POST SCRIPTS

A recent interview with a Muslim female from Somalia, living a large American city among 25,000 Somali's immigrants went something like this, "I more aware of who I am and what I stand for more than ever before as a result of 9/11. These times have caused me to not take my religion so casually anymore and to investigate and learn more about it so I may defend it! It has made me more careful to observe tradition."

The events of 9/11 has indeed put Muslims in general on the defensive and galvanized many of them into a more radical practice of their religion.

Because of the extreme mental conditioning that includes the subordination of their will in their pursuit of enlightenment, coupled to a unique Muslim-only view of morality, jihad and the corrupt world, the moderate Muslim is susceptable to at least tolerating what his more radical counterpart does in the name of Islam, up to and including criminal acts, if not worse.

The worse, is reflected in the arrests of the Muslims in Canada. If you believe that US policy and military interventions has caused Muslim radicals to wage war on us, then I have to ask, what has Canada done to warrant this sort of hate and terrorist plotting?

IMHO it all goes back to the religion and their dysfunctional view of humanity that does not subscribe to their religious beliefs.

All religious extremists are nothing but trouble.

Sorry Libby, once again I must respectfully disagree. See, I have a hard time drawing any sense of equivalancy from the "Pentacostal rattle snake handlers in Arkansas" and "Jihadist in Islamobad". Just don't work fer me deary.

Muslim fanatics are hands down the champs of genocide and not just in the murderous middle east, but to a wide range of countries and cultures around the world.

I find it odd, after all the evidence, you can't bring yourself to just call like it is and say those Islamofanatic, infidel murdering, homosexual killin, wife stoning, woman beating, hostage beheading, jew hating, trash talkin, education depriving, child raping, clitorectomy giving, civil rights trashing, uberfacist, pillagers and torturers, those rank , vile chauvenist pigs with pea sized intellects filled with warped 10th century stupidity, existing in a 21st century world called "Muslims jihadists" ....are a scourge on humanity and every other religious extremists simply and utterly pales by comparision...not even in the same ballpark..not even in the same book, let alone the same page?

There....I said it for you and I feel much better, (the truth is so liberating) now you try it and please feel free to report back.

Not all religious extremists are terrorists, but all Muslim terrorists are religious extremists.

Don't make me explain this again.

And all Christian terrorists are religious extremists.

They don't get cut no slack just because they're currently not as active as the Muslim sort.

Does the the word "Waco" ring a bell? As a matter of fact, the Indian gangster teaming up with AQ reminds me of that Ruby Ridge guy teaming up with the Neo Nazi gun runners. Any difference is simply a matter of scale.

Libby...I think we're really not talking about political events anymore, my guess is we are talking about something a lot more personal...maybe a close relative? Is that where this anger is coming from for Christians?

Please don't get psychological with me. It's impertinent. I suggested that as ALL religious extremists were prone to violence, making very much of the Muslim variety might not be productive in resolving the current situation.

Actually, go ahead, get psychological. Because extremism (be it Christian, Hindu or Muslim) is rooted in a common disordered psychology that has virtually nothing to do with religious doctrine.

libby, I love your scale...you mean the same Waco where Janet Reno of the compassionate Bill Clinton administration, decided it would be more fun to send in tanks and armed agents in a seige that lasted for weeks and ended in a huge conflagration that killed innocent Americans citizens, men, women and children? You mean the Waco where David Koresh could have easily been picked up for questioning at the local drug store or supermarket at any time prior to the seige? You mean that Waco, libby?

And you honestly think the little religious oddity and his meager following was a serious threat? To whom? I never even heard of the man until the tanks showed up at his gate...and neither, I would guess, did you. Still you pose the idea that he was dangerous to the same degree that terrorists are; terrorists who attack citizens all over the world and have vowed to bring everyone under Sharia Law or kill them! Your scale is broken, libby, and quite beyond repair.

And by the way, the compassionate leader of the country, good ol' Bill stood right up, just like an adult, to take responsibility...he said, "Uh, that was Janet Reno's deal." Wow...what a leader.

Now, if you can, explain why the left had no problem with Janet Reno's egregious violent acts of aggression against American citizens. Tell me why it was OK for her to stomp all over their civil rights of assembly and religion. And explain to me why the same left is having an absolute hissy fit over Guantanamo where the terrorists are clean, dry, given special foods, given copies of their holy book and prayer rugs, and are treated with decency and dignity.

They events are not the same, any more than your treatment of these events is the same. You are just terribly "off scale" about all of it.

Oh, and PS...the "Ruby Ridge guy" wasn't blowing up trains or plotting to blow up more trains and buildings and his family wasn't either. They were, however, fearful that the compassionate Bill Clinton administration was bent on taking away another civil right...THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS! Whatever crimes the Ruby Ridge guy may have commited, the method for bringing him to justice was deeply flawed and probably in violation of normal procedures.

Don't get me started on the Ellian Gonsales thing...middle of the night...rifles pointed at his head...poor kid scared to death...he probably thought he was back in Cuba!

Libby, actually I was only trying to be honest with you, this is what we are all about, right? We are just trying to be honest with each other.

When it comes to debating politics, we both go way back. So, I know this is a sore subject for you (religion). I had an inkling where your anger might be coming from from the disproportionate way you reacted.

Libby did I ever tell you, you remind me of another person, a guy named Tasker. Since you have returned Tasker has been silent. Too bad, I'm sure you would find him a valuable ally in rebutting the right. You are both so closely aligned.... in so many ways.

Hey Libby wasn't a teenager shot in the back and killed in that episode? Also I believe an infant was also shot and killed by a sniper trying to kill its mother. If they had been members of the Earth Liberation Movement or Heaven forbid "Butterfly Hill" Libby and her friends woulds still be screraming.

Such a wealth of material. A person hardly knows where to start. First, believe me, should the Earth Liberation Movement take to hoarding firearms, the FBI has my permission to take 'em on.

Ruby Ridge and Waco were both very sad, and just go to show that you don't wanna be hoarding firearms and scaring your neighbors and bringing the FBI down on yer heads.

Please don't compare me and Tasker. He's got the most scatologial mouth I ever heard.

On the subject of religion, I am very wary of any doctrinaire organization comprised of human beings. Governments and corporations are bad enough, but religions are the very worst. And I am eterally getting into trouble with Christians who insist that their religion is more religious than everybody else's.

And back to Waco for a minute, law enforcement would come under the heading "doctrinaire organization comprised of human beings." Both local law enforcement and the FBI eternally get it wrong. There's nothing partisan about this. You wanna avoid these organizations; you do not want them poking around in your business. Where we could get partisan is where you say caching firearms is ok, and I say anti-war demonstrating is ok, and we both have the FBI on our case.

please define "eternally get it wrong"

being that man is fallible, it could be said that every one gets it "eternally wrong" but I sense you meant something else.

And is that truly why you get in trouble with Christians? Because they say their religion is more "religious" than everyone elses?

I sometimes marvel at the attitudes displayed toward religion. I do not appreciate any member of a religion who chooses to impose their will upon me by rudeness or force, but I also do not fault someone for attempting to convince me that their system of belief is correct. The 3 major world religions all claim that their is punishment for not adhereing to certain aspects of their doctrine, therefore I would expect them to share such information out of a sense for the caring of their fellow man, just as much as I would expect someone to tell me if I was about to be hit by a car. To take offense at such an act is, for most, a very disingenuous thing since most people are fond of sharing the "right" answer with our neighbor.

Remeber that while religion has been used to corrupt and enslave, so has politics, none so more than those who have sought to make a political ideology their religion.

As for your position of not trusting any "doctinaire organization comprised of human beings". this is wise policy, but probably isnt entirely true. The notion of trusting implicitly all of your fellow man is understood to be ubsurd by most of the population. But the act of trusting next to nothing, since pretty much all organization comprised of man include some sort of doctrine, is generally an overstatement and usually the words of a cynic.

as to your proclivity toward cacheing firearms, I find that interesting, as someone who does not trust "doctrinaire organizations comprised of human beings" one would think that the ability to defend onesself from the encroachment of such organizations would be paramount. Or is it that you feel everyone else should be unable to cache weapons?

As far as anti-war protesting, I find it interesting? I sometimes wonder what you wish to accomplish. certainly before a war has begin I see very clear reasoning, but after it has started, one would think that the surest way to end a conflict would be by meeting the stated goals for which a representative government has chosen war, not the hamperring of it, which ensures more the length, and tragedy which is inherrant in war. I believe that most war protestors are either nieve, or fanatical in their belief that their position is so just, that the prolonged suffering and even death and defeat of US servicemen and women (as well as others) is a reasonable price to pay, that their beliefs may be esposued.

I feel that every law having to do with the ownership of fire-arms by non-felon, adult United States citizens should be abolished. I am at a loss as to why the liberal Left and the ACLU are not with me my on this issue. They are so protective of the constitution, why don't they want me to bear arms? They go out of their way to stretch the freedom of speech so it covers issues having nothing to do with any spoken language. They go out of their way to misrepresent the separation of church and state, so that prayer can't be done in school or during a school function. The way the Left goes nuts about every cross they see, you would think they were vampires.
Why don't they protect my right to bear arms with the same zeal?
I think it should be law that if your going to own a fire arm, you should have to pass a hunter safety course and show that you are proficient in the use of the weapon. I also think that if your going to have that weapon in a family dwelling you should have to take appropriate action to keep family members safe from any mishaps. I also feel what "appropriate action" is taken is up to the adults of the household.
I started learning hunters safety when I was about 4 years old. I was shown guns, I watched them being used and I was told they were not toys, and not to be touched. By the time I was six I was shooting bb guns and 22's. I knew not to point my weapon at anything I want going to shoot. I was hunting by the age of 8. I am 41 years old and have all my fingers and toes plus both my eyes. Oh and because of my training I also have my hearing thanks to the use of earplugs.
I went to Jr. High and High School in Pennsylvania. When I was in the 8th grade, my school offered (liberals hold on to your butts for this one) during school hours, on school property, at no cost, a hunters safety certification class with my science teacher as the instructor. If that didn't kill the libs this will. Also during my Jr.high years, they had "club day" every Wednesday during 8th period you would sign up for one of a few dozen activities. One of the clubs offered was titled "Intro to black powder firearms." In this club we would learn about muzzle loading weapons. We learned about the different kinds of powder and how they burned. We would learn about the different types of projectiles used by the weapons. We even melted down lead and cast musket balls and bullets. We learned the difference between flintlocks and percussion weapons. We also built a fully functioning replica of a Kentucky pistol. When it was finished my instructor blew the bottom out of his trash can by discharging a half load of powder and no ball into the trash can. By the time I took the class, this had become a tradition and guess what? No one called the police or even complained about it. If Mr. Jones even thought of doing that today he would do hard time. Oh I am sure liberalism has taken charge and nothing having to do with guns is taught any longer. I will bet they have managed to teach American history without mentioning guns.
When will people learn? Guns do not kill people! People kill people! Abortions kill something like 1.7 million would be Americans every year. A french fry can kill you. Why isn't there a 7 day waiting period to buy fries?
The simple truth is that liberals are ignorant, and cowardly. They are scared of guns because guns make noise and if used correctly will make a mess. They think guns are the problem and by keeping me from owning a gun their problem will go away. What they fail to understand is when it comes down to it, I will stand my ground with a tire iron if need be, I will beat to death any danger to me or my family. Will tire irons be next?

Toby is obviously a sensible, responsible fella. The trouble is that he doesn't have a whole lot of company.

Guns may not, all by themselves, kill people. But they make it much too easy. If I'm not mistaken, gun laws have essentially two purposes: (1) to track down gun owners who are not sensible or responsible (i.e., have murdered somebody) and (2) to prevent people who have already proved themselves unstable from getting their hands on a gun.

Both noble aims, IMHO.

“please define ‘eternally get it wrong’�

Examples are legion. Arresting Quaker Grandmas. Releasing three-time rapists. You know the sort of thing. I’m all for infiltrating the local Mosque, you know, just to keep an eye on things, but you can probably leave the Presbyterian Peaceniks out of it. And are they still makin’ little boys take their shoes off in airports? Geez.

“And is that truly why you get in trouble with Christians? Because they say their religion is more "religious" than everyone elses?�

If you have something in mind, you have my permission to let fly, as long as it’s not that tired ol’ “they disagree with me, so they must hate me.�

“I sometimes marvel at the attitudes displayed toward religion. I do not appreciate any member of a religion who chooses to impose their will upon me by rudeness or force, ...�

I’m new on the block, so I’m not certain of everybody’s positions on things, but I hope this means you’re down on those certain religiose types who are trying to pass legislation restricting my reproductive rights. I sing praises to the Goddess daily that I was not born in some groady Islamic state, but neither am I going to stand for any Christian Mullah tellin’ me I have to have children I don’t want and can’t care for properly.

“Remeber that while religion has been used to corrupt and enslave, so has politics, none so more than those who have sought to make a political ideology their religion.�

True, but historically, I still think religion takes the prize. Are we not working up to something very nasty right now?

“As for your position of not trusting any "doctinaire organization comprised of human beings". ... usually the words of a cynic.�

Me? A cynic?

“Or is it that you feel everyone else should be unable to cache weapons?�

You got it. If the crazy guy down the street hasn’t got a gun, then I don’t have to defend myself against his gun. It’s perfect.

“... one would think that the surest way to end a conflict would be by meeting the stated goals for which a representative government has chosen war, not the hamperring of it, ...�

If one believes that the war WILL ACCOMPLISH the stated goal. Fine. But if one is pretty sure from the get-go that the reasons and the goal are a crock, one has a civic and moral duty to make a fuss.

Toby, you reveal more than you know. I am touched by your patient sharing.

"...we would learn about muzzle loading weapons. We learned about the different kinds of powder and how they burned. We would learn about the different types of projectiles used by the weapons. We even melted down lead and cast musket balls and bullets. We learned the difference between flintlocks and percussion weapons. We also built a fully functioning replica of a Kentucky pistol."

Five sentences...five little jewels of awareness...five lessons in human reality...the reality libby thinks she can wave away with her her magic legislative wand.

We begin with one simple word:

"we"...human beings, homo sapiens, people!

Second revealing word:

"learned" the ability to grasp the meaning, to figure things out and then...use that knowledge to do stuff!

libby, you can be as stubborn as you want on this issue but humans are, and always will be, capable of designing and building weapons.

Removing them from society accomplishes none of the things you wish to accomplish. Crime, especially violent crime, increases when gun laws are excessive. DC is the perfect example. So not only would you deny "the people" a basic right, the right to bear arms, you would also unwittingly encourage violent crime in the process. Brilliant, simply brilliant.

I would also encourage you to consider that an "armed" America is an America ready to do battle. It acts as a great deterrent to anyone who might consider take over or invasion. It's the reason we have the right to bear arms, to protect our freedoms and rights. In this context our laws against murder and assault have their place, to ensure that the unlawful use of arms is justly punished.

Is there anyone you trust?

yes both noble aims. Unfortunately a policy can be bad and still have a noble aim. Apolicy can do harm and still have a noble aim, a policy can be intrusive and unconstitutional and still have a noble aim.

so tell me, are you only concerned with the stated "aim" of a policy, or are you equally concerned with the results and second and third order effcts?

And I know you have a great many posters who address your comments, how do you determine which ones you will respond to.

Taskers method is interesting, he gennerally choses only a portion of a statement, then slightly manipulates it in order to draw away from the real debate. Its fun to watch, frustrating at times, but after awhile you can actually place bets on which portion of your debate will be misrepresentedin order to draw away from the focal pointof the discussion to an area he is more comfortable with.

I couldn't care less what the intended purpose of gun laws are. They infringe on the second amendment. These laws are intrusive and really only hinder law abiding citizens. Criminals by definition are not law abiding members of society. They won't be filling out forms or waiting on background checks before robbing a bank or killing someone. Now, on the other side of that coin, I am all for extremely harsh punishment for people who use guns (or not) while committing crimes. I find it disturbing that liberals fight like hell to gut the second amendment, while being unwilling to punish criminals in any meaningful way. This insures a high crime rate because the criminals know how weak and easily manipulated our system is. Got to keep that block of voters happy I guess. It isn't easy for executed convicts to vote.