KvalfQY89z8

I can't tell who's right! It looks like The ladies from "The View" had Carnation's Instant Bitch this morning and Bill O'Rilley is just...drinking tea with the Tea Party!

This is what "The View" is....

hkt2hEe-kbU

PS-Here's the article....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101014/en_yblog_upshot/goldberg-behar-walk-of-view-set-during-oreilly-interview

He picked the wrong show to be on, if he though that it was going to be an easy interview.

He picked the wrong show to be on


Yeah, it's called The O'Reilly Factor!
8-P

I think I may have gotten up and walked off.  It was the only alternative to slapping the crap out of that maggot o'reilly, and there is so much crap to slap it could take years to get it all out.  What o'reilly said was insidious, but I have noticed on the news that while they say Barbara chastised her fellow panelists they are leaving out the part of how she also chastised o'reilly.

He picked the wrong show to be on, if he though that it was going to be an easy interview.


he's been on the view many times so he knew exactly what he was getting into and he knew exactly what he was doing by saying the things he said.  


Personally I loved it... it's been far too long since we've had a good view altercation... that crap between the white house crasher lady, her husband  and whoopi doesn't count...  

My co-worker/friend just brought up an interesting point.  Why attach religion to the label?  Why say Muslim Extremists or Muslim Radicals or Muslim Terrorists  when we never say Christian Klansman or the Christian KKK? 

My co-worker/friend just brought up an interesting point.  Why attach religion to the label?  Why say Muslim Extremists or Muslim Radicals or Muslim Terrorists  when we never say Christian Klansman or the Christian KKK? 



It is called fear mongering. You HAVE to have an enemy-someone who is "different". So, they (the fear mongers) will use anything to stir up fear like religions, the color of someone's skin, where they were born-it doesn't matter. Those people are "different" from us because of_____(fill in the blank) so we have to fear them.  ::)



Cat

Bill O'Reilley is a horses ass.  I'd like to see the 70% of Americans that he was talking about.  There is no way the number is that high.  I'd like to think that most people have a little bit more sense than that.

Bill O'Reilley is a horses ass.  I'd like to see the 70% of Americans that he was talking about.  There is no way the number is that high.  I'd like to think that most people have a little bit more sense than that.


you'd hope but unfortunately there are a lot more ignorant a-holes in this country than I ever realized...

you'd hope but unfortunately there are a lot more ignorant a-holes in this country than I ever realized...


I'm starting to feel hopeful that reason is starting to come back.  See this:  http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=41913.new

I'm starting to feel hopeful that reason is starting to come back.  See this:  http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php?topic=41913.new


I like it!!! O0

you'd hope but unfortunately there are a lot more ignorant a-holes in this country than I ever realized...


You'd hope, but noooooooo! (as John Belushi used to say)

I'd like to book Bill Orally on The Joe Pesci Show!  That's more his speed!
;)

I don't want to be RevCleveland here, but...

Islam was once a peaceful religion. Non-Islams were taxed rather than killed, it was when The Mongolian Empire was at its height when everything changed. The Islams today (the fundamentalists) are very Turk-Mongol influenced.

And yes...there were Christian Terrorists!

Ever heard of...The Spanish Inquisition?

What o'reilly said was insidious,

You mean that Muslims really did not take down the World Trade center in the name of their view of their religion? ???

Does not matter if they were "extremists" or not... they did it in the name and for the glory of their religion.  We see this mayhem on every continent save Antarctica.  India, Spain, France, Netherlands, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, America, Germany, Somalia, Kenya, Italy, Russia, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, Red China, ... all in the name of a worldwide effort to promulgate Muslimism.

That these creeps possibly represent a minority of Muslims makes it no less of a Muslim effort.  Denying that only empowers the terrorists more.

It is amazing how many people want to decry "The Catholic Church" over the clear misdeeds of any number of clergy in the sex abuse scandals, yet they get all up in arms when the worldwide terrorist movement is characterized as Islamic.  But there is a huge difference... in the Catholic situation, most of the "uprising" against the abuse has come from Catholics, and ex-Catholics in the public forum who (rightfully) rebuke the behavior and try to put a stop to it.  In the case of the Muslim mayhem, the "moderates" keep their mouths shut, and bystanders try to defend the honor of a religion that for whatever reason chooses not to stand up and defend itself against the purportedly scurilous hijacking of its theology.

And yes...there were Christian Terrorists!

Ever heard of...The Spanish Inquisition?



the point is... they aren't called Christian Terrorists.... 

no one says Baptist Radicals, Lutheran Terrorists, Evangelical Extremists, or Catholic whatever.... yet you hear people say Muslim Terrorists (et al.) every time

the point is... they aren't called Christian Terrorists.... 

no one says Baptist Radicals, Lutheran Terrorists, Evangelical Extremists, or Catholic whatever.... yet you hear people say Muslim Terrorists (et al.) every time



Well when I was going to school, the Spanish Inquisition was specifically taught as a failing of the Catholic Church.  There was no effort to mask the association of one with the other.

When things were a bit more active in Northern Ireland, the terrorists (on either side) were regularly referred to as Protestant Terrorists or Catholic (IRA) Terrorists.  As a Catholic I had no problem with this at all... the perpetrators were acting in the name of Catholicism and were referred to as such.  But the big difference is that you did not see Catholic priests worldwide railing in support of IRA Terrorist killings and trying to "spread the cause" globally.  And pretty much the view was the same from the Protestant side... there was no worldwide theological support for the violence on either side.

You mean that Muslims really did not take down the World Trade center in the name of their view of their religion? ???

Does not matter if they were "extremists" or not... they did it in the name and for the glory of their religion.  We see this mayhem on every continent save Antarctica.  India, Spain, France, Netherlands, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Germany, Somalia, Kenya, Italy, Russia... all in the name of a worldwide effort to promulgate Muslimism.

That these creeps possibly represent a minority of Muslims makes it no less of a Muslim effort.  Denying that only empowers the terrorists more.

It is amazing how many people want to decry "The Catholic Church" over the clear misdeeds of any number of clergy in the sex abuse scandals, yet they get all up in arms when the worldwide terrorist movement is characterized as Islamic.  But there is a huge difference... in the Catholic situation, most of the "uprising" against the abuse has come from Catholics, and ex-Catholics in the public forum who (rightfully) rebuke the behavior and try to put a stop to it.  In the case of the Muslim mayhem, the "moderates" keep their mouths shut, and bystanders try to defend the honor of a religion that for whatever reason chooses not to stand up and defend itself against the purportedly scurilous hijacking of its theology.



19 men, who were muslim, terrorized the nation in the name of Allah... that doesn't mean we have to blanket all muslims with the label of terrorists. 

I have seen many talk shows and interviews with Muslims who talk about the verbal abuse, racism and tirades they've faced since 9/11. There was a push by some to try and show that many muslims do not feel the way the terrorists did... yet they were being penalized for having the same faith and/or skin color as the terrorists.  I think there are just a lot of us non-muslims- who are disgusted by the blatant attack on a culture because of the actions of a few.

One of the first things I said when I first learned about 9/11 was please let the terrorists look like Timothy McVeigh because I knew this back lash would follow.  Let's face it... if the terrorists had been young white men there would not be this climate of fear people have today....

19 men, who were muslim, terrorized the nation in the name of Allah... that doesn't mean we have to blanket all muslims with the label of terrorists. 

I have seen many talk shows and interviews with Muslims who talk about the verbal abuse, racism and tirades they've faced since 9/11. There was a push by some to try and show that many muslims do not feel the way the terrorists did... yet they were being penalized for having the same faith and/or skin color as the terrorists.  I think there are just a lot of us non-muslims- who are disgusted by the blatant attack on a culture because of the actions of a few.


First off, O'Reilly has not blasted the entire Muslim world.  But he also is not blind to the elephant in the room.

But while we are on the subject of the Muslim Culture.  You mean the part where women are supposed to be covered from head to toe?  Where women's movements in public are severely restricted? Where little schoolgirls are burned alive by fellow congregation members because they dared to actually attend school? Where female adulteresses are buried up to their necks in sand and then stoned to death, while men receive a rather less punitive sanction? All done in the name of Allah... and if the supposed majority of congregationists did not support this (either actively or tacitly) it would not be as pervasive as it is worldwide.

Heck... the Anglicans have split up their church over the issue of gay clergy alone.  Regardless of which side one might support, the Anglicans have chosen to stand up for whichever theology they believe in, and have not stood silently by while the opposite side festers.  There is a similar situation in the Presby world too.  But Muslims?  The main schism there is between Shiite and Sunni, who effect their differences by kicking each others' asses with belt bombs.  They violently rise up against the other "side".  But when it comes to the overall situation of religious violence against non-Muslims, the "peaceful ones" generally sit idly by and let the creeps define their religion.

There was a time when Muslim Culture represented higher education, excellence in the sciences, and innovation in mathematics, astronomy.  In today's world, Muslim Culture is represented by violence and a desire to implement "Islamic Republics", and preventing access to education.  Of course not all Muslims adhere to this nihilistic lifestyle.  But they stand idly by and are gradually letting the creeps define their religion and "culture" due to their own inaction.

19 men, who were muslim, terrorized the nation in the name of Allah... that doesn't mean we have to blanket all muslims with the label of terrorists. 

I have seen many talk shows and interviews with Muslims who talk about the verbal abuse, racism and tirades they've faced since 9/11. There was a push by some to try and show that many muslims do not feel the way the terrorists did... yet they were being penalized for having the same faith and/or skin color as the terrorists.  I think there are just a lot of us non-muslims- who are disgusted by the blatant attack on a culture because of the actions of a few.

One of the first things I said when I first learned about 9/11 was please let the terrorists look like Timothy McVeigh because I knew this back lash would follow.  Let's face it... if the terrorists had been young white men there would not be this climate of fear people have today....





True...not ALL Islams are terrorists.

I watched "Rick Steves: Iran" and he saw that the Iranians are peaceful and some like America because the Life Span is shorter there and many don't know much about the 1979 Iranian Revolution....

First off, O'Reilly has not blasted the entire Muslim world.  But he also is not blind to the elephant in the room.



by refusing to separate Muslim from his use of the word terrorist he has.  If he had conceded and said "Fine, let's call them terrorists who are Muslim" then I'd say no but he refused to budge.


But while we are on the subject of the Muslim Culture.  You mean the part where women are supposed to be covered from head to toe?  Where women's movements in public are severely restricted? Where little schoolgirls are burned alive by fellow congregation members because they dared to actually attend school? Where female adulteresses are buried up to their necks in sand and then stoned to death, while men receive a rather less punitive sanction? All done in the name of Allah... and if the supposed majority of congregationists did not support this (either actively or tacitly) it would not be as pervasive as it is worldwide.

Heck... the Anglicans have split up their church over the issue of gay clergy alone.  Regardless of which side one might support, the Anglicans have chosen to stand up for whichever theology they believe in, and have not stood silently by while the opposite side festers.  There is a similar situation in the Presby world too.  But Muslims?  The main schism there is between Shiite and Sunni, who effect their differences by kicking each others' asses with belt bombs.  They violently rise up against the other "side".  But when it comes to the overall situation of religious violence against non-Muslims, the "peaceful ones" generally sit idly by and let the creeps define their religion.

There was a time when Muslim Culture represented higher education, excellence in the sciences, and innovation in mathematics, astronomy.  In today's world, Muslim Culture is represented by violence and a desire to implement "Islamic Republics", and preventing access to education.  Of course not all Muslims adhere to this nihilistic lifestyle.  But they stand idly by and are gradually letting the creeps define their religion and "culture" due to their own inaction.


first of all I'm not trying to debate the muslim religion. I don't necessarily agree with their practices but, then again, I'm anti practically all religions... I'm just saying that the muslim people as a whole were not responsible for what happened on 9/11 yet people continue to make the culture as a whole all inclusive when talking about the incident and that is wrong...

There was an Islamic worship center inside one of the towers.  There's another down the street.

And when this new center is built, well...  it'll just be the third to be made in the vicinity.

It's no big deal, but O'Reilly is just pandering to the fear that has been generated towards Islam.

That being said, that Family Guy clip is so true.

by refusing to separate Muslim from his use of the word terrorist he has.  If he had conceded and said "Fine, let's call them terrorists who are Muslim" then I'd say no but he refused to budge.


THEY ARE MUSLIM TERRORISTS.  They do their "work" in the name of Islam and to the glory of their impression of Allah.  They are proud of their Muslimism.

If a Muslim guy robs a bank in a random act of criminality, he's a robber.  But if he runs out of the bank shouting "Allah Akhbar" and was wearing a necklace bomb while he did the deed, he'll be called a Muslim criminal, because he invoked his religion and the bomb stereotype all by himself.

I have unfortunately been the member of two Catholic parishes where the pastor got involved in illegal activity (in these cases they were pilfering money, thankfully not molesting the kiddies).  I have absolutely no problem at all referring to them as "corrupt Catholic priests" because they did their crimes under the cover and protection of their position as religious figures.  To refer to their crimes without referring to their religious affiliation which was part-and-parcel to the crime would be naive.  Thankfully we ran those mofos out of the priesthood.

THEY ARE MUSLIM TERRORISTS.  They do their "work" in the name of Islam and to the glory of their impression of Allah.  They are proud of their Muslimism.

If a Muslim guy robs a bank in a random act of criminality, he's a robber.  But if he runs out of the bank shouting "Allah Akhbar" and was wearing a necklace bomb while he did the deed, he'll be called a Muslim criminal, because he invoked his religion and the bomb stereotype all by himself.

I have unfortunately been the member of two Catholic parishes where the pastor got involved in illegal activity (in these cases they were pilfering money, thankfully not molesting the kiddies).  I have absolutely no problem at all referring to them as "corrupt Catholic priests" because they did their crimes under the cover and protection of their position as religious figures.  To refer to their crimes without referring to their religious affiliation which was part-and-parcel to the crime would be naive.  Thankfully we ran those mofos out of the priesthood.



now we are back to my friend's original argument:  the Klan acts in the name of God but no one ever calls them Christian (or name specific denomination) Klansmen.


by identifying them by the culture first you leave room open for stereotyping and racism.  Maybe this has to do with being a person of color. I'm sick of people judging an entire group based on the acts of a few people.

now we are back to my friend's original argument:  the Klan acts in the name of God but no one ever calls them Christian (or name specific denomination) Klansmen.

by identifying them by the culture first you leave room open for stereotyping and racism.  Maybe this has to do with being a person of color. I'm sick of people judging an entire group based on the acts of a few people.



The most vociferous critics of the KKK are Christians (I venture to guess) and you don't see any clergy standing up and saying "The KKK rocks".  They are more or less universally and openly reviled by the established Christian religions (and pretty much most/all of the non-Christian religions as well). Christians (and Jews, etc and atheists) joined together and have put these guys pretty much out of business.  Any funding networks that they had were pretty much shut down.  Walk down the street wearing a white pointy hood and there is an excellent chance you'll get your ass kicked.  But the Islamist Fundamentalists mount an AK-47, a bomb belt, and their own sheets, and a line of supporters forms behind them in prayer and support.  Funding networks are pervasive throughout the Muslim world.  Whole governments are founded on the basis of the "Islamic Republic".

I'd say this is quite different from how the KKK is viewed these days.  I do believe that if the KKK was more focused on mayhem due to religious affiliation they would be tagged as "Christian extremists" or some such.  But they are not trying to establish some sort of religious body, they simply want to kill blacks, hispanics, a few Jews, and so on.  So they are seen as "racist conspirators". Their hate appears to be hate for the sake of hate and not for the purpose of promoting their "denomination".  Islamic Militants do their mayhem IN THE NAME OF THEIR RELIGION and FOR ITS GLORY.

I think we are going to have to disagree on this you are not seeing the big picture and I have no desire to go round in circles with you anymore.

The most vociferous critics of the KKK are Christians (I venture to guess) and you don't see any clergy standing up and saying "The KKK rocks".  They are more or less universally and openly reviled by the established Christian religions (and pretty much most/all of the non-Christian religions as well). Christians (and Jews, etc and atheists) joined together and have put these guys pretty much out of business.  Any funding networks that they had were pretty much shut down.  Walk down the street wearing a white pointy hood and there is an excellent chance you'll get your ass kicked.  But the Islamist Fundamentalists mount an AK-47, a bomb belt, and their own sheets, and a line of supporters forms behind them in prayer and support.  Funding networks are pervasive throughout the Muslim world.  Whole governments are founded on the basis of the "Islamic Republic".

I'd say this is quite different from how the KKK is viewed these days.  I do believe that if the KKK was more focused on mayhem due to religious affiliation they would be tagged as "Christian extremists" or some such.  But they are not trying to establish some sort of religious body, they simply want to kill blacks, hispanics, a few Jews, and so on.  So they are seen as "racist conspirators". Their hate appears to be hate for the sake of hate and not for the purpose of promoting their "denomination".  Islamic Militants do their mayhem IN THE NAME OF THEIR RELIGION and FOR ITS GLORY.


The "religion" of the KKK was white supremacy and the "protection of Christian womanhood" from the swarthy peoples, and it was a religion, with it;s own rituals, initiations, and internal discipline.  I also think it is ridiculous to savage "Muslim culture" - there are many - with all its aberrations, since the resurgence of Islamic fundymentalism can be directly connected to the actions of the western powers going back to the 19th Century (European Imperialism - ever hear the term?) and especially the post WWI partitions, betrayals, and other shenanigans.  The question should not be "how can we defeat terrorism?" because we can't, it is a tactic, just like any other military tactic.  The question should be "How can we - help, cojoulle, convince, etc - people living in what is essentially the middle ages to join the modern world?".  Until we get that right, the terrorists, like the poor, will always be with us, and are likely to be some of the same people (and no, I'm not saying that all poor are terrorists).

This is all I have to say...

Religion is made by man...not God!

So Christians who claim that their part of a religion...is wrong. Having a relationship between you and God...or a Supreme Being is more important than Religion!

The United Klans of America (or whatever crap they call themselves) are spread in numbers for safety.  They administer wretched little Klaverns.  If one of 'em gets busted he can only rat on the other guys in his klavern because they are independent entities.  So a white supremacist group such as White Aryan Resistance will pop up.  Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center watch them until they make any kind of a civil rights threat, and then slams the trouble-maker out of business!

A HUGE problem with violent racist skinheads soared from about 1984 to 1989.  It was getting horrible.  They were everywhere.  In 1990, Tom and John Metzger, the father-and-son team running W.A.R. (White Aryan Resistance) got BUSTED by Morris Dees.  He cheered on some skinheads who bashed in the brains of an Ethiopian grad student at a bus stop.  Dees pounced, sued their asses off and the skinhead problem shrank back to its 1980 levels (still too many).

THEY ARE MUSLIM TERRORISTS.  They do their "work" in the name of Islam and to the glory of their impression of Allah.  They are proud of their Muslimism.



NO THEY ARE TERRORISTS WHO CALL THEMSELVES MUSLIMS.  They can call themselves anything they want, and give religion and God as a reason for what they do.

I could wake up one day and say that God said I was Oprah Winfrey.  I still won't be able to use her Mastercard Platinum BECAUSE IT ISN'T TRUE.

NO THEY ARE TERRORISTS WHO CALL THEMSELVES MUSLIMS.  They can call themselves anything they want, and give religion and God as a reason for what they do.

I could wake up one day and say that God said I was Oprah Winfrey.  I still won't be able to use her Mastercard Platinum BECAUSE IT ISN'T TRUE.


;D 

NO THEY ARE TERRORISTS WHO CALL THEMSELVES MUSLIMS.  They can call themselves anything they want, and give religion and God as a reason for what they do.

I could wake up one day and say that God said I was Oprah Winfrey.  I still won't be able to use her Mastercard Platinum BECAUSE IT ISN'T TRUE.


Well, to play Devil's Advocate...  God could be anyone or anything.  Religions are only based on scripture and the interpretations of them.  One of the central problems with faith is its lack of empiricism.

So, Al Quida is still an Islamic group just as much as the Westboro Baptist Church is Christian, because they consider themselves to be Muslim.

And honestly, Al Quida takes a stricter interpretation of Islam than the average Muslim.  You could say that, in certain respects, they are more devout than the average Muslim.  But see, this is what happens when you take a religion to the extreme.

Even today, there are groups that use Christianity (a religion started by a pacifist) to justify war or murder.  Many Christian fanatics end up joining the military with the explicit intent of killing Muslims, just the same way that many Muslims become fanatical and join terror groups to right what they perceive as wrongs by the West.

So, O'Reilly is correct that Muslims killed us on 9/11, but he's also missing the point that it was fanatical Muslims, not your average everyday Muslims.  This important distinction is what makes all the difference.

In effect, Whoopi and Joy need to acknowledge the dangers of fanatical Islam, while O'Reilly needs to acknowledge the difference between regular Muslims and fanatical ones.

I'm disappointed in The View.  They shouldn't have walked off their own show.  They should have made Bill-O so mad, he walked off their show.  It ain't hard to do, the guy's a rageaholic...and like a lot of us dumb micks, he's proud of it.
::)

Hey, kiss me, I'm Irish.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/14/pottytrain1.gif

I'm disappointed in The View.  They shouldn't have walked off their own show.  They should have made Bill-O so mad, he walked off their show.  It ain't hard to do, the guy's a rageaholic...and like a lot of us dumb micks, he's proud of it.
::)

Hey, kiss me, I'm Irish.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/14/pottytrain1.gif



I'll give ya this.... they should have made him walk off... honestly I don't think whoopi would've walked off... I think she went when joy went as a sign of solidarity.... 

I have to admit, as I watched what really went through my head was "Whoopi, what's up with those shoes?!"

I have to admit, as I watched what really went through my head was "Whoopi, what's up with those shoes?!"


yeah... I was thinking the same thing...  ;D

The "religion" of the KKK was white supremacy and the "protection of Christian womanhood" from the swarthy peoples, and it was a religion, with it;s own rituals, initiations, and internal discipline.  I also think it is ridiculous to savage "Muslim culture" - there are many - with all its aberrations, since the resurgence of Islamic fundymentalism can be directly connected to the actions of the western powers going back to the 19th Century (European Imperialism - ever hear the term?) and especially the post WWI partitions, betrayals, and other shenanigans.  The question should not be "how can we defeat terrorism?" because we can't, it is a tactic, just like any other military tactic.  The question should be "How can we - help, cojoulle, convince, etc - people living in what is essentially the middle ages to join the modern world?".  Until we get that right, the terrorists, like the poor, will always be with us, and are likely to be some of the same people (and no, I'm not saying that all poor are terrorists).


Karma for this!!

NO THEY ARE TERRORISTS WHO CALL THEMSELVES MUSLIMS.  They can call themselves anything they want, and give religion and God as a reason for what they do.

I could wake up one day and say that God said I was Oprah Winfrey.  I still won't be able to use her Mastercard Platinum BECAUSE IT ISN'T TRUE.


Awesome.  And karma.

I have to admit, as I watched what really went through my head was "Whoopi, what's up with those shoes?!"




yeah... I was thinking the same thing...  ;D



Add me to that list.


Great minds think alike.  ;) :D ;D ;D ;D



Cat

I have to admit, as I watched what really went through my head was "Whoopi, what's up with those shoes?!"


;D  

She always wears uncomfortable looking shoes.  The most comfortable looking clothes, and the most ridiculous shoes.