weak to win without becoming that which we purportedly hate in our enemies?

Not especially, but let me take a stab at it: It’s basically cold war rhetoric with the specifics changed from “Communism” to “Islam?” Heck I’d be willing to bet that it’s pretty close to the rhetoric Charlemagne used to justify the expansion of his holy empire.

Every foe anyone’s ever fought has been a foe like no other. They have to be, because last century’s foe is this decade’s trade partner. “Sure the English were bad, but they’re nothing compared to the SPANISH.” “Sure the Spanish were but at least they’re Christians, unlike these Indians.” Muslim just happens to be the evil ‘other’ de jour.

In writing “constitution,” you didn’t commit a “capital” offense. As a former teacher, I’d categorize it as a spelling misdemeanor.

“Mike:
I like you.”

John,
So what’s a little capitalization error among friends?

Jericho,

Aside from ranting himself to a reasonable state of mental health, I hear Lewis has switched to decaf if that provides any relief.

What a terribly insane way to grab people’s attention…

Dear Lewis Black, help me off my rage..

People watch buildings burning, car crashes, cock fights, mud wrestling, reality TV shows, etc.

I’m just saying…

Not to defend Fox News, but perhaps you might enlighten me as to why democrats, independents, and republicans alike are watching his program?

I’m just asking …

Indeed, I’m sure several inmates in state and federal prison agree.

It’s what I didn’t say …

Are you familiar with Huntington’s Clash of civilization theory?

Jill:

As a combat veteran, I agree to disagree.

Elaine:

I see your point (generally speaking).

Mike:

I like you.

I’m of the opinion that it’s of greater import to stand up for/defend the civil liberties granted us by the Constitution than to know that it begins with a capital C.

why is it people who have sh . . . for brains always worry about someone else’s spelling?

I suppose it is the same lack of imagination which causes people to assume people who curse have a lack of verbal ability, or people who are dis-organized aren’t too bright.

I may not know as much about the “Constitution” as you know about the “constitution,” but at least I know how to spell it correctly.

John,
It is so sad that you don’t have a clue about what America and our constitution mean. No one who does would have written that drivel.

I thought about that also and agree with you.

Nobody made mention of Eric Rudolph, did they?

We have caused the deaths 2 million in Iraq since 1990 (4 presidents), with several million displaced. I don’t have injury numbers.

Call me old fashioned but that qualifies as already-committed genocide

Or… we could just leave them alone. I mean, not to inject facts into a good rant, but aren’t we the ones that invaded other countries? So, doesn’t that make us the instigators? I mean of the war, which is a word that has a very specific meaning when it comes to the actions of a country.

You said: “This enemy is like no other, and to find him or her, frankly, I do not have any problem (generally speaking) with sacrificing my civil liberties. We are at war. I do think it is wishful thinking to assume democracy can win over the hearts and minds of a people that want nothing to do with it (democracy).”

****************

One of things I value most about living in a democracy is that we have certain civil liberties that are supposed to be protected by law. You may be willing to sacrifice your civil liberties. I am not.

I remember the wise words of one of our Founding Fathers Benjamin Franklin: “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety.”

I see democracy has failed to win over your heart and mind because you will sacrifice it in the US.

Is this why you stopped appearing on his show, Prof Turley?

So insisting that words have definitions is semantics? Would you also accuse me of “relying on semantics” if I say that French Fries aren’t baked potatoes? Terrorism isn’t a catch all phrase meaning “immoral violent behavior.”

(One can also look at more modern episodes, if one is willing to endure the debris that will be thrown at you. Given the egregiously disproportionate numbers of civilians killed by the Israeli army, not calling it a terrorist organization is relying on semantics to hide some very ugly truths.)

That’s what I got! Bill is grieving because it just wouldn’t fly to commit genocide.

I think the point is that McVeigh was a) engaged in terrorism and b) most definitely not a Muslim.

I find the entire John Wayne/simplistic good/evil easy answer rap quite annoying. It’s the root cause of the authoritarian mindset: “Just point me in the general direction and tell me what to hate; I’ll follow you anywhere so long as you don’t make me think.”

Shouldn’t Bill O’Reilly be judged the same way that states are on this issue; i.e. amorally?

McVeigh was engaged in Christian terrorism?

Since when?

Agreed. I liked Glenn Greenwald’s column discussion of the word terrorist in this connection as well.

Weren’t those Northern Irish Catholic? We all know they’re not really Christians anyways.