[mburbank]

Man, you read what you want to see.

It isn't a mirror image. It isn't equation. We aren't the same people. Many of us are better than many of them. Our system of government is better than anything theirs has to offer. The vast majority of their evil doers are more evil in their doings than ours are. Would you and Kev be satisfied if I stopped writting about bad things we do entirely and only wrote about bad stuff they do? Or would you just go on pretending that I don't see any difference between the U.S.of A and Al Quaeda?

But saying we aren't mirrors of each other doesn't mean that things we did and do play into and support things they do. If I beat the crap out of you and left you bleeding on the street, is the important thing that Mike Tyson is worse than me cuase I didn't rape you or bite off your ear?

Beyond that, I don't see what your opening salvo is even about, unless you honestly have no understanding of causality. Just because we didn't have anything to do with why some places are shitty doesn't mean we don't have anything to do with anyplace that's shitty.

I think you're all tied up in knots in an attempt to be sarcastic. You are a lot easier to understand when you're just trying to be understood and not getting all tied up in the funny stuff.

"So why don't you care for the people living under Shar'ia laws who are victims themselves?"

I'm sorry, did I say I didn't care? I guess you don't care about sweat shop labor, since you don't write about it. I demnd you write about all suffering everywhere if you want me to take what you have to say seriously. If you don't cover my concerns, yours aren't valid. See, now, that was sarcastic, and I think also followable.

I'm sorry, did not speciffically writing about how horrible it is to saw Daniel Pearls head off means I don't care. See, now, I thought we were all in agreement on that, I didn't even realize it was subject to debate. If I mislead you into believeing that I think it was okay, I'm sure it has to do with me, and not you pretending I think anything of the sort because that makes me easier to argue with.

If I'm off the mark on what you were doing, why don't you just try saying what you think? I find your implications muddy and convenient. I'll state again, I believe you don't just come out and say what you think because you're afraid it would expose you as a tool.

"Do you see how that does a disservice to human kind though"

No. I don't. Because I didn't do that. I don't think I mentioned Daniel Pearl at all, or said anything complimentary about beheading. In fact I said it was bad. It's okay to think that beheading is bad and nuking people is also bad. Is your argument that nuking people is nice? Is tat what your implying? We both know it isn't, so stop playing sophist games. Your entire style of argument is what's wrong american discourse right now. Suppose I define your argument as "They are evil over there, so we can do anything we want to anybody pretty much anyhwere, anytime and it's not just okay, it's great." Well, I think anyone can see your argument is pretty stupid, plus it shows you are a very bad person and you want America to rule the world. It's an easy, stupid, childish way to argue, and since you're obviously reasonably intelligent, it's pretty cynical as well.

""we're bad, we do bad things, I don't have the right to judge or worry about their badness, we're responsible too"

think that's exactly what the parable of the mote and the beam and the eye means. Jesus was saying everybody does bad things so nobody should judge. (Sarcasm).

I'll try to be clearer. The evil that other countries do does not absolve us of the right and responsability to question our actions and our leaders. As a country we tend to believe it does, or perhaps that we are incapable of evil, or that our evils are so paltry in comparison to others that we'd better sepnd all our time tending to theirs and none tending to ours. In fact, it's been vogue for several years now to suggest that evenmentioning the fact the we do and have done bad things is the same as siding with terrorists. In no way does any of that say in any way that it was okay to cut off Daniel Pearls head, or institute Sharia, or any of your other nonsense. You wish it did, because then it would be the stupid concern you want it to be. You take it that way not because I say anything of the kind, but becuase it makes you more comfortable, superior and dismissive.

Oh, by the way, that guy that got caught circumcising his daughter in the USA? I thought that was very wrong, I'm glad he got caught, and I think he should go to jail. I know I didn't write about it, and you've got me afraid you'll think I was in favor of it. PLUS, lest I forget, I think female circumcision is truly nasty, and while I think it would be illegitimate to invade a country to get people to stop doing it, I want to forcefully state that DOES NOT MEAN I AM PRO FEMALE CIRCUMCISION or that the SECRET BOMBING OF CAMBODI JUSTIFIES FEMALE CIRCUMCISION. It's an abomination, and while I do not think we should overthrow any regimes to make it stop, I think it's horrible. See how I did that? I used sarcasm in the way I delivered that message even though the message itself is valid.

"Do you truly in your heart believe that radical Muslims commit crimes solely as a responsive backlash to the policies of foriegn governments like the US?"

Of course I don't! Have you stopped beating your wife? It's really easy to know I don't believe that. All you have to do is read and you'll see I never said anything of the kind. 'Soley' is your word choice, not mine.

Do you truly believe in your heart that nothing we have ever done has impacted in any way whatsoever to the rise of Radical Muslim power?

I bet you don't. Know how I know that. 'Cause you never said it! See how easy this is?