Bigotry on the checkout aisle
I know the general discourse in the US over the past few years towards Muslims has tended to be harsh and disparaging, but perhaps the biggest instance of culture shock to hit me here was this image and heading, prominently displayed in a supermarket checkout line.
Now I understand the Examiner is a piece-of-shit rag that nobody reads (it’s still somehow making enough money to be in business though) but there would have been rightful outrage had blacks, Jews, Christians, Asians, whatever been generalized as ‘the enemy’ on the front page of a newspaper or magazine prominently displayed on a national supermarket chain’s checkout aisle.
Still, can’t help but feel that it would have made for amusing reading. I need to stop being so dismissive of bigoted shit.
You are way late, Will already beat you to it.
…but there would have been rightful outrage had blacks, Jews, Christians, Asians, whatever been generalized as ‘the enemy’ on the front page of a newspaper or magazine prominently displayed on a national supermarket chain’s checkout aisle.
Rightful? Jews get characterized as the enemy every single day in the Arab media. Where's your outrage? Can you show me your posts where you complained about the way Jews and Christians are portrayed in the Arab world? It seems to me that many of your commenters have even posted links to examples of that, and y'all defended that bigoted shit. So, put a sock in it. This is a legitimate grievance but KABOBfesters are not the ones to be making the case, because you're worse bigots than anyone on the "Examiner" staff could ever be.
No, jews don't get characterized as the enemy in the Arab media, Israelis do. And even if they mention jews, they mean it as in Israelis not as people that follow Judaism.
No, jews don't get characterized as the enemy in the Arab media, Israelis do. And even if they mention jews, they mean it as in Israelis not as people that follow Judaism.
So, let me get this straight: If the headline said "Top secret meetings with Arabs – His shocking pact with the enemy" it would have been OK? Is that your final answer?
By the way, I thought you live in the West Bank? Now you are in the US? Why? I would object to a generic characterization of all Muslims being enemies of the US (as this tabloid has done) – but YOU are certainly an enemy of the US, as anyone who has read your posts on this blog can testify to. What are you doing here?
And PS – any comment about the "Apes & Pigs" videos as shown on Palestinian television? And comment about Mickey Mouse the Jew being beaten to death on a children's program?
"Rightful? Jews get characterized as the enemy every single day in the Arab media."
Have you ever lived in the Arab world? No? then stfu Craig. I've lived in the ME for more than 2 years, and I never saw anything remotely like this directed towards Jews. In fact when I was in Israel I saw far more racism towards Arabs than I did see racism from Arabs towards Israeli's.
But heres the best part PC, Muslims live in the US. Tons of them live here, and for our media to stereotype all of them as the enemy even in this way, is beyond ridiculous. You should be ashamed of yourself for even trying to downplay this.
Have you ever lived in the Arab world? No? then stfu Craig.
Oh, now I have to live in the Arab world to have an opinion about the blatant bigotry I see in the laws that are enacted in Arab countries, in the words I read on Arab blogs, on the translated programs I see from the mainstream Arab media, in the words written in Arab newspapers?
How convenient for you, oh great defender of Arab bigotry.
I've lived in the ME for more than 2 years…
Good for you. Stay there. Please.
…and I never saw anything remotely like this directed towards Jews.
Only problem with that claim, coming from you, is that you are a known liar. That makes taking your word for things a bit difficult.
In fact when I was in Israel I saw far more racism towards Arabs than I did see racism from Arabs towards Israeli's.
Again, there's the issue of the frequency with which you make obviously false claims on this blog. *shrug*
But heres the best part PC, Muslims live in the US. Tons of them live here…
Here? I thought you lived in the ME?
…and for our media to stereotype all of them as the enemy even in this way, is beyond ridiculous. You should be ashamed of yourself for even trying to downplay this.
You should be ashamed of yourself for lying about this, as you should be ashamed of all the other things you've been lying about. Since when does somebody with as little integrity as you have get to tell other people what should shame them?
And how dare they discriminate against Aliens in UFOs the way they do! Have you seen how they insult outerspace aliens with racist caricatures!
And for the record: Super Sayyin is arguing that there is no racism against Jews in the Arab media. Huh?
Yes he is claiming that. The only source you have is MEMRI, which is notoriously unreliable to say that least and has political motives. Supper Sayyin on the other hand, has actually been to the Arab states and can speak Arabic.
And I'm glad to see that you're an apologist for racism.
The only source you have is MEMRI, which is notoriously unreliable to say that least and has political motives.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=%22Death+to...
6 months ago, I saw Arabs on television chanting "Death to Jews" – with my own eyes. In English.
Supper Sayyin on the other hand, has actually been to the Arab states and can speak Arabic.
Can he *read* Arabic? Perhaps you can ask him to translate the HAMAS charter for you? And the HAMAS Martyr's Oath? I could provide the English translations, but you'd just ignore me. And what would be the point? I'm sure you already know what they say.
You are talking about being an apologist for racism while attempting (and failing) to minimize all the anti-Jewish sentiment in the Arab media? Huh?
FAIL.
What is MEMRI'S political agenda? Why is it unreliable, it doesn't produce the content, only translates it – all the content is straight from Arab media. Anyhow, MEMRI is far from the only source showcasing different aspects of the Arab media, its all over. Get real.
MEMRI was founded by a former IDF man. His main objective is to portray Arabs in a negative light. And it's translations are unreliable, which is why CNN's own Arabic department has contested its translations over and over again. The fact that you're only access to Arab media is through MEMRI tells us a lot. Try learning Arabic for yourself.
In no way am I an apologist for anti-Semitism the way you have tried to downplay this anti-Muslim headline.
The fact that you're only access to Arab media is through MEMRI tells us a lot. Try learning Arabic for yourself.
Shafiq, I'm pretty sure that it was you who denied Palestinians were celebrating in the streets on 9/11 until you were shown video footage of it, right? Now you are such an expert on the Arab world and the media that you challenge other people's right to even form an opinion?
200 million Americans saw video of Palestinians in Lebanon and in the occupied territories celebrating, on live television. On 9/11. But you didn't. And not only that, you tried to claim what those 200 million Americans saw with their own eyes was a lie.
Too bad 200 million Americans didn't see the story of the 5 Mossad agents caught dancing and celebrating while they filmed the attacks on the Twin Towers. They had a map with choice viewing locations circled and one of them had $4,000 stuffed in his sock. They were later interviewed on Israeli TV where they admitted they were there to "document the event."
For some strange reason, they were allowed to return to Israel and the video they took that day is classified.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisr...
Too bad 5 Mossad agents is only equivalent to tens of thousands of Palestinians dancing in the streets in your own mind.
I said the video was a deliberate misinterpretation of what happened. Videos can be misleading when given the wrong context. As I've shown eagle2007 before, FOX News is a master of doing this.
And when did I deny anyone else the right to form an opinion. As a matter of fact, I told eagle to learn Arabic and form his own opinion on Arab media.
I said the video was a deliberate misinterpretation of what happened.
No, that isn't what you said. And you are the one who is misrepresenting what happened, even now. Hundreds of journalists saw the exact same thing, in every area where Palestinians live in the middle east. Some were even with Yassir Arafat, and reported on his frantic efforts to put a stop to the celebrating.
You try to deny the obvious like this and claim that it's just some biased people trying to misrepresent the facts, and then you want to be taken seriously when you make claims about what gets reported in the Arab media? lol.
Did you manage to get SuperSayyin to translate the HAMAS Charter and the HAMAS Martyr's Oath yet? What do you have to report? I'm getting a little tired of you and others denying what other commenters say and then ignoring the evidence we present when it doesn't suit you. If you got nothing, then stay out of the discussion please. You are wasting everyone's time.
the hamas charter is arab media? Since when?
I’m getting tired of you making pointless diversions and never addressing the points made. You seem to not like it whenever someone challenges your point of view.
The founder is the former Israeli Intelligence officer.
The founder is the former Israeli Intelligence officer.
So? How many people in Arab governments are former intelligence officers? How many people in Pakistani government are former intelligence officers? How many people in Iranian government are former intelligence officers? Is it the word "Israeli" that automatically disqualifies him from being taken seriously? If so, what is the topic of this post again?
Well, if a former Pakistani intelligence officer took on a job as a..let's say an international Indian language translator (from Tamil to Hindi) with a site and objective like MEMRI, everyone would know that impartiality would be impossible, and in both India and Pakistan people would speculate whether or not the individual had even completely severed ties with his/her previous organization. It doesn't completely discredit his/her work – but the speculation is inevitable and often rightly founded given the nature of the work and the person's previous ties and line of work. Everyone in Pakistan knows, for instance once an ISI always an ISI.
What makes you think impartiality is either wanted or required for a "watchdog" organization? The purpose is to expose dirty laundry that people would rather hide, not to be fair. And who better to do that than somebody with a background in covert operations?
I would agree accuracy is critical, but most of the attacks on MEMRI that I've seen seem to be based on the allegation that they are biased, not that they are wrong. Which seems a bit ludicrous, to me.
Well, bias is pretty serious – their translations are usually pretty good, but they do a good job of cutting videos and only showing segments, as well as manipulating the meaning of one or two crucial words which can have a few meanings. Translation can be a dirty thing.
"Mickey Mouse the Jew being beaten to death on a children's program.." Well, "MIckey Mouse the Jew is a Baby Killer from way back when he killed Palestinian childrenby breaking their skulls with sticks (circa 1948)….remember that you Judeonazi F—k, during the stillbirth of your bloodsoaked "democracy" from hell. You know man "the old will never die, and the young will never forget, nor forgive!!!!!
Mickey Mouse broke childrens skulls with sticks? Which cartoon were YOU watching?
remember that you Judeonazi F—k, during the stillbirth of your bloodsoaked "democracy" from hell.
I'm not Jewish. I'm an American Christian, and a former US Marine.
You know man "the old will never die, and the young will never forget, nor forgive!!!!!
There are a hell of a lot of Arabs and Iranians who better hope like hell that isn't true.
The MEMRI mouse shit has already been debunked as one of MEMRI's willful mistranslations.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/may/...
We cannot change the fact that today, the enemies that U.S. forces are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are almost exclusively Muslim.
A similar headline during WWII might have said "So-and-so's top secret meetings with Germans – His shocking pact with the enemy"
Was Obama meeting members of Al-Qaeda? No, he was meeting ordinary US citizens – they're not the enemy, no matter how much you'd like them to be.
And by the way, the US treatment of American Germans was a stain on its history
Were Aliens really landing in the field in Kansas? Your treatment of corn is a stain on your history.
Seriously, what are you talking about?
Eagle, that was easily one of the stupidest arguements you have made yet.
Imagine if during WW2 we said that we are at war with the Christian enemy because most Germans and Italians happen to be Christian.
Seriously stfu and stop trolling here.
We also cannot change the fact that neither Iraq or Afghanistan ever made a hostile move against a single American until we invaded their country. They are not our enemy, we are their enemy, though I doubt you have the intellectual or moral capacity to see the difference.
Those are facts which are not facts, Sean.
Is this evidence of your "sophisticated" education?
They're facts all right. Even you're not stupid enough to believe the bullshit about WMDs Bush was peddling. Or are you one of these loons who still insists they were there despite the evidence?
More Bigotry!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8130873.stm
Like this you mean?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8049...
You know what I love?
When people downplay certain acts of bigotry by bringing up other acts of bigotry! It's not a pissing contest. The National Examiner is a load of tapeworm infested feces, that cover is racist and fear-mongering, and someone who thinks that cover is wrong shouldn't have to face irrelevant accusations regarding racism elsewhere. I don't go around calling White people pig-nosed or whatever – so don't tell me about that when I make a statement expressing disgust when my group is targeted.
One act of racism does not justify another – which seems to be what some of the arguments above are implying. It's just resonant of people who say "Well, they want good treatment here? Well they don't treat our people all that well back whatever country they're from!" – irrelevant comparisons with underlying bigotry.
Racists and haterz be all over the place – admonish hatred and fear-mongering for what it is.
One act of racism does not justify another – which seems to be what some of the arguments above are implying.
That's not what I am implying, Sana. I am implying that Mohammad has personally forfeited his right to complain about racism, as he is one of the worst bigots around. It's like a criminal complaining they got robbed. Who cares? That's karmic justice as far as I'm concerned. Does that mean I don't believe that laws should be enforced, to protect the innocent?
And in case you are wondering, if I saw David Duke complaining about racism against whites, I'd tell him to go cry me a river.
Dude, you called Mohammad an "enemy" of the US – seriously? Are you calling DHS?
Also, please show me an example of clear cut bigotry in Mohammad's post – and I mean this sincerely. I haven't been around that long (two months? Have been reading for about 4/5?). I've seen angry posts, reflective of accounts I've read/heard from friends who've lived/visited the OPT – Arab and non-Arab, Muslim and non-Muslim – so those have never caught me off guard. But do cite me some examples. Thank you.
Dude, you called Mohammad an "enemy" of the US – seriously?
Yes, seriously. He clearly is an enemy of the US, and anyone who has been reading this blog knows it. He even knows it himself, and if he's at all honest he would admit it. So, now it's not only wrong to refer to all Muslims generically as enemies of the US, it's wrong to call Muslims who *really are* enemies of the US enemies? lol.
Well, we just can't win, can we?
Also, please show me an example of clear cut bigotry in Mohammad's post – and I mean this sincerely. I haven't been around that long (two months? Have been reading for about 4/5?). I've seen angry posts, reflective of accounts I've read/heard from friends who've lived/visited the OPT – Arab and non-Arab, Muslim and non-Muslim – so those have never caught me off guard. But do cite me some examples. Thank you.
I'm not going to go through the archives (and the comments) of this blog to prove something that is obvious, SanaKF. I suspect it would be pointless, anyway. Most the KABOBfest crew has used racial epithets against me personally at least once, including Mohammad. But lets talk about more subtle forms of bigotry, shall we?
Do you see bigotry in this post?
http://www.kabobfest.com/2009/01/gaza-lies-and-mu...
Do you detect enmity towards the United States in that post?
What I detect is the anger of a young Palestinian man living not too far from where 1400 individuals – primarily innocent civilians – were killed, whose direct family and friends were affected, had their homes and livelihoods destroyed. That's going to be a pissed off post, PC. I also don't see bigotry – could you point out to me where there is an instance of this bigotry that you mention? I just see anger and distress. And don't assume it'd be pointless – if I honestly see some bigotry in something, I'll call it out.
Maybe it's just me and my own experiences, but when you see your brethren being slaughtered – intentionally or not – you're not going to be formidable towards the perpetrators and those who aid them. I love the subcontinent – it is rich in culture, potential and life. I don't agree with everything, but there is more love than hostility. At teh same time, however,I get pissed off at the Pakistani government for it's continuous idiocy and seemingly deliberate disintegration of its country and people. In fact, I have a deep hatred for the Pakistani government. I get pissed off at India's treatment of Kashmiris and find that the country has done little to bring to justice those involved in the Gujrat slaughter as well as other instances in which thousands of Muslims have been slaughtered at the hands of its radical Hindu and Sikh populations. Does that make me an enemy to both India and Pakistan? Am I a threat? No, of course not. The story's different if I'm spewing violent words and calling for violent action.
Hostility and anger are basic parts of our humanity – albeit we must be aware of how we express them and keep them from causing harm to others. Mohammad is angry in that post, and rightfully so (i'd say that about anyone who would have written such a piece in such a situation, even if I disagreed with their statements), but he is not inciting violence. I think it's ridiculous to call him an enemy. Lots of Americans have publicly stated similar views – does that make them enemies? What about vocal Canadians who've stated such views against the US? Are they enemies as well? And this question then begs further inquiry into where the line is drawn – when does a political dissenter become an enemy and who is setting the criteria? What is then done with such enemies?
I just have issue with the implication of calling someone an 'enemy of the state' with evidence which is applicable to millions of American as well as weak. Point it out to me next time and we can continue then.
That's going to be a pissed off post, PC.
All of his posts are pissed off.
I also don't see bigotry – could you point out to me where there is an instance of this bigotry that you mention? I just see anger and distress.
You see anger and distress. I see hate and bias. Bias that's based on hate for people of a different nationality, ethnicity and religion than he is. Isn't that the very definition of bigotry, Sana?
You may say it's justified because of the violence in the area, but I've been active on Iraqi blogs since back in the days when Iraqis were cutting the heads off innocent Americans and uploading the videos to the internet. I always tried to be fair and honest on Iraqi blogs, despite that. So did the vast majority of other Americans, from what I could see.
And don't assume it'd be pointless – if I honestly see some bigotry in something, I'll call it out.
I got called a "Judeonazi" by somebody in this thread earlier, and I'm not even Jewish. I've been called cracker, redneck, hillbilly and more other derogatory ethnic slurs by these bloggers than I could even count. You want to tell me they aren't bigots? lol.
Maybe it's just me and my own experiences, but when you see your brethren being slaughtered – intentionally or not – you're not going to be formidable towards the perpetrators and those who aid them.
The hostility is understandable. But don't these folks here on this blog don't have a responsibility to try to be fair and honest ? Is it OK to preach hate and violence? Pour gasoline on the fire? What happens of other people start doing the same thing, Sana? Who will come out on the losing side of that type of escalation? People have entirely too much faith in the humane nature of their enemies. Total war would be very ugly, and Arabs wouldn't win it.
I love the subcontinent – it is rich in culture, potential and life. I don't agree with everything, but there is more love than hostility. At teh same time, however,I get pissed off at the Pakistani government for it's continuous idiocy and seemingly deliberate disintegration of its country and people. In fact, I have a deep hatred for the Pakistani government. I get pissed off at India's treatment of Kashmiris and find that the country has done little to bring to justice those involved in the Gujrat slaughter as well as other instances in which thousands of Muslims have been slaughtered at the hands of its radical Hindu and Sikh populations. Does that make me an enemy to both India and Pakistan?
But that's the *exact* opposite of what KABOBfesters are doing, Sana.
Am I a threat? No, of course not. The story's different if I'm spewing violent words and calling for violent action.
Mohammad has called for violence on numerous occasions.
Hostility and anger are basic parts of our humanity – albeit we must be aware of how we express them and keep them from causing harm to others. Mohammad is angry in that post, and rightfully so (i'd say that about anyone who would have written such a piece in such a situation, even if I disagreed with their statements), but he is not inciting violence.
Maybe you should read some of his other posts? He wanted people on the West Bank to riot against the PA and Fatah, and wanted the West Bank to go on the offensive against Israel, during the Gaza war.
continuing in another comment…
I think it's ridiculous to call him an enemy.
What would it take to qualify him as an enemy then? He means to do my country harm during a time of war. I wouldn't call him an enemy combatant unless he actually turns his words into actions, but an enemy? Most certainly. He qualifies by any definition I can think of.
Lots of Americans have publicly stated similar views – does that make them enemies?
He isn't American.
What about vocal Canadians who've stated such views against the US? Are they enemies as well?
We aren't in conflict with Canada. So, that just makes them loudmouths.
And this question then begs further inquiry into where the line is drawn – when does a political dissenter become an enemy and who is setting the criteria? What is then done with such enemies?
Why don't you apply these concepts to South Asia and see if you can figure it out on your own, Sana? Is Pakistan an enemy of Afghanistan? No. But are some Pakistanis enemies of Afghanistan? Absolutely. Is the "line" really so hard for you to see?
I just have issue with the implication of calling someone an 'enemy of the state' with evidence which is applicable to millions of American as well as weak. Point it out to me next time and we can continue then.
I didn't call him an "enemy of the state". I used the word the same way this article the post is about, did. Some Muslims *are* the enemy, and Mohammad is one of them.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enemy
1 : one that is antagonistic to another; especially : one seeking to injure, overthrow, or confound an opponent
2 : something harmful or deadly <alcohol was his greatest enemy>
3 a : a military adversary b : a hostile unit or force
See definition #1 up there? That's how I used the word. You used definition #3.
I object to you using a dictionary to define a concept as complex as "enemy," PC. You need to use an encyclopedia, for some reason which I am unable to describe other than the fact that I clearly have no means by which to rebut your arguments, nor do I have any desire to. So if you want to try again, I'll be back later to check on your progress. If not, you get a "D" on this assignment. It would be an "F" except that I think this exercise is so ridiculous and your entire methodology so hollow and pathetic that I have no interest in carrying this analogical parallel any further, and by this point I'm just rambling.
<a href=
"http://www.kabobfest.com/2009/06/obama-calling-the-kettle-black.html">http://www.kabobfest.com/2009/06/obama-calling-th...
I object to you using a dictionary to define a concept as complex as "enemy," PC. You need to use an encyclopedia, for some reason which I am unable to describe other than the fact that I clearly have no means by which to rebut your arguments, nor do I have any desire to, so I'll focus on something arbitrary like your source for definition of a word. So if you want to try again, I'll be back later to check on your progress. If not, you get a "D" on this assignment. It would be an "F" except that I think this exercise is so ridiculous and your entire methodology so hollow and pathetic that I have no interest in carrying this analogical parallel any further, and by this point I'm just rambling.
http://www.kabobfest.com/2009/06/obama-calling-th...
I object to you using a dictionary to define a concept as complex as "enemy," PC.
How cute
But unlike the word "democracy" which describes a very complex form of government, the word "enemy" is very easy to understand. I think you said someplace you were in the Army? I'm pretty sure you didn't even get a dictionary definition for "enemy" in bootcamp. I know I didn't, in the Marines. Totally un-necessary to describe a concept that every human being understand very well. On the other hand, when I was in high school we spent a whole semester on democracy.
…for some reason which I am unable to describe other than the fact that I clearly have no means by which to rebut your arguments
You are claiming I had no means to "rebut" your arguments, when your argument was that Iran has democracy? Is a rebuttal even necessary? Do you really expect people to debate you every time you have a brain fart?
…except that I think this exercise is so ridiculous and your entire methodology so hollow and pathetic that I have no interest in carrying this analogical parallel any further, and by this point I'm just rambling.
I bet you broke a sweat trying to figure out how to string all those fancy multi-syllabic words together without managing to actually say anything, though.
PC can you ever make a claim without lying?
It doesn't work that way, bro. I've been specifically pointing out your lies and challenging you on them for several weeks. Ignoring all the times you got caught in lies and just claiming your accuser is the liar is pretty juvenile, and unlikely to buy you much after 1st grade.
When have you ever caught me in a lie PC? Name one time.
Just like you can't name an instance of bigotry, racism, or hatred in a blog post on this blog.
So again, I ask you, can you ever make a claim without lying?
When have you ever caught me in a lie PC? Name one time.
Its just the same as you being unable to report one instance where this blog endorses bigotry, racism, or pure hatred.
So once again, I ask you, can you ever make a claim without creating a lie?
Just spare us the bullshit and say you can't.
Many of these Israel firsters are out in full force on the Mondoweiss website, too. In fact, most of them are the same people.
Unfortunately, the national Examiner is not an aberration, and studies have shown people really do believe the bullshit in papers like that. For people that can believe that aliens abducted Elvis and made him impregnate Britney, "Muslims are the enemy" is an easy sell.
For people that are perhaps marginally more sophisticated than that, there's Fox News which uses the same techniques as the National Examiner to seduce its audience into believing whatever bullshit it cares to peddle, although it does so in far more clever and manipulative ways. Basically, what the right-wing media tries to do is make people feel good about themselves by praising them and congratulating them on their "values" and way of life. They give them something to feel superior to in the form of an identifiable and hostile "other" such as "liberals" or "Muslims" and by stroking their egos encourages them to embrace the most absurd and extreme bigotry, propaganda and lies. People are inclined to believe others who like them and praise them, as opposed to those who put them down or ignore them.
Hitler used the same simple formula. He told the humiliated German people they were the "Master Race" destined to rule the world and the rest was gravy: the German people folded like a cheap lawn chair, fighting heroically for their own oppression and destruction. And so have we Americans.
As Voltaire once said, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." The idea that Muslims are our enemy is an absurd fiction. But the atrocities are real.
If we learn nothing else from the last 8 years and the 4 more years to come, it should be that.
Well said.
Unfortunately, the national Examiner is not an aberration, and studies have shown people really do believe the bullshit in papers like that. For people that can believe that aliens abducted Elvis and made him impregnate Britney, "Muslims are the enemy" is an easy sell.
"Muslims are the enemy" has been an easy sell since at least the 1980s, Sean. It became a given, on September 11th, 2001. A lot of people worked very hard at moderating US public opinion towards Islam after that attack, including GW Bush.
For people that are perhaps marginally more sophisticated than that…
You are claiming to be "sophisticated", Sean? I'd really like to see your GPA from school, because you seem like a pretty mediocre individual of about average intelligence, who got brainwashed into believing that being a loudmouth leftist makes him special, and better than all the other mediocre and average Americans.
Hitler…
References to Hitler. Game over. Insert coin.
"Bro," you're eyes must be brown, because you're full of shit!
I'd like to see you graduate from Harvard Law school Magna cum Laude, become the Harvard Law Review's president, run for Senator and then run for President. Obama's life speaks for itself . . . he's definitely a better leader than Grampa McBush and his Bimbo Pallin.
You're an ignorant human being and you lack any real evidence and people skills when addressing others and when responding to comments. Try sticking to the topic and not asking to see someone's GPA. It shows me and everyone else even MORE how little you know and can debate.
I come to this blog just so I can read your comments. You definitely make this place better with your views and opinions. I appreciate them and you know what? Keep 'em coming . . . because, the more you post, the more I laugh!
You're the brainwashed, anti-justice, pro-hate, blinded and disturbed Extremist Neo-Con, "bro" . . . not I
I didn't talk about Obama, so no clue WTF you are on about there…
Try sticking to the topic and not asking to see someone's GPA.
I thought the topic I was replying to was Sean's condescending and demeaning comment about his fellow Americans? So, he gets to call people ignorant and stupid, and I don't get to question whether he's qualified to make such an assessment? lol.
You definitely make this place better with your views and opinions. I appreciate them and you know what? Keep 'em coming . . . because, the more you post, the more I laugh!
Yeah, I can tell you don't get out much. Your comment was so dull that I almost didn't bother with replying, even with all the insults you threw my way. Maybe I should challenge your credentials to be making assessments about people skills?
"Muslims are the enemy" has been an easy sell since at least the 1980s, Sean. It became a given, on September 11th, 2001. A lot of people worked very hard at moderating US public opinion towards Islam after that attack, including GW Bush.
Yeah, he worked real hard at bullshitting the American people into a war against Iraq that has left over 1.5 million dead, 4 million refugees, a destroyed infrastructure and a raging civil war. But he made some pious, bullshit speech or two about how we need to be tolerant of the Muslims we were killing so hey, it's all good.
You are claiming to be "sophisticated", Sean? I'd really like to see your GPA from school, because you seem like a pretty mediocre individual of about average intelligence, who got brainwashed into believing that being a loudmouth leftist makes him special, and better than all the other mediocre and average Americans.
My GPA from college was 3.78, and I got that working full time while going to school full time. Though if you had an education in reality you would know that educated people are often the most brainwashed by propaganda, simply because they are exposed to the mass media more than less educated people typically are. In either case opinions of my intelligence and my character by some immature, nasty little gobshite on a blog matters not a wit to me.
Hitler…
References to Hitler. Game over. Insert coin.
Pompous, pseudo-intellectual snobbery on mention of Hitler, who apparently cannot be spoken of by anyone but Godwin and the ADL without some smarmy little 'net cunt wanking himself to death over it.
"Muslims are the enemy" has been an easy sell since at least the 1980s, Sean. It became a given, on September 11th, 2001.
"Muslims are the enemy" is an easy sell to gullible and ignorant bigots like you who believe whatever they're told and who can't distinguish the actions of individuals from those of 1.5 billion Muslims.
Even if I bought into the criminal Bush administration's rather fanciful and far-fetched account of 9-11, which I don't, the actions of 18 Muslim terrorists hardly makes every Muslim everywhere "the enemy."
Do you think all Muslims should regard every Christian everywhere as "the enemy" based on Bush's war crimes? How about Southerners, are they the enemy too? I seem to recall us fighting a war against them and some of them are still running around sporting Confederate flags and refusing to celebrate the 4th of July.
Your defense of bigotry is shallow and dishonest as always, Craig.
I'm pretty embarrassed I posted on a topic Will had already covered, but the debate it has generated has made it worthwhile. Thanks guys.
I saw this issue at the checkout stand today. I felt so angry. I am a firm believer in freedom of speech, but I am so sick and tired of the media framing the Muslim population as the "enemy". If I had the money, I would go to every major distributor of the National Examiner and buy ALL of the copies. I know it seems extreme, but unfortunately I live in an area of the country that this publication simply perpetuates stereotypes. Ugh! I wondered if this issue was disseminated across the country or just in particular pockets?