Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
"But it WAS Muslims who killed us on 9/11!" ("killed us"? What about the Muslims who died on 9/11??

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
According to your interpretation, one should always mention the perp's religion when decrying their actions. Yes, right now Muslim terrorists are an issue, but in your version it should be "A Christian shot the abortion doctor and Christians cheered him on". They're not representative of Christians, they're Christian fanatics...they did it in the name of their "god", supposedly, but to call them merely Christians is wrong in that it indirectly condemns all those of that faith.

As well, one would have to say "A Christian" about anyone who commits a terrorist act, whether they did it in the name of their god or not. So the IRA terrorism should be referred to as committed by "Roman Catholics". To be fair, he should have said "Al Qaeda killed us", if you compare the IRA terrorism.

It's not PC, it's about using the word "Muslim" to identify someone, and people wouldn't even think of saying "Catholics killed ___". His intent was to link the New York community center to terrorism because it's proposed by Muslims, that was obvious.

I agree walking out wasn't the answer, but no, it's not a "liberal" tactic. I seem to remember a few people refusing to continue (one woman in particular who took off her mike on Larry King's show) when they got too pissed off. It's a HUMAN response, when feelings overcome reason, and equally dumb when done by anyone. Babwa did good, in both calling them on it and calling O'Reilly on the tactic.

By the way, I don't say the Tea Party is racist, I've always said there are racist elements to the Tea Party, and I believe it's their leaders (and the politicians behind them) who use buzz words and other means to ENCOURAGE the racists among them.

Quote:

---

They don't condem the attacks or subsequent attacks

---

Oh, Jezus, here we go again. You may not have been around, but I've posted tons and tons of material about Muslims decrying, protesting and demonstrating about, and speaking up against terrorism in the name of Islam. They don't get media play, is the problem, but your statement is wrong. Moderate Muslims, prominent Muslims and everyday Muslims speak up every DAY.

Maybe I should put up a post every day about protests by Muslims against terrorism; I kinda thought once we'd gone through that we'd had done with it, but apparently not.

As to the View, I don't watch it. I see clips occasionally, which have given me little respect for the show. As to male perspective...I think you're showing a double standard, in that many political shows are almost exclusively, OR exclusively, male. I see nothing wrong with an all-female political show...and it's not even that, from what little I've seen. If they represent an anti-male perspective, I think that's wrong, but it's not up to me to say.

The "dangerous thinking" you claim is, to me, not so much dangerous as an effort to bring some sanity to the discussion, to view terrorists AS terrorists, not condemn a whole religion. If you wish to do so, that's your right, but it's not accurate.

Of COURSE neither the Japanese nor the Muslim community raised up against their leaders, any more than Germans did. It's not in the nature of a population to rise up against their worst aspects. For one thing, they're usually brainwashed into thinking they're in the right and the other side is "evil"...just as we do. For another, they're not organized, and what happens outside one's country isn't as given to riling up a population as what directly affects them. Here in America we DO protest, but we don't overthrow our government for invading sovereign states or deposing governments, so what's our excuse?

Yes, Iran is a theocracy, and religion is intertwined with everyday life among Muslims; that doesn't make all the millions of Muslims around the world terrorists, nor should they be inferred to be such. There is no connection between a community center in New York and the terrorists committing atrocities around the world, in fact exactly the opposite was intended, but the mood of the country currently is to hate all things Muslim, which O'Reilly and his cronies at Fox are playing on really well. I'm glad he was called on it, and I'm glad he apologized.

I would be pissed all to hell if some radical buddhist group (and there are a couple) bombed a building and people ran around saying "buddhists bombed that building".

Can you see past any bias you might harbor to understand what I'm saying?


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
By the way, O'Reilly's use of "us" was intended to make the distinction between "us" and "them", which should have been obvious to anyone aware of his entire manner of speaking. It's the same as his saying "Muslims killed us"...it's using verbiage to manipulate the audience.

---

Quote:

---

In 1975, Arthur Ashe played against Ilie Nastase in the Masters tennis games in Stockholm, Sweden. Nastase was out of control. He delayed the game. He called Ashe bad names.

Finally, Arthur Ashe put down his tennis racket and walked off the tennis court. He said, "I've had enough. I'm at the point where I'm afraid I'll lose control. " The officials were shocked; Ashe was winning the game. One official told him he would lose if he walked out of the game. Ashe said, "I don't care. I'd rather lose that than my self-respect. "

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

The two ladies who walked out displayed a typical liberal political correct reaction. You can't generalize when talking about anyone who is not a Conservative Republican. For example. They say we can't say Muslims attacked us, even though all the attacks were Muslim and Muslims danced in the streets following the attacks. They can say and have said that all Tea Partiers are racist when only a small handful of persons attending any given rally display racism.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Joy and Whoopie SHOULD have walked out, then kept on walking untill they got to the East River, then jumped into the East River, then their bodys were never found.....funny?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:


Yeah, I don't agree with everything Bill says, hell, I don't agree with half of it. But he's hardly the hellfire of rightwing lunacy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

I also take some issue with loss of cool being the end of an engagement, cause when I blow a gasket, it usually the other guy who winds up wishin they'd stood in bed - sometimes rage is entirely appropriate.

---

Quote:

---

Here's a tip: The person who stays calm wins.
The person who loses their cool loses.

---

Quote:

---

that's right, I'll say it, not ALL Muslims are evil

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I saw that earlier. The sad thing is that the left doesn't recognize when they just got pwned.

Here's a tip: The person who stays calm wins.
The person who loses their cool loses.

(...)

Not taking sides, but seriously, attacking Bill O'Reilly is a sign that you've aimed your weapon in the wrong direction. He's pretty moderate. A lefty who can't tolerate O'Reilly is sending a message "I'm completely unreasonable and will never be satisfied, please don't try to compromise on my behalf."

Yeah, I don't agree with everything Bill says, hell, I don't agree with half of it. But he's hardly the hellfire of rightwing lunacy.

Attack Rush or Beck if you want to paint us as loons. Hell, we have plenty of loons.

---

Quote:

---

A lefty who can't tolerate O'Reilly is sending a message "I'm completely unreasonable and will never be satisfied, please don't try to compromise on my behalf."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Originally posted by DreamTrove:

Quote:

---

Here's a tip: The person who stays calm wins.
The person who loses their cool loses.

---

But they didn't lose their cool.

They calmly walked out and calmly communicated their counterpoint with their body language: "I choose not to tolerate this level of hatefulness and bigotry."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
CTTS, if I recall correctly, Joy DID say something along the lines of “I won’t stay here and tolerate...” I think walking out was stupid and made them look as bad as O’Reilly, but I definitely don’t think it was planned, as some others do. And no, I didn’t see it as calm and collected, for sure. Yes, they didn’t scream at him, they just walked out, but their walking out definitely made the point of anger beyond self-control as well as any words would have.

---

Quote:

---

DT, also well said for the most part. I do recognize, as Jon Stewart did in his interview, that O’Reilly represents the “moderate” voice...tho’ as he also said, “that’s not saying much”. But O’Reilly was there, he made the statement, so he’s responsible for it. I in NO way demean O’Reilly’s intelligence; he’s one bright cookie and knows how to play the game and where to aim his shots, but I really think this wasn’t thought out, any more than the walkout was; I think it was O’Reilly being accustomed to saying such things and Joy and Whoopi not being sensible. Babwa had it right, in both instances.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Sounds to me like they conducted themselves as good Buddhists might, actually.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Sounds to me like they conducted themselves as good buddhists might, actually. I'm serious. It is entirely appropriate to walk away when your anger is too intense to control otherwise. What you seem to be arguing, and falling into the same anti-emotional trap as DT in the bargain, is that they SHOULD NOT HAVE FELT the anger, and that is a fundamentally disrespectful conclusion to draw. You weren't there. You didn't have to sit next to Mr. Falafel and listen to his oily prevarications. What are we humans to do when confronted with bilious, smirking hate? When we are confronted by our own unasked for and unforeseen strong emotion in response to remorseless contempt? Y'know, what are we supposed to do, Nik? Bill's had months and months to consider his stance on the community center and he framed the discussion exactly as he wanted to--it was a set up and a deeply ugly distortion. You think ANYONE there was gonna make the man see reason? Not a chance.

I don't see Barbara's tepid "polite" discourse as the solution. She tells us, "You have just seen what should not happen," vividly laying blame at the feet of her cohosts and they are called to sheepishly return to the site of their, to my mind, entirely appropriate outrage and be further humiliated, all but silenced. I think walking off that stage was the sanest thing they could have done under the circumstances and I'm a little disgusted with Barbara's high handed denunciation of the women when the pig O'Reilly is sitting there to gloat.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
By the way, O'Reilly's use of "us" was intended to make the distinction between "us" and "them", which should have been obvious to anyone aware of his entire manner of speaking. It's the same as his saying "Muslims killed us"...it's using verbiage to manipulate the audience.

---

Actually I think his use of the term goes farther then what any of us has mentioned.

Watch the clip. When he says "Muslims killed us" I think we are getting a rare glipse at how very deep a connection he feels to 9/11. I think that he feels personally attacked by what happened, like he was in the building himself. I think this is reflective of most Americans...which is why the line drew substantial and spontanious audience applause.

In a way we were all in those buildings on 9/11 and a part of all of us was killed. Time changes things and some people find it easy to forget what that morning felt like and the anger we all felt after, but I think 70% of Americans would agree with me...we were all in those buildings, the mosque is legal and Constitutional and dead wrong to build it there, and we're sick and tired of having to kowtow to the hurt feelings of (insert offended group here) who don't give a frack about how we feel.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by DreamTrove:

Quote:

---

Here's a tip: The person who stays calm wins.
The person who loses their cool loses.

---

---

But they didn't lose their cool.

They calmly walked out and calmly communicated their counterpoint with their body language: "I choose not to tolerate this level of hatefulness and bigotry."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:

Buddhism seems a pretty shiney philosophy or is it a religion? Not being demeaning, I'm just not entirely sure, seems to vary with the person I 'spect. Anyhow, I hate to be a dick, but Buddhism has it's bad apples just like any other religion, just look at the Samurai, many of which brutalized their own people. Of course, I think blaming Buddhism is as ridiculous as blaming Christianity for Timothy McVeigh.

---