Where are the Conservative voices?

Hate speech is something much more obscene and damaging than political barbs.

Or Egyptians, no Iraqis or Iranians.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Well, to begin with,
the Moslems might have 2nd thawts
about blowing up or burning down our edifices.

Instead of dealing with a handful of religious fanatics you'd make yourself the enemy of the whole Moslem world...

Actually Kuwait is one of the few Arab counties that doesn't.

Most ill will is due to the attack on Iraq, which was done in such a cack-handed manner that it made things ten times worse.

We didn't avenge ourselves against those (revenge?) against those who carried out the 9/11 attacks, like izzythepush said, we only turned a lot of good will against us by attacking a country who had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11...

OmSigDAVID wrote:

We avenged ourselves; to a very limited extent.

Vengeance is a very poor substitute for justice. As Rev has pointed out we killed a lot of innocent men and women who had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. We made matters worse...

You're just making that up.

As far as your claim goes that Bush didn't try to link Iraq and 9/11, he did say this:
"You can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror."

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Well, to begin with,
the Moslems might have 2nd thawts
about blowing up or burning down our edifices.

Instead of dealing with a handful of religious fanatics
you'd make yourself the enemy of the whole Moslem world...

No we haven't. We've responded appropriately to them and they don't like it.
They've made themselves our enemies.

maxdancona wrote:

Hate speech is something much more obscene and damaging than political barbs.

What is your concise definition of "hate speech"?
I declare that: I hate discriminatory taxation and I hate gun control.

I 'd like to say that I hate authoritarians, but there 's a problem with hypocrisy
in that I 've had them for friends.

I hate jazz too; it has given me headaches. I 'm not afraid to say so.





David

Brandon9000 wrote:

You're just making that up.

More "civility" from the Republicans who are always whining about liberals' incivility. Don't call revelette a liar!

As far as your claim goes that Bush didn't try to link Iraq and 9/11, he did say this:
"You can't distinguish between Al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror."

However, he always said that the invasion of Iraq was about WMD. He said it repeatedly.

joefromchicago wrote:

That's your standard? In effect, you're saying that liberals need to be as trollish as the three "conservatives" you've identified before you condemn them in the same fashion that you claim more responsible conservatives are remiss in not aiming at the trio right now. Posters who rise to that level of trollishness, however, are routinely placed on ignore by members of all political stripes. So, in effect, you're saying that you want conservatives to repudiate "conservatives" that they may have on ignore because you don't have them on ignore.

Quick note, any allegation of trollish behavior on my part is just as bogus as any allegation of bigotry.
I'm not suggesting that you're calling me a troll -- just wanted to get that out there.

How about this?

Quote:

I think it's that a certain type of Liberal delights in the slaughter of innocent Americans.

I previously mentioned that at least some moderate Muslims have a happy little smirk when innocents are slaughtered by other Muslims. I see the same happy little smirk on a lot of Liberals when innocent Americans are massacred.

I would not be at all surprised if every single Liberal who has posted in this thread was absolutely delighted at the 9/11 attacks.

Your judgement is deeply flawed.

The hateful bigotry being spewed against Muslims by these "conservative" posters is uniquely offensive. It is ugly and bigoted to a level that must be challenged.

Max, you ask where are the Conservative voices. Well, I'll tell you. I am right where I have always been. I have simply realized over the years that responding to some posters only gives them more of a platform to spout hatred.

I once posted a response to Gunga (I think it was) about his whole KKKlinton schtick and how that will keep people from taking him seriously. But I quickly learned that it does no good, so why bother.

Because bigotry matters. It matters to who we are as a society. It matters to the people who are targeted by it.

If we accept the demonization of Muslims as part of our public discourse without it being strongly challenged. it hurts us as a country. It makes us a weaker culture and lessens us as a people who respect freedom and liberty and equality.

But there are also practical reasons. Consider growing up as a young Muslim and being faced with this type of hate speech.

The posters in question are are claiming that Muslims are prone to rape and violence.

In my opinion, failing to strongly and publicly condemn this hateful bigotry is unfair to the people who are the targets of it.

You, evidently, view A2K differently. You may see it as a courtroom or a battlefield or town hall meeting. In those settings, I can see why you'd want to challenge racists rather than walk away. If, however, you also see it as a conversation, then all I can say is that I hope your interactions with people in real life are limited.