What does it matter?

Do you value the US as a secular nation?

So what's your point? Better, yet, who cares.

Well, he got one thing right. The Moslem call to prayer is one of the prettiest sounds I can think of.

"Who cares?"

Well, a lot of Lib/left people seem to care a great deal about Stephen Harper's religious affiliations, no?

What does it matter ?...and who cares?
Wowzers!!!!!!

From every corner of the media today, the attitude seems the same..'who cares'?
It will mean a great deal when all the facts are known. One hopes it is not too late when we do know what we already suspect. About a lot of things.

No one values the US as a secular nation. The founding of the nation is important and the manner in which it was founded. There are millions of Americans who appreciate that and are prepared to fight to bring the great ship of state aright, so off course she has been these many decades.

He's not a Muslim. Furthermore, so what if he was/is?

We look silly when this nonsense is pressed. We've got better/useful/accurate/actual bad things to question him on, not this chickensh*t.

Yeah, exactly.... why should anyone care. His religious beliefs are his business. We should be concerned about what he DOES, not what somebody thinks his 'religion' might be.

This 'religion' issue does explain why there are so many problems in America today. Way too many people are myopically focused on inconsequential personal issues, while completely missing what's really important.

Moslems have fought Moslems, viciously and violently, as for example a couple of years ago in Gaza.
And the strife between Sunni and Shia is endemic.
There is no reason, in principle, why a Moslem president of the United States
could not lead his country against a Moslem power. Christians have often fought Christians, after all.

However, there is in Obama's attitude toward religion a sense of duplicity.
It would be much more sensible, and would relieve the sense of double-dealing and treachery that Obama gives,
if he were to say, "Yes, I am a Moslem. I pray to God fives times a day. God willing,
I shall lead us all against the scourge of fundamentalist and violent Islam."

To the comment,
"What does it matter?

Do you value the US as a secular nation?"

I would say that it matters because the US is a
great secular nation.

He's not a Muslim. Furthermore, so what if he was/is?

We look silly when this nonsense is pressed. We've got better/useful/accurate/actual bad things to question him on, not this chickensh*t.

Posted by: Dante at August 23, 2010 12:26 AM

So Dante.....when your daughter is subjugated to Sharia law,and stoned to death for "dating" an infidel,you will call it chickenshit?
The only chickenshit here is you.Islam is NOT a religion,but a political way to attempt to gain world governace.Funny how when the Commies went down,it all of a sudden became Islam.Same Godless b'tards,same useful idiots following them.
The ME should stand for one thing...multi explosives,NOW.
(Sorry for feeding the troll,Kate et.al)

Funny that those who find his muslim roots so uninteresting even though Islam has always been a potent merger of politics and religion, do not extend that disinterest to the beliefs of those nonmuslims who have been designated as enemies of secular humanism and all its great works.

The point of whether he's Muslim or not lays on his credibility and deceitfulness. As is whether he's gay or a CIA operative as some conspiracy people allege.

The point is - No one knows who this guy is really, full stop.

That is a very dangerous person to have in charge of "the most powerful nation in history".

Can he or is he being blackmailed and compromised?

Where is his birth certificate and what POTUS would spend over one million dollars of his own wealth to supress that information?

It is indeed important to find out whether Barry Soetoro is a Muslim or not!

I don't know of any islamists that don't allow their religion to taint their political or cultural views. They may exist, but from all I've seen of people that have been raised or exposed (yes, I'm saying "exposed" to the religion of islam) they all turn into something that you wouldn't really want to have leading a friendly country like the USA. That may have quite a bit to do with him hiding his past life, and all that entails.
They seem to be unable to separate their religious views from their political views. While it isn't a problem for normal religions, that is, religions that seek to bring you closer to God or closer to a spiritual well being, it does present a problem with islam, as its underlying proposition appears to lust solely for world domination and control of its adherents.

*Have the "normal" muslims been told that B.Hussien was a muslim while he was residing in Indonesia, and now appears to be an apostate? I'm just asking.
*Does B. Hussien have "SoA" (soldier of allah) on his business card like the Fort Hood Dr. that murdered 13 and wounded another 32? Can someone check before the shit storm starts?

Frank gafferty On Hugh Hewitt stated that obamas support for the mosque is a clarifying moment as it will be seen as the event where Obama publically embraced sharia. Meanwhile repubs led by newt are taking the battle to stealth sharia.

The vast majority of Americans are and will side with the GOP on this issue and it could precipitate and epic rout in November AND 2012.

Justthinkin:

You are so right....people who think that Muslims in general are peacefull people have their heads up their ass!

Just Google the website "Religion Of Peace"...they are keeping score!

As the speech by Bill Whittle says on the SDA blog, we had better wake up...FAST!

At this time the last thing the Americans need is a possible closet Muslim as their President.

Justthinkin and Sgt. Lajaune say it well.

"He's not a Muslim. Furthermore, what if he was/is?"

The point is that *Obama* covered up his Muslim upbringing, just as he's covered up a lot of other things that may or may not matter, depending on your point of view. During the campaign he released 'fact sheets' on his website saying he's "never been a Muslim or practiced any other faith" - "I've always been a Christian. The only connection I've had to Islam is that my grandfather on my father's side came from that country..."

He outright *lied* about a whole range of factual, check-able information, including the fact that he was registered as a Muslim at both schools he attended in Indonesia back during a time when it was entirely viable and not a problem to check off any other religion.

It's interesting that the Washington Examiner's Byron York's matter-of-fact, undeniable statement "it's accurate and fair to describe Obama as having Muslim roots" should evoke so many variants of "who cares" in light of the fact that Obama himself apparently cares enough to lie about it during a Presidential campaign and afterwards.

I'm curious: are the commenters who say "who cares?" and that it doesn't matter suggesting that an American President's Muslim upbringing couldn't possibly affect his foreign policy actions as President? If so, make the case; I've certainly never heard or read anyone who suggested that George Bush's faith had no effect on his worldview. Why is it all of a sudden a complete non-issue that Obama has Muslim roots?

There's an inherent contradiction in the notion that the matter of his Muslims roots - to whatever extent - is simultaneously a smear and a "who cares" issue.

Suppose a particular Presidential candidate went to great lengths, for whatever reason, to cover up and deny his Catholic upbringing, and a reporter wrote:

As Richardson said, his grandfather was Catholic. His father was raised a Catholic before becoming, by Richardson’s account, “a confirmed atheist.” Richardson's stepfather was a Catholic. His half-sister Anne told the New York Times that her “whole family was Catholic.”

Richardson spent two years in a Catholic school in Ireland and later, in a conversation with the Times’ Nicholas Kristof, described the Anima Christi, the beginning of which he recited by heart, as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth.” Given all that, it is entirely accurate and fair to describe Richardson as having Catholic roots."

Would that factual statement be proscribed and treated as a self-evident smear? Or might it merely be seen as a correction of the particular candidate's record of lying to the public about the matter?

After Canada's left/hard left spinning Harper's regular church attendance and that of Reform/Alliance leaders/candidates into a "hidden agenda", it is certainly disingenuous to declare that religion is a never-ya-mind when it targets a leftist leader---even a sitting POTUS.

One of the inconvenient details that did slip through the filter is that OILBAMA attended Occidental in California with a Federal Scholarship for foreign nationals and that he was registered as Barry Soetoro, Indonesian, muslim.

This can not be dismissed as a childhood experience/environment.....this was a young ADULT in post-secondary school.......

What other inconvenient, embarrassing, little details are suppressed?

This is not trivial.....These matters are of signal importance....due to the prospect that the POTUS could be subject to blackmail etc.

You can play "What If" games till hell freezes over and it won't make a damn bit of difference. The fact remains that America is screwed because of choices Americans made and only Americans can get themselves out of the mess they're in. Scapegoating it on the POTUS is a popular pastime that's been going on in every administration. Blame games are simply avoiding personal responsibility and nothing more than a means of delaying the inevitable.

Stop buying cheap import crap that sends your dollars and jobs overseas. Think locally, support your neighbors, become self reliant again. Emulate the Founding Fathers, and take back the country they were willing to die for. Take charge of your lives and turn the country around, it's up to you.

"So Dante.....when your daughter is subjugated to Sharia law,and stoned to death for "dating" an infidel,you will call it chickenshit?"

So Justthinkin...does that mean your son is surely doomed to be sexually molested should the president be a Catholic?

"Well, a lot of Lib/left people seem to care a great deal about Stephen Harper's religious affiliations, no? "

And they shouldn't. It's only a problem when a politician makes governing decisions based on his religious beliefs. An instance where this may be the case with Stephen Harper is the following. He has ignored all reason and fact in regards to crime and drug policy in his attempts to implement mandatory minimums for minor drug offenses. This leaves one wondering if his religion isn't the decisive factor, since his governing actions follow the guidelines of his religion rather than reason.

I'll leave it to you to find an example of Obama doing something similar. Obama really hasn't done much period, so good luck.

"The point is that *Obama* covered up his Muslim upbringing, just as he's covered up a lot of other things that may or may not matter, depending on your point of view."

Is this anything new or unique in the realm of politics? Being politically presentable despite the truth?

If Israel decides to take out the Iranian nuclear plant, then we'll quickly find out what religion our boy Barry is following.

Some people want to bend over backwards to be tolerant and secular at just the wrong time here, having a lying secret Muslim president would be more of a disaster than America has experienced so far.

I also just don't get this growing concept that it really doesn't matter "that much" if he was born in Hawaii or Kenya. It matters a lot and should be instant grounds for impeachment if he lied about that. The death of dear old granny on election night sounds really suspicious in the context of other facts.

I'll betcha Hillary and Bill know the facts and perhaps have done since about, oh, September 08 when the blackmail began.

@ BTJ.

""So Dante.....when your daughter is subjugated to Sharia law,and stoned to death for "dating" an infidel,you will call it chickenshit?"
So Justthinkin...does that mean your son is surely doomed to be sexually molested should the president be a Catholic?"

So BTJ...are you just playing stupid? His son would stand a much better chance of being sexually molested under sharia law.

"I'll leave it to you to find an example of Obama doing something similar. Obama really hasn't done much period, so good luck."

Really? I think most people who visit this site might disagree. Or at worst, know better. Obama has done more than enough.

"Is this anything new or unique in the realm of politics? Being politically presentable despite the truth?"

If you don't consider a communist/muslim President of the United States of America as new or unique, you troll here to spite the truth.

I have to agree with the 2 comments from John Galt above.

"So BTJ...are you just playing stupid? His son would stand a much better chance of being sexually molested under sharia law."

Wow...you clearly didn't get the point of my comment.

" Obama has done more than enough."

Ok, what has he done? Other than stick to the same path that his predecessors laid out?

"If you don't consider a communist/muslim President of the United States of America as new or unique."

Haha...now he's a communist? We're finished here friend, I'm done debating with this level of ridiculousness.

Btj. Small and silly.

BJT is a troll that comes out from under the bridge anytime he smells words like Muslim or Islam.

Ignore it, most likely a Muslim troll. The going in circle "arguments" and forever "explain yourself" requests without any self clarifications make for easy dismissals. It's a rigged game not worth playing.

Like it or not Mitt Romney is not president of the United States today because he is a Mormon (and may again not get the nomination as Republican candidate). So why shouldn't Obama have taken his lumps in the primaries and election if he is really Muslim?

For sure if he for various reasons was not born an American then he could be impeached.

If, I said if, he is a a Muslim then it means he lied about one of the most personal things in humanity, his beliefs about religon.

If he is a Muslim and admitted that when he ran the first time then I it is pretty clear he would have lost. He likely would have lost to Hillary.

I dont think he is, I think his roots give him a soft spot/blind spot for Islamism, no different than a Catholic probably cuts the RC church. In his case, I think it is a confluence of family members being that religon (hence the unwillingness to demonize) and his own political philosophy assigning protected status to an American minority and sympathizing with the alleged victim status of Islam worldwide.

I dont think he is a muslim. I think he is sympathetic, but I think he is blind to the more nefarious characters that are promoting islamic supremicism...not assigning any weight to the religous underpinnings of their philosophy, he dismisses it. His experience with Islam is likely pretty moderate, as would almost any Moslems in Indonesia in the 60;s and early 70's.

That Obama can be deceived by people speaking well meaning words and cloaking themselves in anti Western victimhood doesnt surprise me at all. But that makes him indistinguishable from any one of a number of left leaning politicians, journalists and religous leaders.

For those who say who cares if the President is a practicing Muslim and that the US is a secular society make their own argument invalid. For the leader of a Western society to be a Muslim is a conflict of interest. The beliefs and current practice of Islam is incompatible with current beliefs and practices of a western society. Islam does not value women nor does it value many other practices and cultural norms that are the hallmarks and defining characteristics of a modern western society. The last 20 years have proven that. The religious beiefs of our forefathers, mostly Christian, allowed them to accept a secular society, allowed them to accept that women are equal and have allowed them to accept that the rule of law is paramount and that only the state can decide who should live and who should die, not some archaic sense of honour which actually translates into slavery or the murder of women. Islam as it is currently preached and practiced is not compatible and cannot accept what we have built as a culture and a society. So how can it be OK that our leader does not believe in the very values he is suppose to defend?

The u.s. as far as i can see is a hugley populated christian nation so to have a muslim or anyone else run it seems suicidal for christians .

Paul in calgary

It matters because the Great Communicator can't convince people of what he is or isn't anymore.

People are on to His Slickness, how he uses sweet talk and a measured pace to speak much and say little.

They are also on to his real political ways and the fact that he is killing the American economy.

Jimmy Carter is so relieved Obozo got elected.

In the 19th century, some of the more vociferous critics of Benjamin Disraeli regularly referred to him as "The Jew". Disraeli's father was a Jew, although his son was brought up as a Christian. To be sure, Victorian anti-semitism played a part in the reaction to Disraeli, but part of it stemmed from objections to his foreign policy, which seemed to favour accommodation with Turkey at the expense of oppressed Christians in the European parts of the Ottoman Empire.

Disraeli's religion (or, more properly, his cultural "attachments" became important only in the context of his policies.

York's statement was modest, straightforward and accurate. What's notable about his (utterly true) statement "it's...accurate and fair to describe Obama as having Muslim roots" is that, while it IS accurate and fair, it's an assessment that, if we're to be honest, has not been overtly *uttered* or *written* in mainstream assessments of Obama, certainly not in mainstream news coverage. Based on some of the comments here, I can understand why: the floral-scented gift baskets of received wisdom that too many people almost subconsciously absorb, and then promulgate, instruct didactically that it would be somehow "rude" or "beside the point" or "irrelevant" to mention his Muslim roots; it would be small of us to even refer to them, apparently. I suggest that a US president's Muslim roots may be neither irrelevant or beside the point when it comes to the matter of his foreign policy approach, for example, including towards Israel.

As for BTJ (and his ilk on both sides - apparently - of the political spectrum) I could take his comments more seriously if he was on the record (i.e. in comments, either here or elsewhere) as saying that George Bush's, or Stephen Harper's, or "the Right's" religious beliefs were utterly irrelevant to their manifest world view as it pertains to politics, including foreign policy.

I don't think that Obama, psychologically, has any religious affiliation. He's focused only on himself as Himself.

BUT - he has emotional ties to two 'religions'. His first tie is to Islam and he has himself admitted it - defining the call to prayer as 'the prettiest sound'. He was raised Muslim at a formative time of his life, around the same time, I suggest, as he moved into pathological narcissism.

We can see the results of this connection in his refusal to acknowledge the reality of Islamic fascism, his refusal to accept the reality of the 'war on terror', his refusal to acknowledge terrorist attacks on US soil as 'jihadist', his attempt to turn NASA into a 'Muslim outreach' program, his refusal to confront the Islamic nations (eg, Iran and its nuclear bomb), his apology to the Islamic nations for 'the pre-Obama America', his absurd statements to Islamists that Islam is a religion promoting 'peace, tolerance, justice and human dignity' and his statement about the 'exceptional contributions by Muslims to the USA'.

So, Obama's emotional connections to Islam, whatever his religious filiation, are strong and warm.

By the way, Islam is less a religion (it has little to say about the metaphysical) and essentially a 7th c political and societal system of total subjugation of all. Cloaking that system in the guise of a 'religion' prevents those axioms from being criticized and turfed as repressive and unjust.

Then, there's Obama's other religious filiation. Again, it's not religious per se but also emotional. That's Black Liberation Theology, via the Rev Wright's church of his wife, Michelle. She's hardcore anti-white and anti-American, and that's what this church is all about. Obama has followed this ideology. Anti-white and anti-American.

It's these attributes - his refusal to accept the reality of Islamic fascism and his anti-white and anti-American stance - that is the cause of concern.

That's the problem,EBD.Harper's religion,or Bush's,or Thatcher's IS touted out as bad and evil by the lefties,yet we can't mention that Obama was/is a practising Muslim/Islamist.
And Dante....my son,under sharia law,would be the one stoning your daughter,after he and his buddies raped her,then claimed she was at fault.Try to remember this fact....under Islamic law,a woman's word is only worth 1/4 of a "man's".My son was taught to respect both sexes as equal,with both being prone to good and bad,BUT we are still equal.
So tell me,what about Islam so scares the crap out of the followers,that seeing a woman NOT in a burlap sack makes them homicidal rapists that they even kill their own sisters/daughters? Could it be following the rants of a pedophile? Try reading the Koran and hadiths,and see the level of depravity in them. Oh wait. Facts.Or a fact.The lefties favorite four letter word.Facts don't belong in the world of pixie dust and unicorns.

The inflammatory language is counterproductive, Justthinkin. You're entitled - always - to make your point, but phrases like "homicidal rapists" and "rants of a pedophile" are entirely beside the (intended) central point of the discussion here, which is that it's merely accurate and fair - as opposed to being some sort of an (apparently self-evident) outrage, or a smear, or evidence of racism or Islamophobia, or an irrelevancy, or a misdirection - to note Obama's Muslim roots.

Nothing about this guy is as it seems. As Kate has stated a few times all promises have an expiry date. You want him to be Christian, he's Christian. You want him to be Muslim well he can be that too.
What he has trouble with is being competent and that is the one that matters. You can dislike his Muslim black side or you can hate his commie Christian white side. One way you are a racist,the other way you are right on. The man gives you choices.

Whenever Harper is accused of being a 'fundamentalist Christian', I'll ask that same question - 'who cares'?

Dante: "He's not a Muslim. Furthermore, so what if he was/is?"

First, you don't know if he is or he isn't, because he hasn't been clear about his religious affiliation, which does matter to voters, whether you like it or not. It certainly seems to matter to the MSM when a politician is a practising Christian; they're especially hard on Evangelicals and Catholics.

Second, the fact that Obama's religious affiliation has been clouded, that he has not been forthcoming about the details, is of concern to many voters, as others have pointed out. It affects his credibility: By refusing to be transparent, you're left asking, "what's he hiding and what else doesn't he want us to know?"

For instance, where was he born, what were his marks at Harvard, etc., all of which Obama has spent a lot of money to keep under a seal of privacy for the next 23 years.

It appears that Obama's got a lot to hide; he's a public figure -- as POTUS, the leader of the most powerful country in the world -- and does not have the right to withhold facts about his past that are relevant to who he is, to what makes him tick, to how he governs. Given that the U.S.A./Western Civilization is in a life-and-death struggle with the ME and Muslim extremists, how can it possibly be said that "it doesn't matter" whether Obama is a Muslim or not? That would be like saying that it didn't matter whether or not Winston Churchill was a Nazi sympathizer during WWII.

As for the "who cares?" and "it doesn't matter" drones: That's the new default of the historically challenged these days who've drunk the MSM/entertain-me-to-death Kool-Aid. When faced with a fact they don't like, their immediate response is, shrug, whatever, who cares? ...

Obama and his puppet masters are counting on this historical amnesia. In addition to his obtuseness, it's a good cover.

"Then, there's Obama's other religious filiation. Again, it's not religious per se but also emotional. That's Black Liberation Theology, via the Rev Wright's church of his wife, Michelle. She's hardcore anti-white and anti-American, and that's what this church is all about. Obama has followed this ideology. Anti-white and anti-American.

It's these attributes - his refusal to accept the reality of Islamic fascism and his anti-white and anti-American stance - that is the cause of concern."
ET

BINGO! & AMEN!
You beat me to it ET...It's not really where Barry's worshipping heart is at thats the concern, its where his heart and convictions are in general. He is afterall, the current leader of the free world.
We might not know to which God he prays and I also believe Obama is not even spiritual enough meaning he would'nt care less if he never did go back to ANY church at all but
one thing thats much clearer and certainly consistant is the fact he seems to despise white America.

My opinion. Obama is not religious in any way. He joined Rev. Wright's church because, as a community organizer, he used the people at that church and others. If he had worked in Boston, he would have joined a catholic church. If he had worked in San Francisco, he would have been a Vegan Agnostic. The only worship he performs is when he looks in a mirror. If it got him money, power or access to someone, he would perform Aztec rituals at the Lincoln Memorial.

Many politicians don't let themselves be "known". There's always room for backpedaling depending on voter reaction. (Mr. Harper is no exception.) I think many people are uneasy about Mr. Obama because his elusive nature is far more pronounced than what we expect as usual in politicians. His background is murky as are his connections. Perhaps he's shallow and there simply is nothing to know. Or perhaps he's naive and fronting for some faceless groups. Or perhaps his interests are inimical to the country he purports to represent. Does he ever speak sincerely about anything? Because he has the gift of delivering teleprompter stuff so convincincly, we are bound to wonder what is the man really like unplugged so to speak? His talk show circuit does nothing to clarify the picture. I think his religion is another aspect of the murkiness that hovers around his presidency. His dismissal of a good number of his citizens as "small town guns and religion" is beyond arrogant, not to mention stupid.

Whatever the man is, Muslim or not, I just don't think he's up to the job. Unfortunately, he's in a position to do a lot of damage.

I beg the moderators indulgence, I don't usually answer trolls, but really the statement that Obama has not done much is risable! Try a health care that the majority of Americans don't want and its escalating costs. How about $1.0 trillion in stimulus that was virtually pork barrel waste. The mess of the drilling moratorium and its attendant economic hardship and unemployment. Really this is too easy!

At least all of Barrys supporters, especially those he keeps well fed with food stamps, will be happy to know that he is comfortably enjoying his 9th vacation, since he took office.

1 1/2 years ago how does he find the time to accomplish all that he does?

fair to describe Obama as having Muslim roots

I just wish he'd get rooted. /Strine

knight 99 - yes, those endless vacations and golf and sports events are quite something.

The Democrats are trying to rebut these valid criticisms of Obama's endless vacations and parties by relabelling Bush's going to Camp David and his Crawford ranch as 'vacations'. No, they weren't. The two sites were functioning as external White House offices.

Obama is behaving as president much as he behaved as titular president of the Harvard Law Review. He did nothing there; no editing, no writing of articles. He left it all, entirely, up to others. He'd simply appear from time to time, smile and wave and chat - and disappear.
Same with his Community Organizer Role, where he preached (to the converted) and delegated and left.
Same with his brief time in the Senate, where he voted 'present' 99% of the time and left the hard work to others.

Now, as President, he's overseen and allowed the radical left to takeover, to insert a massive 'stimulus' that is nothing but pork, and has done nothing for the economy, ram through by bribes and backroom deals and a majority, a deeply unpopular Health Care, allowed unemployment to balloon to over 10 and even 16% in some areas - while promising that his stimulus would keep it below 8.5...ignored the Gulf Oil spill, attacked dissent, attacked Tea Party voices, refused to protect the borders and deal with illegal immigration ..all he ever does is blame Bush or claim racism and fling taxpayer money at any problem...and leave for his golf game.

In foreign affairs, his ignorance of history and reality is mindshaking; he's insulted our western allies and smooched up to our enemies, supported the anti-constitutional Zelaya, supported the loss of the Falkland Islands to Britain...enabled Iran to get a nuclear weapon, ignored the democracy demonstrations in Iran....and totally ignored Islamic jihadism.

ET you nailed it. I couldn't have said it better.

It always amazes me that some people cannot see the man for what he is.

The posters here nailed it. It doesn't matter if he's Muslim or Christian as much as it didn't/doesn't matter what Bush's or Harper's religious leanings were/are.

It's his actions that count.

Obviously Obama is embarrassed by his Muslim roots. That's reason enough to keep bringing it up.

Exactly - it's his actions.

For example,
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/the_truth_about_obamas_muslim.html

In differentiation to his overwhelming praise for Islam, which he singled out for its contributions to 'tolerance, justice and human dignity' (?!), "he refused to attend the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts (an avowed Christian organization), and, refused to attend the National Day of Prayer because he claimed to do so would be offensive to non-Christians."

He also refused to attend the Arlington National Memorial Day Services, and has not joined a church since being forced, politically, to leave Wright's Black Liberation church.

Attendance at a church would not matter; what matters is his rejection of certain religious events and his support for other religious events - and his astonishing refusal to acknowledge the reality of Islamic fascism.

As president, he has a duty to uphold the Constitution - a duty which he refers to and then ignores at whim, as when he refuses to protect borders and deal with illegal immigration. He also has a duty to acknowledge the spirit and identity of America - and he apologizes to the world for both America's spirit and identity, refusing to acknowledge its exceptionalism and defining it, pre-Obama, as 'erroneous and guilty'.

With this in mind, Obama ought to oppose the Obamamosque. It has nothing to do with the constitutional freedom of religion, for this freedom does not mention the geographic site where this is practiced. It has to do with ethics; it is a reality that Islamic fascism destroyed the lives of over 3,000 people; the geographic site is 'hallowed ground' and no mosque ought to be built there.

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, the wise people as false, and by the rulers as useful" ~ Seneca

Ha ha, Freudian Slip:)

This weekend while my wife and I were divy-ing the chores she asked me which jobs I wanted and I said "that's okay honey, I don't have a choice...I mean I don't have a say...oops I meant I don't have a preference as to which jobs I do".

We both had a good chuckle as my sub-conscious gaffes.

For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

~ Luke 12:34

This is why one's religion is important.

Until recently, before those of us in the West, under Leftist tutelage, trashed our Judeo-Christian faith, we had backbone and courage. We had the gift of discernment, to help us distinguish between tolerance and suicide, to separate the wheat from the chaff. Now, wheat? chaff? tolerance? suicide?

Who cares?

Very few liberals are Muslim, most are Atheist/Agnostic, yet they are always on the side of Muslims.

Obama is simply one of them, but with dangerous amounts of power.

Muslim or not he must be stopped.

it certainly does matter who is in the white house!

How about ahmadinejad, would you be happy if he was in the white house?

In my opinion this pos is nothing more than a trojan horse who is hell bent on destroying the u.s. and is doing a dam fine job of it.

Glad to hear an awakening has started.

Todd Chuckles ... oh sorry, Chuck Todd has a completely different take on Barack Obama's religiosity! And since an "esteemed" member of the MSM said it then it must be true, right?!

His real religion is Marxism . . .

http://tinyurl.com/2avo3bl

It's the "multi" in multiculturalism that's become the New Religion, and that's Obama's cult(ure): He fills the multi bill on a whole lot of counts, which lets him slip under a lot of radar.

All you have to believe in is "multi"culturalism, under which dispensation focus, facts, and reality be damned; the more multi someone is, the better, and who cares about the specifics?

You're a black POTUS and clueless? Who cares?

You're maybe a Muslim POTUS and bow to America's enemies? Who cares?

Multiculturalism tells us NOT to discriminate, and yet discriminating between good and evil, right and wrong, is what separates human beings from animals.

'who cares'?

People who suspect they've been lied to care.

Lets look from another angle, perhaps the question should be: Is Obama an atheist?

If Obama is an atheist then he has lied (on record) about his faith which likely had major sway in the 08' election. Like a Muslim, it's unlikely that the Americans would have elected an atheist. So yes, I care if Obama was elected under false pretence whether he is atheist or muslim. In other words, I’d have no issue if Obama campaigned as an atheist(or a muslim) and won the election; only if he was deceitful during the campaign.

Re: secular nation

Could someone please direct me to the document that says "America (or Canada for that matter) is a secular nation". I wasn't aware that the terms "freedom of religion" and "secular nation" are equivalent. In my opinion, one of the gravest mistakes we've made in western society is to allow the atheists to cram the BS line that we are secular nations down our throats and into our education system. Personally, I am an agnostic individual that is proud and happy to live in what is clearly a Christian nation (Canada) because I am afforded the Right to exercise my beliefs as I wish; which, I could not do in a Secular or Muslim nation.

Finally, of course people… whomever they are, are going to be guided by their religious beliefs when making all decisions, political and personal. To wish for, expect or demand that our leaders do else-wise is moronic. Our laws and civilization are rooted in the Ten Commandments and we should expect that our leaders conduct themselves in the manner that was intended, regardless of your personal religious views. THAT, is why I care if Obama is a muslim! Because if he is, by definition, he is in conflict with the very ideals he's expected to uphold.

*
again, folks... just ask "slick willie" clinton... it ain't
the mis-step that smokes you... it's the cover-up.

*

"So Dante.....when your daughter is subjugated to Sharia law,and stoned to death for "dating" an infidel,you will call it chickenshit?"

Do you really believe what you are writing or are you just saying it to be like me - a devil's advocate? Because if you do believe this, you may want to start taking some anxiety and paranoia med. I don't mean to be rude, but to link idle speculation about Obama's links with Islam to the Islamification of the US is a little too similar to Margaret Atwood's fear of the 1980's Christian resurgence in the US (think Handmaiden's Tale). Suffice to say, American secularism survived Reagan and his cronies (Falwell, Robertson etc) and it will survive Obama and his alleged beliefs. If you really live in this kind of fear, you have my complete sympathy.

"Funny how when the Commies went down,it all of a sudden became Islam.Same Godless b'tards,same useful idiots following them."

Indeed. A constant fear of something or the other. That's what makes America great. At least that's what this thread suggests. Lets say Islam is defeated and vanquished. I wonder who next in line is. Mexicans?

"That is a very dangerous person to have in charge of "the most powerful nation in history"."

Lets go back to the founding fathers and the very famous concept of checks and balances. That, alone, should put an end to this discussion. He's not invincible. He'll be in power for another two years (or six) and then he'll go. And then the American people will replace him. Of course, if you want to convince yourself that the end of days is here, nobody is going to try to convince you otherwise.

"Would that factual statement be proscribed and treated as a self-evident smear?"

Fifty years ago, it was. Factual statements may be factual, but the intent behind them is to smear. Remember Kennedy and the Vatican rumors that one of the parties spread? Do you remember how Kennedy tried to avoid the issue whenever it came up? He denied it outright once or twice, but for the most part he remained evasive.

You'll notice that over time, Islamophobia has become acceptable. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not calling you or anyone racist - but if you take the most basic definition of Islamophobia (fear of Islam) and compare it to the statements above, it is pretty self-evident. In light of this, it isn't exactly hard to figure out that if Obama downplayed his links to Islam, it has less to do with his worldview, and more to do with political strategy. He is aware, as I am sure anyone is, that Islam scares people in America. To attribute very normal political strategy and posturing (exceedingly normal, even) to some kind of devious plan to destroy America and the world, suggests that reality and logic are being replaced by emotion and paranoia.

"Disraeli's religion (or, more properly, his cultural "attachments" became important only in the context of his policies."

And yet he is remembered as one of the better, more effective Prime Ministers of the UK.

"What's notable about his (utterly true) statement "it's...accurate and fair to describe Obama as having Muslim roots" is that, while it IS accurate and fair, it's an assessment that, if we're to be honest, has not been overtly *uttered* or *written* in mainstream assessments of Obama"

You might as well say that all Germans over a certain age have Nasi roots. Problem with that school of thought, as the Germans themselves have shown, is that people can get conditioned over time. Therefore even if his roots are Muslim, those roots could be easily transplanted by the experiences he gained in America. Humans learn through experience. Beliefs tend to evolve over time. Human nature and all that.

"It's these attributes - his refusal to accept the reality of Islamic fascism and his anti-white and anti-American stance - that is the cause of concern.'

Another long-winded psychological diatribe. However this one makes a little less sense, since it effectively means that Obama hates his mother and her side of the family.

For all the talk about America being a secular country, we can all agree on one fact. No American-born non-Christian, be he Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Taoist whatever, can ever aspire to be President of the United States. That says volumes about American secularism in itself. Even the Indians, with their flawed democracy, have managed to elect Sikh PMs and presidents, Muslim presidents and, of course, one of the most important kingmakers in modern day democratic politics - an Italian-born, Catholic woman. That is secular democracy.

The rest of the stuff is pretty repetitive. For all the hatred of all things "mainstream", SDA has its own mainstream school of thought going on which evidently doesn't believe in critical thought. Everyone writes the same thing over and over again. You might as well institute a facebook-style "Like" button. That would cut down the comments to maybe three.

Indeed. A constant fear of something or the other. That's what makes America great. At least that's what this thread suggests. Lets say Islam is defeated and vanquished. I wonder who next in line is. Mexicans?

-Devil's advocate

It turns out the fear of Russian communist spies was justified;

They caught 11 Russian spies in the USA a couple weeks ago.

Will you deny this as well?

If those Mexicans are Illegal yes they should be next in line.

Then we should go after liberals.

Bwahahahahahahahahah!!!

Oh and yes America is great.

It is because the USA is great that Canada can afford to be such a nice place to live.

Without them as close neighbor, friends and allies we would be a shit hole.

They buy 80 % of what Canada produces.

They protect us from Invaders ;

ever heard of Japanese airplanes flying over the north pole in WWII trying to attack the USA by flying over Canada?

or German Submarines in St-Lawrence River in Canada in WWII?

The USA is great and makes Canada great like it or not.

Home Rule, not Rome Rule, was the battle cry of Northern Ireland's Protestant sector. It may have had some credence, but the Republic of Eire is hardly ruled from Rome, the evidence is clear. When John F. Kennedy ran for POTUS there was fear of Papal interference in the politics of the country, but this proved false, and Kennedy was hardly a shining example of Catholic Matrimonial bliss.
Truth is though, that Islam has proven to be incompatible with democracy.

Fear is a good thing, say when confronted with a bear, or someone intent on harming you and your family. Accusing people of "fear" is not an argument.

Also, anyone from any background can aspire to POTUS so long as they are born in the USA. What DA neglects to mention is the Right of citizens to vote for whom they wish on their own criteria. It's called "Liberty"; and it makes the following statement incorrect and ridiculous : "No American-born non-Christian, be he Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Taoist whatever, can ever aspire to be President of the United States."

So no, I guess we can't all agree.

Well Devil, at least our enemy ala Islamic Supremacism is real unlike the leftwing climate hysteria generated by MSM and libtards for three decades. You remember the hysteria over the iceage coming back in the 70s, then it was acid rain and alas now it's Global Warming. My enemy is real, it's here in the west and it oozes and festers with hatred.

I think a key attribute of the USA, and what has made it exceptional, is its focus on the individual as the key agent of economic, political and intellectual power in a society.

That was an outstanding decision made by the Founders. No nation had ever so firmly declared its support for the individual before. After all, the individual, warts and all, is also the locus of failure, errors and to believe in such a being, requires taking a great risk. However, since it is only the individual who reasons, who thinks - this choice by the US to accept the risks of freedom led to the exceptional technological and intellectual advances of the US.

We have seen, and will always see, the continual rise of the opponent of individualism; namely, the collective. The collective, as a means of organizing a society, represses the individual. Collectives are always 'no-growth' for they reject dissent, questions, criticism - the backbone of individual innovation. They reject risk in favour of an assumed collective stability. This collective is utopian. If only we all behave in such a way, THEN, all will be pure and perfect.

The problem is, societies are not machines; we must acknowledge a requirement to adapt - whether to adapt to increasing populations and the need for more food and better medicines, or adapt to changing climate, or whatever. Therefore, the collective is unable to adapt. It becomes harsh and repressive.

We've seen the idea of collectivism in the medieval church, in fascism, in communism and now, in Islamism. They are all the same. Insisting on homogeneity, rejecting reason, thinking, individualism; repressive and militant. And all must be fought against and rejected for they deny the basic nature of man: his ability to reason, innovate and adapt.

ET, you write so clearly some of the main reasons, "the focus on the individual", why my wife's and my grandparents did their best and succeeded in leaving that Utopian paradise the Soviet Union in the early 1920s. The "world joy bringers" wanted a collectivist system for all.

What is so sad is the the liberalism of today appears to want collectivism.

oops

My bad DA.

I misread your comment. Sorry for the unjust criticism of the quote above. I caught you meaning on the second read, and although I may not quite agree, your point is well taken.

Wow, the State-Run MSM has been busy this summer.

I am just a poor homegrown conservative tea-partying terrorist from Mt. Olive, Louisi-Yana, not really bothering to many people, but yet, in one summer the MSM has managed to pit me against the Blacks (Omar Thornton) , the Mexicans(Arizona) and now the Muslims(ground zero), all for political gain. And, jeeez Mary, that's no small attempt, that's over 30% of the population. I guess maybe we should thank them for bringing all that bigoted racism into the light of day.

And there is still over 2 months togo. I reckon if the truth be known I might even dis-like the Chinese, Koreans, and those damn Russians, won't know till they tell me. The local Native Indians aren't much of a problem, I seriously doubt they read the newspapers and, anyway, spend most of their time up in Oklahoma getting drunk.

Hope ya did good at the Shows Kate, I wish now I had gotten a smaller breed dog, that 10 month old German Shepherd is 87 pounds, my God, her head is as big as mine, and I tell ya, it's kindof intimidating when she gets close to your face, yea, it took nerves of steel for a while, but these days I am more than likely to get a bigfat wet tongue across the brow. For whatever reason she has decided that I am her alpha male. She did almost get the meterman, and the water guy, my cousin, and 3 Jehovah Witness's on mountain bikes (that was fun, and I recall watching video and movies where German Shepherds are being trained to attack, kill and mutilate, or whatever else you want destroyed, I see now why they use German Shepherds).

Ok, gota go back to work, brakes over, on state time here, ;- )
,

ET:

Great post regarding the individual vs. collective...only one question...what does that have to do with why anyone should care about Obama's religious beliefs AS AN INDIVIDUAL? Why should the collective drag him down in the name of the man's spirituality?

Il Douche makes Slick Willie blush with his sepsis. No one believes a word.

What a great secular nation America is...where the President is subject to criticism for what his spiritual beliefs MIGHT be, and where soldiers get locked up for not attending a religious rock concert.

Ahhhh, you can almost smell the freedom :S

Funny how the same people who are so concerned with Islam coming to America are working so hard at bringing America down to the suppressive level of most Islamic nations. Ironic.

The only Deity Obama worships, is himself. Personally I think he's an Atheist with cultural tendencies towards Islam.. Marx is his Religion. As it is his imps. To the ones who he has appointed. That or they barley have a Faith.
Normally this wouldn't bother me, Since most secularists are as well. Being that their socialist Atheists means they have as crusading set of beliefs, & total, contempt for those who do believe in a Personnel God.
As Obama said.The American People will not give up guns or bibles, pretty much covers his contempt for those with Faith.
He thinks Government is infallible.
JMO

What a great secular nation Canada is...where the Prime Minister is subject to criticism for what his spiritual beliefs MIGHT be, and where soldiers get charged for murder, when they actually are doing their jobs.

It's utterly irrelevant to comment on the physical individual who selects an ideology; the focus has to be on the ideology.

The jihadist is physically an individual but has selected a collectivist ideology - radical Islam.

Obama is physically an individual but selected Black Liberation Theology - a collectivist ideology;
Obama selected statism and socialism - both of which are collectivist;
he obviously is emotionally attached to Islam, a collectivist ideology;

He rejects dissent and questions - which is the foundation of individualism (notice he hasn't had a press conference for a year;
he rejects free and private enterprise in favour of collective and public institutions - re education, health care;

Obama rejects the freedom of the individual and the risk-taking of questions, dissent, analysis. He's a collectivist.

For those who think Obama's obvious Muslim faith/attachment/what have you is no big deal, ask yourself this: if Obama was a devout Christian who made statements a la Sarah Palin that God has a plan for the US, ect., would anyone have voted for him?
I say no.
His obvious adherence to a religion that promotes disunity with others is an enormous problem. Lie to yourselves if you must but that problem will always be there.

"The only Deity Obama worships, is himself."

Don't we all? Or shouldn't we all? For the true message of Jesus Christ is that God is in us all.

"I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

John 8:12

He was speaking of himself as a Human Being, saying that any and everyone can achieve true happiness, true being, by doing as he did.

The only other option is to worship the collective.

@ the devil's puppet.

"You'll notice that over time, Islamophobia has become acceptable. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not calling you or anyone racist - but if you take the most basic definition of Islamophobia (fear of Islam) and compare it to the statements above, it is pretty self-evident."

islam is not a race. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not calling you an idiot - but if you take the most basic definition of idiot (a senseless person) and compare it to the statement above, it is pretty self-evident.

@ BJT.

You aren't playing.

"It's utterly irrelevant to comment on the physical individual who selects an ideology; the focus has to be on the ideology."

Ah, so one must focus on the individual...except when it comes to spirituality...then it's all on the collective. I get it now. What else must be referred to the collective? What other boundaries do you put on individualism? When can we and can't we judge an individual as an individual? When must we judge an individual as a collective?

"For those who think Obama's obvious Muslim faith/attachment/what have you is no big deal, ask yourself this: if Obama was a devout Christian who made statements a la Sarah Palin that God has a plan for the US, ect., would anyone have voted for him?"

But he didn't. Quote him making a statement where he referenced his religious faith as a guiding principle in his decisions...a la Sarah Palin.

BTJ, typical leftists pretend they know the Mind of God and His Son (the same one who they won't allow mentioned in public school). You have has much idea about Jesus as you do... well.. anything, really. Can it, is my point.

"But he didn't. Quote him making a statement where he referenced his religious faith as a guiding principle in his decisions"

We know the Journolistas helped Obama get past the morals hump... Among other evils that were suppressed in the name of 'Change'...

"BTJ, typical leftists pretend they know the Mind of God and His Son"

I AM God's son...and so are you. Or would you rather believe that Jesus was some supernatural phenomenon who's being no human can ever hope to achieve?

"Or would you rather believe that Jesus was some supernatural phenomenon who's being no human can ever hope to achieve?"

Which man is closer to perfect?

muhammad or Jesus...

BTJ

You have never heard the Gospel of the Jewish Messiah Yeshewa ( Joshua in Hebrew). The one you ascribe to is the Hollywood Gentile Jesus (Jesus dervived from the greek Issus from the Aramaic Yeshewa.
God Became Man to fulfill the Law of God with no man can do. That means not even thinking of adultery. Original sin, brought to the human race by the Deceiver promising we would become Gods. So we heeded him with death as our Victory.He's been giving that line out since day one. People still fall for it.Sorry where Not gods , never will be. Where in rebellion towards God. He, & He only. Supplied Salvation through the death of his own Son.
As Abraham showed his faith was willing to do with the Son of Promise.
Daniel even gives a date & his death 500 years before.
By Faith you are saved by grace. Not of yourselves least any Man should boast.
Call on the name of Yesewa & you will be saved.
Under no other name can man be saved but the Messiahs.
By no flesh should any shall be justified. No one can earn heaven . Its a gift. You repent your sins to God in the Name of the Messiah. Ask for the Holy Spirit to be given in the Name of the Messiah.Thats it. Than comes a lifetime of sanctification or remolding. For crowns.
Abraham believed (the promises of God) & it was accounted unto him as righteousness. Demons believe in God. Salvation is of God for anyone who would call on him through His Son.
We Become the Bride of the Messiah through no deed or law of ourselves.
Christians are just those God has forgiven. We do Gods will out of love, not reward.
There are no magic rituals, no special formulas, no right words to use like a chant. God is Personnel. He wants to know you. Just the Blood of the Son of God & our hearts circumcised with his Spirit.
Some Christians forget this Coventry was Given to the Jews first , than the Gentile. Gentile Christians are grafted in unnaturally. The Church just became Gentile orientated from so many converts & when it married the World after Constantine.
But all are one , Male & Female, Jew or Gentile In Messiah.
We become Sons of God ( Having been forgiven & born anew as his children), & what Adam did is redeemed from Satan's go at being a god as well.
If I left anything out I'm sure someone will correct or add.
This is cubical Christianity. First Century believe.
By the way he's coming again, but not as the Lamb but the Lion.

"It turns out the fear of Russian communist spies was justified"

That turned out to be one of the biggest jokes in history. None of them had actually committed any damaging espionage, as opposed to the Chinese, who've done a lot more. Should have put the Chinese before the Mexicans, I guess. My mistake. But you get my gist. There will be always someone to be scared off. No self-confidence. Just fear. It always amazes me how scared Americans are that there ideals will get washed away by the barbarian hordes. It certainly is a far cry from the way the founding fathers thought. They saw America as a land of victims of persecution; you see it as land full of cloaked enemies. Were they naive or are you paranoid? The answer is apparent: who's ideas have survived the test of time? And who's ideas, well, don't? I've said it before and I'll say it again. Great civilizations may disappear, but great ideas endure. Always.

"So no, I guess we can't all agree."

You're right. I misworded that statement. I shouldn't have said aspire. Technically I can aspire to be the pope. I should have said it the way it should be said: as a fact. No American-born non-Christian can ever become President of the United States. The answer is simple enough: people see all kinds of whacky machinations in a person's faith. People find a way to make it difficult for Christians (Kennedy) or people who profess to be Christians (Obama and that Mormon guy - I forget his name) to, well, go about their jobs without attaching whacky conspiracy theories. That said, I am terrified of an American born HIndu president taking over because I am convinced he will make us do yoga and I'm just not flexible enough to do it, without looking like a clown.

"ever heard of Japanese airplanes flying over the north pole in WWII trying to attack the USA by flying over Canada?"

No. Have you?

"or German Submarines in St-Lawrence River in Canada in WWII?"

Why yes, I have. They even sunk a bunch of Canadian ships. It was even given a name - "the Battle of the St Lawerence". They even managed to sink three Canadian warships.

"The USA is great and makes Canada great like it or not."

Agree completely.

"Fear is a good thing, say when confronted with a bear, or someone intent on harming you and your family. Accusing people of "fear" is not an argument."

Fear can be a good thing and a bad thing. Perhaps I should rephrase it as irrational fear. Go back to the first comment I made. Do you really think Shariah law is going to be implemented in the US, taking into account the "silent majority", the checks and balances on government, the entrenched bureaucracy (a good thing in this case) and most importantly, a very small muslim population? If thats not enough, factor in the security apparatus that is geared towards keeping radical elements in the minority in check. You really think Obama can tell everyone to stand down and they will do it in 30 seconds? Bureaucratic inertia alone will stop any insidious mechanisms he may have. And then, of course, theres the entire elected government up there. Therefore, I agree - rational fear is indeed good and justified. But the levels of fear expressed on SDA - and the theories inspired by this fear - are bordering on the ridiculous.

"The only Deity Obama worships, is himself. Personally I think he's an Atheist with cultural tendencies towards Islam.. Marx is his Religion"

You deserve a prize. A man who has cultural affinities with Islam believes in the philosophy of a German Jewish thinker. I'd never have the nerve to come up with a statement like that.

"Obama rejects the freedom of the individual and the risk-taking of questions, dissent, analysis. He's a collectivist."

Did he tell you all of this himself? I joke. While your psychological analysis of Obama amuses me no end (I am too wary of psychologically analyzing people I have never met), I would ask you one simple question:

Do you really believe that Obama rejects the freedom of the individual? I mean, Obama is many things, but he hardly comes across as Kim Jong Il - the only person who I can think of who would fit that category.

"if Obama was a devout Christian who made statements a la Sarah Palin that God has a plan for the US, ect., would anyone have voted for him?"

We have any number of US presidents who've used that to win (Carter, Reagon, W). I don't understand what you are getting at.

"His obvious adherence to a religion that promotes disunity with others is an enormous problem."

Now you're just taking a shot at Judaism, Christianity and Islam. They all technically promote disunity by talking about believers and non-believers. The big difference between them is the attitude they adopt towards the non-believers (Islam - very hostile, Christianity - Initially hostile, now mellow). However, the base implication is the same. If you insist that your way is the only way and everyone else is wrong, you are promoting disunity.

You've outdone yourself today ET. Can't add much to your comments but it does save me a great deal of typing.

One thing that I was forced to reconsider in September of 2001 was whether Libertarianism and islam could co-exist. I've come to the conclusion that they can't. This means that one needs to take a very hard line with islamofascism and Wahabism and see if the survivors might decide it safer to chose the religious beliefs of Sufism, Bahai or Sikhism which are all saner offshoots of what I can only describe as the deranged medieval rantings of a pedophile with temporal lobe epilepsy.

So it matters very much if the POTUS (more accurately TOTUS) has myopia for TROP. I agree with ET that he probably has no true religion himself (aside from what is immediately convenient) but US inaction on events in Iran and the ME might even make Chamberlain look good in comparison to the big zero (He's already raised Jimmy Carter's stature immensely).

I don't think Will Smith is a Muslim. I don't think he's a Christian (Rev Wright style or other). I don't think he believes in anything, and, as others have alluded to above, he adopts whatever mask or role he feels is most useful at the time. I can see as a shrewd kid in Indonesia (we can agree he's shrewd, can't we?) deciding to pose as a Muslim in that overwhelmingly Muslim country. Also, let's remember he had to leave Hawaii and move to Indonesia because the proto-Communist dictator Sukarno ordered all foreign students (including his new stepfather) home. This happened to him at age 6, in 1967.

Think about this for a moment; you're six years old, and you leave the relative sophistication and political/racial/religious tolerance of Hawaii for the supercharged and hyper-partisan society of Indonesia. (See The Year of Living Dangerously) Are you going to stand up and say "I'm an American Christian!"? I bet not. To avoid being beat up on a regular basis, you decide to go along and get along. ET, you're fond of long distance psychoanalysis of Smith; wouldn't you agree that this event convinced him that he had to wear a mask, and that he didn't really "belong" anywhere? Not fully black, not fully white, not fully Christian, not fully Muslim, not fully American, etc., etc.

Now, what would the consequences be when, at age 11, he moves back to Hawaii? Once again, he's just a kid, once again, he's an outsider, and once again, he has to adopt a mask. He survives, and doubtless begins to feel that he can present himself in any way necessary to succeed. He becomes a human chameleon.

This is a tremendous asset in politics. Need to appeal to blacks? No problem. Need to appeal to whites? "Hey, my mom was white." Need to appeal to liberal elites? "I went to Columbia and Harvard." Need to appeal the masses? Eat burgers and Spam. Just as Tiger Woods parlayed his golf skill with his self-described (and equally amorphous) "Caniblasian" heritage into an extremely popular brand, so Smith is able to be everyone and no one simultaneously. If one understands this, one is no longer surprised by his predilection for voting "Present".

If I may indulge in a quantum physics analogy, he has become Schrodinger's Political Cat, existing in many simultaneous and contradictory states, and somewhat desperate not to have the box opened, lest his wave function collapse, and he must stand revealed before all. The strain has to be enormous - look at pictures of him before the election and pictures now. His hair is grayer, his face more lined, and he seems gaunt and frayed. Absent a miraculous turnaround in the US economy, or some egregiously stupid act by Iran or North Korea, I can see him pulling an LBJ, and deciding to chuck it. Far better to retire to the lucrative speaking circuit, pace Clinton and Gore, and leave the mess for someone else to clean up.

KevinB - finally something with enough intellectual substance to chew on.

BTJ, I believe I made my point when I wrote "can it".

Indiana @ 1:01: P.M., well said.

KevinB: "[Barack Hussein Soetoro Obama] becomes a human chameleon." That, in a nutshell, is Barak Obama. Be very scared. (Read John Le Carré's "A Perfect Spy," for some insight into a human chameleon. In most cases, the father's a bounder.)

ET: Although I concur with most of what you've said, I disagree with your argument that "We've seen the idea of collectivism in the medieval church." What to you mean by this?

The Christian Church has always upheld the dignity and integrity of the individual human person, despite the sins and very human indiscretions of church officials.

"The Christian Church has always upheld the dignity and integrity of the individual human person, despite the sins and very human indiscretions of church officials."

I think he meant the Catholic Church. Suffice to say, Luther probably agreed with him. The Catholic Church did have a habit of whipping people into line (conformity) - everything from intimidation (Galileo) to violence (Spanish Inquisition, Portugese inquisition).

You can separate Christians from the actions of the Church, but it is a little more difficult to separate the most religious figures (church officials) from the actions of the Church. Attributing it to human nature is a bit whimsical. There actions were undoubtedly influenced by their religious beliefs. For the record, I am not referring to the latest bouts of Church scandals (where you are probably right). I refer only to the medieval church and its attempts to silence dissent and questions.

Keniv

well put

the jesuits had a saying, "give me the boy till 7 (years old), I'll give you the man"

Obama's formative years certainly were helter skelter, and this must have had a great impact on the developement of his character. Now I don't car if a muslim is POTUS ( I personally am an atheist witha anti religious slant) , but I do care if he lies about it, or any other aspect of his past.

I don't think Will Smith is a Muslim.
I don't think so either. He's a reasonably good actor, I thought he was good in Hancock and Men in Black, but I've never heard him speak out on religion. Why would you care?
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000226/bio

[...]The Catholic Church did have a habit of whipping people into line (conformity) - everything from intimidation (Galileo) to violence (Spanish Inquisition, Portugese inquisition)[...]Attributing it to human nature is a bit whimsical.

Actually pretty much every culture has acted that way ( forced conformity, intimidation, violence, war et cetera ).

Some cultures still act that way. ( Middle East comes to mind...)

Stalin was anti-religion but treated its people more or less the same way the Church did centuries ago;conformity, intimidation, violence, et cetera...

It has NOTHING to do with the (*)Christian Church.

It IS Human nature.

History abounds with examples.

(*I'm an atheist and a conservative)

DA >

No end of the world conspiracy worries here.

Instead any thinking person can clearly estimate the outcome of runaway budget deficits, extended foriegn military campaigns on multiple fronts, unchecked illegal immigration, a collapsing economy without a manufactuing base, and a currency crises without a viable resolution.

Instead you have a commander in chief who no one knows or understands who is on permanent vacation. When he does poke his head into the real world, it is to give endless campaign speeches read from a TelePrompTer and to sign executive orders against the wishes of the majority public (he campained on a platform that he would never sign an executive order because it was "unconstitutional"). When he travels abroad it's to bow and cow tow to enemies of the US and shun it's traditional allies.

Now of course none of this is an end of the world show stopper. But it is definitely laying the brickwork for that road. The end of freedom and liberty based on "who is he" agenda is indeed the end of the world for most freedom lovers.

Spitting in Uncle O'Stalinist's face.

Say No! to the collectivists.

Say No! to the "Professional Left*".

"Continue to attack their institutions in every way we as individual citizens can. We are like sand grinding away at the gears and flywheels of their infernal machinery. Disrupt their bullsh*t factories at every weak point. Grind away at the hardened teeth and wear away the protective coatings they’ve depended upon."

...-

"21. monkeyfan

The left establishment is terrified of the awakening of the decentralized American amateur…Millions upon organic millions of grassroots American Patriots have taken to opposing them in any way we are fit and able to. Each and every one of us is in control our own battle space. We each determine who, what, where, and how we will stand in opposition. In this sense Patriot Judo need not co-opt the juvenile antics of the professional protest establishment as the rising mass of Americans asserting their individual rights leave the Liberty eaters with no defined avatar for their professional character assassins and enforcement apparatus to behead.

They are forced to show and assert their hands which are proving to be in direct opposition to what it means to be an American. Every grand solution they float to solve the quandary of facing an increasingly aware and ungovernable polity is a new affront to each and every one of us; not because we have maneuvered to make it appear that way, but rather because they maneuvered in the light of their own decisions to prove that it is what it is. As such they are running on the mere fumes of decades of snake oil and propaganda.

Continue to attack their institutions in every way we as individual citizens can. We are like sand grinding away at the gears and flywheels of their infernal machinery. Disrupt their bullsh*t factories at every weak point. Grind away at the hardened teeth and wear away the protective coatings they’ve depended upon.

America was founded by and for individuals with a God-given right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness gained through the fruits of our individual labors. America was NOT founded to empower cabals of would-be elites presiding over fiefdoms of dependent serfs.

If they deny us recourse to peacefully redress our grievences, they reap the whirlwind of their decision to repress the will of the people.

The fight is ours to lose."

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2010/08/23/the-inner-circle/#comments

"The Inner Circle

"When Oleg Atbashian described the “Professional Left” he might well have been describing the way in which Wikileaks funds itself. That is, professionally and with great secrecy. Atbashian takes the reader on a tour of an economic sector that can boom in a recession: the paid Left. That whose name must never be mentioned."
(more)

...-

"The Professional Left vs. the Amateur Right"

"Of all the slips of the tongue and unintentional admissions by this administration, Robert Gibbs' "Professional Left" comment may well be the one they wish they could squeeze back into their collective windpipe the most:

I hear these people saying (Obama) is like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested. ... I mean, it's crazy. ... The Professional Left ... will be satisfied when we have Canadian health care and we've eliminated the Pentagon. That's not reality. ... They wouldn't be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.

That is, perhaps, the first objective analysis we've heard from Gibbs in his career as Obama's press secretary - and it's likely to be the last one. For speaking his mind, Gibbs has been urged to resign in disgrace, as if he had committed treason.

We may laugh it off - and, as usual, dismiss the Left as a bunch of silly loons. Or we might consider that their ferocious attacks on Gibbs might be caused by something more sinister than a mere suggestion that on the planet of Hopeychangia, reality is a buzzkill. The latter is not a secret; neither is the fact that the truth is to the loony fringe what the cross is to the vampires. If that were Gibbs' only transgression, he would've been slapped on the wrist, not kicked in the liver. So why the uproar? Why the feeling of betrayal? And just who exactly is the Professional Left?
~
The term "Professional Left" denotes a growing industry that specializes in converting other people's money into an ideological product, while making a good living out of it in the process.

Watch the linked trailer for a complete set
of rules in this fightIt would seem that Robert Gibbs broke the first rule of the Professional Left, which is, you do not talk about the Professional Left."

http://thepeoplescube.com/current-truth/the-professional-left-vs-the-amateur-right-t5883.html

Revnant Dream:
Thank you for your incomprehensible story, how any of that can provide anyone with something to live by and strive for I don't know.

God is in man as he is in everything you see and don't see around you. Man is the ultimate expression and realization of God to grace this earth. Jesus preached true inner peace and happiness, to let go off the ego, to be at one with oneself. That's it, that's all.

DA:

"That said, I am terrified of an American born HIndu president taking over because I am convinced he will make us do yoga and I'm just not flexible enough to do it, without looking like a clown."

Hahaha! too funny.

"His hair is grayer, his face more lined, and he seems gaunt and frayed"

I've definitely noticed that...the exuberance has quickly faded into indifference.

What Chris, batb, bygeorgeg, and Revnant Dream at August 23, 2010 4:51 PM said.

I think BHO is a Muslim. He does not celebrate birthdays or Christmas - Muslims do not celebrate these occasions. He celebrates Ramadan, yet canceled the National Day of Prayer service at the White-house. He quoted scriptures from Leviticus (old testament) mocking them, yet did not mock any Koranic scriptures, but he quotes positively from the Koran in speeches. Both his father (Barrack Hussein Obama Sr - is a descendant of several generations of Muslims), and his step-father was also Muslim, making him Muslim by Islamic law. When he attended school in Indonesia his religion was listed as Muslim. He quotes the Koran in perfect Arabic. He changed his Christian name - Barry Soetero to a Muslim name; Hussein is reserved for Muslims (Barrack, Barack - Baraq which is Arab). He wrongly stated that Thomas Jefferson was sworn in with a Koran. He bowed to the Saudi King, yet he did not bow to the British Queen. He also attributes most of the world's greatest advancements to Muslims. He stated in a speech that America is no longer a Christian nation. He also had the cross removed from the background when he spoke at Georgetown University. There are also photgraphs of him in Muslim dress.

There are many links on the net to these facts and others, all you have to do is google them. Too many links for me to provide.

"Actually pretty much every culture has acted that way ( forced conformity, intimidation, violence, war et cetera )."

Completely agree. However, that was a direct response to a question about the "christian" church. Given the antipathy the Catholic church generated in the medieval era, I figured that's what ET was referring to.

"It has NOTHING to do with the (*)Christian Church."

I disagree there. The answer is fairly simple: Church/Papal infallibility. If you have a dogma that says one man/institution is always right and unquestionable, then, well, you are altering that particular human's/institution's behaviour. He will make decisions that he probably wouldn't have otherwise made. Much of the fault, then, lies in the doctrine that empowers him to make mistakes without ever having to accept that they were mistakes. It may be about human nature, but in this case, the individual's human nature is altered by the religious dogma and therefore the dogma deserves a significant part of the blame. The Dogma is propagated by the Church on the basis of some religious reason (I don't know what it is) and therefore it has everything to do with the Catholic Church.

You are, however, correct to say that there are many others.Even the communists have similar dogmas about their supreme leaders (North Korea being the most obvious example). But that does not mean the Catholic Church of the medieval ages deserves a clean chit.

No one,

I know what leftists will say to you.

"You are paranoid"

and if it turns out you are right and Obama is a Muslim they will say

"so what? big deal ! "

or

"you are intolerant of other religions."

It is all so predictable...

The church has made its mea culpa for the medieval times errors and has evolved quite a bit since then.

When will Islam do the same ?

What the Pope teaches is infallible, not the man.
Read the Catechism before you shoot your mouth off, Devil's Advocate.
At least the Catholic Church doesn't issue insane fatwas. And let's not forget its indelible mark on Western culture, ie, adding to it.

"islam is not a race. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not calling you an idiot - but if you take the most basic definition of idiot (a senseless person) and compare it to the statement above, it is pretty self-evident."

Well, I guess its been a while since you read a book aimed at, err, thinking adults. Maybe I should have said "new" racism. Yes, there is such a term as "new racism" which doesn't take a literal biological meaning of the word race. I'll let you look it up. I initially used the word "big"-"oted", but removed it in case there was a filter on this site. And no, I m not hurling that term at anyone here. I am simply pointing out that, as their comments indicate, they are genuinely fearful of Islam, hence Islamophobe.

"At least the Catholic Church doesn't issue insane fatwas. And let's not forget its indelible mark on Western culture, ie, adding to it."

Hold up, before you get on my case about the Catholic Church, lets not forget that many of the people who inhabited this continent were protestants escaping from religious persecution. Lets leave it at that. I am not interested in debating this topic beyond clarifying what I assume ET had in mind when he wrote what he did. For the record, you are the one comparing it to Islam, not me.

"When will Islam do the same ?"

If Christianity is any indicator, we should be seeing a muslim Luther in another 100 years (1500 years after inception) and a mea culpa in around 400 years?

BTJ

He rose from the dead. His tomb, unlike Buddha's, Muhammad's whatever. Empty. None of these Claimed to be God. Indeed no one.. He did. Crucified for it.
He doesn't leave you with a fantasy He was just a man. He was either Nuts, a deceiver , or God. No middle ground. Than proved it when the grave couldn't hold Him.
Christians don't expect people to Understand. The scriptures say. The Gentiles think its foolishness. The Jews a curse. So has it ever been.
By the way the Church is both Tares & Wheat. The true Church is invisible. In men's hearts, called by God By His grace.

By the way

If Christianity is any indicator, we should be seeing a muslim Luther in another 100 years (1500 years after inception) and a mea culpa in around 400 years?

They should do it now.

It would help calm down everyone left and right.

Don't you agree?

Devil's Advocate, we could be here all day and night talking about the "Church's transgressions" but the simple fact at the end of it all is that the Church is not the enemy. THAT is a Protestant/secular argument. I'm more worried about Islamofascists.

DA>

"New Racism" Ha ha ha ha LOL.

They will make up anything to make it work. I suppose you have heard about the "New acceptable" terms for Negro's out thier now also? Such as coming up with a Presidential Solution instead of N....ger rigged (to be politically correct).

It never ends with the liberal left and thier bastardization of the English language and western values.

Islamophobia - ha ha ha. A phobia is meant to mean an invalid fear of something that might cause harm but is unfounded. Well any right thinking person knows damned well that Islam is intent on causing harm. They even prove it over and over again, but the loons call it phobic to think that.

""New Racism" Ha ha ha ha LOL."

Oh dear. I just realised I've been taking a teenager seriously. "LOL". Really? Never mind. Make of it what you will. Asyou grow older and read more about the world, you will probably learn more about the world.

As for irrational fear, let me quote a line from above:

" when your daughter is subjugated to Sharia law,and stoned to death for "dating" an infidel,you will call it chickenshit?"

See, I don't know how it appears to young people, but the likelihood of this happening in America is, well, a little less than Elvis Pressley coming back to life. This kind of fear is percieved by some of us who, ummm, have seen a bit of the world, as a bit, how should I put it, invalid?

DA>

Amusing. I can feel comfortably sure that I am much older and wiser than you think. Simply not a pretentious ass in using modern online linguists such as LOL. Much more preferable me thinks than utilizing newly made up arguments via terms such as "New Racism"

But old wise ones such as yourself, have so much more to offer us "young bucks" LOL.

DA>

I can also feel comfortable in assuming that I'm far more travelled than you attempt to establish having worked and lived on every continent other than the Antarctica. In fact 60% of my life has been living in a variety of Muslim countries and have raised now very independent adult children, that time abroad is substantial by most standards. Having filled Qty (4) x 48 page Canadian passports in the last ten years alone. Your "get out and see the world" snipes at me are hilarious, and only reinforce your grandiose online presentation of yourself as ridiculous to someone like myself.

Revnant:

"He rose from the dead."

Ah, the old tale of the coming of Spring...that story has been told and retold again since the Egyptians...and maybe even longer. Do you REALLY believe that Jesus rose from the dead?

Knight99:

" "New Racism" Ha ha ha ha LOL.

They will make up anything to make it work"

I guess you haven't read much of Ayn Rand's work then? In 'The New Left' Rand examines the term 'racism', broadening its popular definition to include any judgment of a person based on a non-value or in relation to a collective identity.

Great. I'll broaden a term and publish on SDA right here right now - idiot troll = "New Idiot Troll".

So much more significant, no?

Knight99:

So I assume you will stick to your insinuation that Ayn Rand is part of, I quote, "the liberal left", and that she is guilty of "bastardization of the English language and western values."?

Quite the statement.

"I can also feel comfortable in assuming that I'm far more travelled than you attempt to establish having worked and lived on every continent other than the Antarctica."

More proof that one can do all the traveling and have all the experiences possible without ever really opening one's eyes. Traveling around blinded by one's own opinions will never achieve that which can be reached by opening one's eyes and opinions to the world from the comfort of a couch with a book in hand. It's 2010, you don't need to physically travel in order to experience the world, you just have to WANT TO ACTUALLY EXPERIENCE IT.

Yea, I read it in a book works for most people, at least those inclined to sit in a chair like all "armchair quarterbacks", telling everyone else how they have it all wrong.

Nope there's nothing like reading someone elses point of view then chastising those that have first hand experience with other cultures.

Question - are you one of those people that like to bow with your hands together as if in prayer and smile a ridiculously patronizing toothy grin every time you enter a Chinese restaurant?

I'm betting you do.

"Much more preferable me thinks than utilizing newly made up arguments via terms such as "New Racism""

If mocking terms you've never heard before is your favorite activity, might I refer you to ET's posts.

"I can also feel comfortable in assuming that I'm far more travelled than you attempt to establish having worked and lived on every continent other than the Antarctica. . . . . and only reinforce your grandiose online presentation of yourself as ridiculous to someone like myself.'

You don't have anything to prove to me. If you are as old and wise as you say you are, then please accept my apology. I don't really care where you've been or what you've done. I've only suggested that you have a slightly underdeveloped view of the world, which I simply inferred from your statement. Your decision to defend it in such detail leaves me wondering why you feel the urge to defend it so vehemently. FWIW, I believe you.

"only reinforce your grandiose online presentation of yourself as ridiculous to someone like myself."

No, no. I am sure you are smarter and more articulate than me. You just have a very young (juvenile?) way of expressing yourself.

"New Idiot Troll".

I quite prefer lesser troll or major troll (as the case may be). But by all means, call me what you want.

Who say's I agree with ET? Rarely do I agree with ET except on a few issues.

The "New Idiot Troll" was directed at BTJ. I've always cut you a little troll slack DA.

Again maybe it's not my travelled view of the world that's "undeveloped".

There was no point in over articulating my "world experience" aside from giving credibility to my knowledge of it, and respecting you POV enough to emphasize that you are not sparring with a teenaged idealist.

PS: I do have a young juvinile way of expressing myself allot of the time (sometimes not). That's what helps me stay young, and not take things too seriously. It works for me, and I feel successful in life because of it ;)

"Nope there's nothing like reading someone elses point of view then chastising those that have first hand experience with other cultures."

So one experience (if it's your own) is worth more than numerous experiences (by other people)? Really? Sounds rather narrow minded.

Living in Canada exposes one to cultures from around the world, one does not have to travel to the ME to meet Muslims from the ME...I interact with them all the time.

My point was that being open minded is far more valuable than traveling around the world.

BTJ >

Yes of course, the Muslim undergrad in your downtown TO office is going to reveil to you openly what the customs officer, or taxi driver in Saudi Arabia will, as to what he thinks of you and your culture.

PS: For every POV you read in a book you can find an opposing POV every bit as articulate in another book. It's which emotions or rationality you choose to accept by someone elses heart felt words or spin on their brand of logic.

I'll give you a personal experience (as everyone there in Canada is nicely tucked away for the evening, and I'm bored as hell in Singapore this afternoon).

I was scheduled to fly to Algeria on Sept 12 2001, but was delayed due to flights shut down over North America until Sept 13, then arranged a flight out (probably on one of the first few out after the ban lifted).

Anyway, everyone saw the media hype of the Palistinians dancing in the streets, outrage ensued, and the coverage was quickly dropped. Then reports came out pumped in by the Islamic media, jumped on by the western MSM that the reports were of isolated occurrence, then fraudulent claiming that it was old film footage of some celebration or another.

So to say the least I had know idea of what to expect of the "locals" in Algeria at that time. Of course Algeria is like a police state full of armed encampments at the best of times, due to Islamic terrorism to both westerners and "locals", now it was intensified big time.

The point is when I arrived, the "moderate Muslim" locals were indeed jubilant over the Sept 11 attacks. They confided in me incisively about it, first and formost because I am Canadian and some didn't seem to see a correlation with "Americans". Secondly to goad and gloat over a westerner. I encountered this everywhere I went and was even privey to a bombardment of joke 9/11 e-mails for months afterwards by several Muslims. I ended some friendships with Muslim co-wokers one night over drinks about it ( yes drinks). I well know the hypocrisy, and inherent jealous nature within the culture.

Had I not witnessed this all first hand, I'm sure I would still be sitting back in Canada believing in moderate Islam and a few bad apples.

Exuse the typo's ecetrea I'm still on IPod for the next week which is painful.

DA

Indeed. A constant fear of something or the other. That's what makes America great. At least that's what this thread suggests. Lets say Islam is defeated and vanquished. I wonder who next in line is. ......There will be always someone to be scared off. No self-confidence. Just fear. It always amazes me how scared Americans are that there ideals will get washed away by the barbarian hordes.

It is funny that you implied that Americans must have someone to fear just because communists were enemies first and then when USSR went down Islamic terrorists or islamic fundamentalists started to be perceived as an enemies. Somehow you are misreading things. It is not because America must have someone to fear but it is because America is a perceived leader of the West. As such, communist USSR thought itself by definition as an enemy of US. .[USSR was also primary enemy of Islam then]. After downfall of USSR US started to be thought by many muslims as primary enemy of Islam, as a crusader state and a leader of crusaders aka leader of western countries.

It amazes me that you deride preparations for future eventualities. Although you confirm that Chinese spies did much more damage then Russians did, it is, according to you "just fear". With no real ground for being afraid of possible damage. It surprises me that although there was a terrorist act on 9/11, although there were people who died on 9/11 and although there were other terrorists act on US soil, you call the looking for enemies " naivety or paranoia". You write that people here see America as land full of cloaked enemies just because they are wary of Cordoba mosque, of some believers of religion which professes itself to be also a political ideology and are opposed to a president who prefer to have fun on vacation instead of working. . Certainly the founding fathers were not frightened of enemies but they were preparing for what enemies may have done, and the same do many Americans nowadays.

Of course fear can be "good thing and a bad thing" but there is not a lot here of irrational fear. You are saying that there is very small Muslim population in USA but there was also a small Muslim population 20 years ago in Europe. Now there is much larger Muslim population in Europe and they are wielding more power, a power given to them by politicians . You are assuming that in future bureaucratic inertia will stop "insidious mechanisms" but do you have any evidence for that, in the past, perhaps. Does bureaucratic inertia is stopping changes in UK? There are checks and balances on the government but then president has large powers and even with checks and balances he(or she) may do a lot of damage, if he/she wanted to. Does he want to? How do I know? So being wary of this president is not so ridiculous, isn't it? When he can make a lot of damage for the country.
Great civilizations may dissapear, but I think Americans prefer that their own civilization will disappear after other civilization will do so. And that''s why some Americans are wary of enemies and advocati diaboli.

You said it ella,

It's about language, cultures, and borders - to quote M Savage.

The "fear" is losing ones culture or society. Show us a better culture than the one we have and maybe people would be less reluctant to let ours go.

The only true "globalist's" are the wealthy elite who's money buys them a ticket out of the stink the third world brings. They promote globism and multiculturalism, because it brings them a penthouse apartment c/w security on a beach and a getaway yacht. The rest are useful idiots who will never understand that they are shitting in thier own back yard and will be condemned to raise thier children in it.

"Yes of course, the Muslim undergrad in your downtown TO office is going to reveil to you openly what the customs officer, or taxi driver in Saudi Arabia will, as to what he thinks of you and your culture."

For someone who seems to think of himself as quite well experienced with other cultures you sure do make a lot of assumptions. Like I was saying...it's how you approach experiences that will determine their worth, prejudgments will not achieve anything.

I interact with Muslim families, from 5 year old children to seniors, quite often at one of my jobs.

"For every POV you read in a book you can find an opposing POV every bit as articulate in another book."

That's the point...that is the value of exploring other people's point of view. Would an echo chamber achieve more?

" everyone saw the media hype of the Palistinians dancing in the streets"

People who have been suppressed and abused by US sponsored groups

"Of course Algeria is like a police state full of armed encampments at the best of times, due to Islamic terrorism to both westerners and "locals", now it was intensified big time."

US supported state terrorism which, among other things, blocked democratic elections has a good deal to do with the terrorism.

Do you not think that US foreign policy had more of an influence over the reactions and feelings of citizens of those two country's than their religion?

"It is funny that you implied that Americans must have someone to fear just because communists were enemies first and then when USSR went down Islamic terrorists or islamic fundamentalists started to be perceived as an enemies. "

I think the more telling fact is that the Cold War was used as reasoning for US geopolitical/foreign relations decisions long after the Soviets posed any real threat and in situations in which the Soviets were not involved. (eg. Nationalism scares in South America 1945 and the invasion of Panama, respectively)

"It surprises me that although there was a terrorist act on 9/11, although there were people who died on 9/11 and although there were other terrorists act on US soil, you call the looking for enemies " naivety or paranoia"."

If you know anything about the history of world geopolitics you will realize that in the broader picture, the US DOMINATES the world, in all respects...they've began to sputter economically, but their GDP is HUGE and their military might is even bigger. The 90's was the era of world terrorism...why it doesn't stand out is because much of it was US sponsored.

"The "fear" is losing ones culture or society."

And threatening individual rights with collective majority 'cultures and boarders' is going down that path. Do you think that the NRA should have canceled their tour through Columbine shortly after the massacre?

That's right BTJ >

I almost forgot "American's brought 9/11 on themselves".

or was it "George Bush hates black people, and it was an inside job"

Nab, let's just stick with "they have a contatotional right to build a mosque on ground zero".

Happy? I'll just agree that your right, with whatever your point is. By the way what was that point again? Something about you are a Muslim or have allot of Muslim friends...........

I'll bet some of the closest & "best" friends you know are Jewish, eh BTJ? wink, wink.

Listen BTJ>

I'll be nice for a post.

Your obviously out of your depth commenting here in your nonsensical roundabout ways. The attempt to take credit for the value of opposing POV's in reading a variety of books when it was handed to you should be a BIG indicator.

"echo chamber" he he he, I'm chuckling warmly honestly. I suppose there probably has not been many around you in your lifetime to "help" you see the projection that you put on other peoples ideas or comments. I find that sad in a way. So let me be like a surrogate uncle (for this post at least) and suggest you move along to another blog where your "ideas" may be better accepted as your own, and not repetitive, or borrowed.

Best of luck & Cheers.

"That's right BTJ >

I almost forgot "American's brought 9/11 on themselves"."

Huh? I never approached that subject, only that there are reasons for why people in certain COUNTRIES might not bear the most friendly feelings towards the US. But hey, Glenn Beck said it himself, the US gave people reasons to dislike them...their foreign policy being one of them.

"Something about you are a Muslim or have allot of Muslim friends"

I WORK in a residence where cultures from around the world live.

"Your obviously out of your depth commenting here in your nonsensical roundabout ways."

Hahahahahahaha!...right, and you're right at home oh wise one. What a joke boss.

"The attempt to take credit for the value of opposing POV's in reading a variety of books when it was handed to you should be a BIG indicator."

What are you talking about. I said it right off the bat, multiple points of view are better than one. YOU just happened to screw up and try to argue the opposite, so I took advantage of your statement by quoting it.

"I suppose there probably has not been many around you in your lifetime to "help" you see the projection that you put on other peoples ideas or comments."

Huh? Ya, I live in a box and never come out :S

" move along to another blog where your "ideas" may be better accepted as your own, and not repetitive, or borrowed."

You can keep your suggestions to yourself, you're an immature grown man, and I've got more sense than to take your kind seriously. This blog is ALL ABOUT repetitive, borrowed ideas...every post is nearly identical...except of course for the dissenting voices you get labeled trolls. So I'm not too sure what you're trying to get at.

Mr. Knight, in theory I like your new designation, "New Idiot Troll". But in apllication, won't it involve a lot of NIT-picking?

BTJ

Prove Yeshewa didn't. They have been trying for 2000 years. No cigar. Yes I do believe in the Messiah Jesus raose from the dead physically. In fact if he didn't like the NT says. If he did not rise your faith is in vain.
Gee BJT why don't you ask God this yourself?
A fraid you may get an answer than have to commit?Usually folks like you try to say its silly to pray to ther air. But a real truth seeeker would try it. No, you really want nothing to do with God unless its on your terms. Salvation is free to any.
Jesus said if you Knock at His door he will come sup with you & You with Him.
Just ask. One prayer

"Yes I do believe in the Messiah Jesus raose from the dead physically."

That's all I need to know. Faith over reason is the end of human progress.

"A fraid you may get an answer than have to commit?Usually folks like you try to say its silly to pray to ther air. But a real truth seeeker would try it. No, you really want nothing to do with God unless its on your terms. Salvation is free to any."

I've been more than exposed to my fair share of Christianity...my grandfather was a Reverend.

The story of the rise of Jesus from the dead has been told over and again throughout time, using all sorts of names...it's the story of the renewal of life that comes with the coming of Spring. Doesn't it seem rather ironic that Easter just so happens to take place at the start of Spring?

It is the words of Jesus that you should concern yourself with...Jesus taught that all humans could be like him, find true happiness, inner peace, peace of mind, free oneself from the ego, just be.

BJT>

Calm down before you give yourself an aneurism Just relax a little. We don't need anyone blowing a gasket around here over a few ideas, regardless of thier position, or whether they have the sense or not to know when their not welcome.

Like they say different strokes for different .............

BTJ

To scared to say one prayer huh?
Cowardice by default.
Faith over reason is the end of human progress.

Really? Where did hospitals, public education, Universities, come from? Who where the Worlds leading scientists till the 20th century?
Your fooling yourself. Besides you have your Mythology I have mine. Suppositions are not science. Science is a process.
Oh yeah just because your Dad, or Grandfather was a Minister doesn't mean you know squat. Mine was a tool push. Does that make me proficient at oil production?
JMO

"Calm down before you give yourself an aneurism"

Me thinks you should take your own advice.

"know when their not welcome"

So much collectivism around here...always falling back on the strength of the group. If I didn't fully realize the definition of 'irony' I do now.

"To scared to say one prayer huh?"

What?

"Really? Where did hospitals, public education, Universities, come from?"

Well, people used reason to build the buildings, people used reason to figure out how the human body works, people used reason to create courses and subjects. Mind explaining how religious faith itself created any of this?

"Who where the Worlds leading scientists till the 20th century?"

Modern science didn't start till the 20th century! But please, who were they? And how did religious faith contribute to science?

"Besides you have your Mythology I have mine."

Yes, but I don't use 2000 year old storied to guide my life, and I don't believe in people rising from the dead.

"Oh yeah just because your Dad, or Grandfather was a Minister doesn't mean you know squat."

You're right, no, it doesn't. But I was very close with him, went to church with him, talked with him, was preached to by him, celebrated Christian holidays with him...basically, he taught me Christianity and he was an absolutely wonderful, happy, joyful, amazing person. So I don't need anyone to preach Christianity, been there, done that...took the best away from it.

BTJ

This will be my last post to you.
Frankly your answer is so dumb, it has to be a put on. I don't like being played. Now go play with yourself. Nobody could be that stupid.

Oh yeah, grab a REAL history book. Hint: Harvard was Started as a theological school.

Happy trails

" Harvard was Started as a theological school."

So they built a school...a school is only worth something if it promotes progress and ingenuity...religious faith does not promote either, it promotes a very narrow vision through which to see the world with, namely believing rewritten and edited 2000+ year old stories to explain the world and your life. And you can't even venture too far with your interpretation of them (as in my interpretation of the rising of Jesus from the dead) without persecution even in this day of 'modern' Christianity.

Revnant >

Now if you were advocating Islam, it's ideologies and historical "accomplishments" no doubt you would be having a very different interaction with BJT.

"Religious beliefs" miraculously become a progressive advancment, with non-secular acceptance.

For the record I'm not religious myself, but these atheist twits are not intelligent enough to realize that they are a cult onto themselves. Religious or not it makes for a wondrous fool to not realize and accept the accomplishments that western Christianity has rewarded thier livelyhoods. Unlike anything else the world has offered any common person anywhere and at anytime.

"Now if you were advocating Islam, it's ideologies and historical "accomplishments" no doubt you would be having a very different interaction with BJT."

No he wouldn't...ALL religious faith over reason is the end of human progress...all religions, especially how they are practiced by most followers, present a primitive way of viewing the world around you. The teachings of Jesus are absolutely amazing, however, most people get caught up believing he was some supernatural being who's being can never be achieved by any other human.

"these atheist twits are not intelligent enough to realize that they are a cult onto themselves"

Quote me saying I'm 'an atheist'.

"western Christianity has rewarded thier livelyhoods."

Please, do share some examples of what western Christianity ITSELF has rewarded us with? Was the light bulb invented using Christianity? The internal combustion engine? What?

BTJ >

"Quote me saying that I'm an atheist"

Why don't you quote me saying you are.

I suspect your Muslim.

"I suspect your Muslim."

You suspect my Muslim what? Did he get out again and cause trouble?