Christian Terrorists Arrested in Michigan

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Dude, the Democrats *are* the powerful. They control both houses of Congress and the Presidency, and the sympathies of the permanent civil service are generally very much in alignment with the D's. As is the media.

The media is definitely not aligned with the Democrats. There is an alignment of some of the establishment media with whoever is in power, but even that has to be qualified very heavily. The media runs with whichever talking points the Republicans spout each morning. One example, have you heard any media reports today about the economy actually creating jobs for the first time in a long time? If so, did you also hear that it was "mostly" due to hiring census workers? On NPR this morning, which should represent the extreme left of the mainstream, the reporter actually said "those aren't real jobs". In fact, the census positions didn't count for "most" of the hiring, but that was the line being pushed by the right wing. There is a reason that Drudge has been called "America's assignment editor".

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Dude, the Democrats *are* the powerful. They control both houses of Congress and the Presidency, and the sympathies of the permanent civil service are generally very much in alignment with the D's. As is the media.

The media is definitely not aligned with the Democrats. There is an alignment of some of the establishment media with whoever is in power, but even that has to be qualified very heavily. The media runs with whichever talking points the Republicans spout each morning. One example, have you heard any media reports today about the economy actually creating jobs for the first time in a long time? If so, did you also hear that it was "mostly" due to hiring census workers? On NPR this morning, which should represent the extreme left of the mainstream, the reporter actually said "those aren't real jobs". In fact, the census positions didn't count for "most" of the hiring, but that was the line being pushed by the right wing. There is a reason that Drudge has been called "America's assignment editor".

This is just wrong on the facts. Journalists overwhelmingly vote D, and studies have confirmed this liberal leaning. For example, see http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
This is just wrong on the facts. Journalists overwhelmingly vote D, and studies have confirmed this liberal leaning. For example, see http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

I only had to read up to this sentence, "The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left", before I realized that article is worthless.

It may in fact be true that most journalists vote Democratic. That doesn't mean that they report Democratic. Just read (or watch or listen to) their reporting and that will be clear. Another example, why has so much of the healthcare debate focused on process rather than the substance of the legislation? Again, that's been the Republican line. Reporters may well vote Democratic, but I'll bet their editors and publishers don't.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is just wrong on the facts. Journalists overwhelmingly vote D, and studies have confirmed this liberal leaning. For example, see http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

I only had to read up to this sentence, "The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left", before I realized that article is worthless.

It may in fact be true that most journalists vote Democratic. That doesn't mean that they report Democratic. Just read (or watch or listen to) their reporting and that will be clear. Another example, why has so much of the healthcare debate focused on process rather than the substance of the legislation? Again, that's been the Republican line. Reporters may well vote Democratic, but I'll bet their editors and publishers don't.

Right, because who needs actual studies when you just know what is really true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote: We should condemn both. But, in reality, Christian white males are treated as marginal lunatics while Muslims are treated as representatives of their faith. Nobody ever refuses to stay on an airplane because a white male acted strangely, yet Muslims get kicked off planes all the time (admittedly, so does the occasional breast-feeding woman which is why I support an alliance of Muslims and breast-feeders).

I guess we've been down this road before, but you will note that there is no equivalent to the concept of jihad in Christianity. This, to me, is a material difference. And, of course, in talking about planes, I can't think of the last time "white male" or Christian tried to bring a jet liner down; even leaving aside 9/11, there have been a number of attempts by Muslim terrorists to do precisely that. On such facts, it is not unreasonable that aircraft passengers might be a little more nervous in the presence of Muslim-appearing people acting strangely. I freely admit that all safety concerns involving air travel are pretty much irrational, given the statistics.

Anyway, I, for one, am more than content to say that, if the government's allegations against the Christian Terrorists prove to be true, hang 'em high. Treason should be punished severely.

Of course, the real reason I'm posting is because I really can't wait until you start a new thread entitled "Democrat Terrorists Arrested in Michigan", or rename this one to ensure greater accuracy: ;-p

http://toledoblade.com/article/20100401/NEWS16/4010369

I'm just being cheeky, of course, but seriously, you should reflect on why it is that you would never attack the Democrats or Muslims in a way that you attack Christians and the Tea Partiers. Doesn't seem precisely evenhanded of you.

First, Jeff is pointing out the incongruity between the treatment. Of course he has condemned terrorism by muslims. He just hates that every muslim terrorist is somehow a symbol of the religion, and every Christian terrorist is a deviant Christian.

As for your questions, the term is Crusade or "Holy War". We as Christians invented it. I guess you are off the hook if you are Greek or Russian Orthodox, because then maybe your ancestors did not have a hand in it. Perhaps it is not biblical, but it is hard to discount, since it significantly defined the tension between Christians and Muslims and is likely the reason the notion of Jihad was created.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't you condemn both? You are not condemning the faiths, but people who wrap themselves in the faith for stupid purpose and are Muslim or Christian or other terrorists. And they actions do have consequences. People associated should be monitored and prevented from wreaking idiotic havoc.

We should condemn both. But, in reality, Christian white males are treated as marginal lunatics while Muslims are treated as representatives of their faith. Nobody ever refuses to stay on an airplane because a white male acted strangely, yet Muslims get kicked off planes all the time (admittedly, so does the occasional breast-feeding woman which is why I support an alliance of Muslims and breast-feeders).

They were monitoring these guys as well they should be. And then they got arrested. Would that that had happened with Nidal Hassan before he shot up Ft. Hood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't you condemn both? You are not condemning the faiths, but people who wrap themselves in the faith for stupid purpose and are Muslim or Christian or other terrorists. And they actions do have consequences. People associated should be monitored and prevented from wreaking idiotic havoc.

We should condemn both. But, in reality, Christian white males are treated as marginal lunatics while Muslims are treated as representatives of their faith. Nobody ever refuses to stay on an airplane because a white male acted strangely, yet Muslims get kicked off planes all the time (admittedly, so does the occasional breast-feeding woman which is why I support an alliance of Muslims and breast-feeders).

They were monitoring these guys as well they should be. And then they got arrested. Would that that had happened with Nidal Hassan before he shot up Ft. Hood.

Yeah, it's a pity they did not monitor the guy who flew into the federal building in Texas and the other right wing christian you shot up the holocaust museum. just a pity

[Anonymous]

Sad to see another fundamentalist Christian tried to take down an airliner again tonight. oh wait a second, I got that backwards ....

I'm sure his religion had nothing to do with it, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sad to see another fundamentalist Christian tried to take down an airliner again tonight. oh wait a second, I got that backwards ....

I'm sure his religion had nothing to do with it, right?

You posted your bigotry too soon. Check the news again.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Sad to see another fundamentalist Christian tried to take down an airliner again tonight. oh wait a second, I got that backwards ....

I'm sure his religion had nothing to do with it, right?

Hah, do you feel foolish this morning? Nice to see that your knee jerk reactions haven't slowed down any.

The dude was totally guilty of "sneaking a smoke while Muslim".

[Anonymous]

Guilty of sneaking a prohibited smoke while Muslim on an airliner and "joking" about his shoe bomb?

Couldn't those who wish us ill or worse use a sympathetic diplomat to test and report back on airline security measures and air marshals? Not saying that this is the case, simply that it is fooling to turn a blind eye to the possibility. Especially since this fool is let free on diplomatic immunity and can freely travel back to Quatar with whatever information was collected?

[jsteele]

Back in my day, if you wanted to hijack an airplane you had to use a gun or a bomb. This younger generation has it too easy. All they have to do is threaten the passengers with second-hand smoke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guilty of sneaking a prohibited smoke while Muslim on an airliner and "joking" about his shoe bomb?

Couldn't those who wish us ill or worse use a sympathetic diplomat to test and report back on airline security measures and air marshals? Not saying that this is the case, simply that it is fooling to turn a blind eye to the possibility. Especially since this fool is let free on diplomatic immunity and can freely travel back to Quatar with whatever information was collected?

Oh puh-lease, Christians don't have the corner on being morons! I'm sure there are just as many morons among Muslims.