Head-in-the-Sand Liberals (Harris -famous atheist-backs Bush war on Islam)

[papau]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-harris18sep18,0,1897169.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail
Head-in-the-Sand Liberals
Western civilization really is at risk from Muslim extremists.
By Sam Harris
SAM HARRIS is the author of "The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason." His next book, "Letter to a Christian Nation," will be published this week by Knopf. samharris.org.

September 18, 2006

TWO YEARS AGO I published a book highly critical of religion, "The End of Faith." In it, I argued that the world's major religions are genuinely incompatible, inevitably cause conflict and now prevent the emergence of a viable, global civilization. In response, I have received many thousands of letters and e-mails from priests, journalists, scientists, politicians, soldiers, rabbis, actors, aid workers, students — from people young and old who occupy every point on the spectrum of belief and nonbelief.

This has offered me a special opportunity to see how people of all creeds and political persuasions react when religion is criticized. I am here to report that liberals and conservatives respond very differently to the notion that religion can be a direct cause of human conflict.

This difference does not bode well for the future of liberalism.

Perhaps I should establish my liberal bone fides at the outset. I'd like to see taxes raised on the wealthy, drugs decriminalized and homosexuals free to marry. I also think that the Bush administration deserves most of the criticism it has received in the last six years — especially with respect to its waging of the war in Iraq, its scuttling of science and its fiscal irresponsibility.

But my correspondence with liberals has convinced me that liberalism has grown dangerously out of touch with the realities of our world — specifically with what devout Muslims actually believe about the West, about paradise and about the ultimate ascendance of their faith.

On questions of national security, I am now as wary of my fellow liberals as I am of the religious demagogues on the Christian right.

This may seem like frank acquiescence to the charge that "liberals are soft on terrorism." It is, and they are. <snip>

In their analyses of U.S. and Israeli foreign policy, liberals can be relied on to overlook the most basic moral distinctions. For instance, they ignore the fact that Muslims intentionally murder noncombatants, while we and the Israelis (as a rule) seek to avoid doing so. Muslims routinely use human shields, and this accounts for much of the collateral damage we and the Israelis cause; the political discourse throughout much of the Muslim world, especially with respect to Jews, is explicitly and unabashedly genocidal.

Given these distinctions, there is no question that the Israelis now hold the moral high ground in their conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah. And yet liberals in the United States and Europe often speak as though the truth were otherwise. <snip>

[niallmac]

1. Oh this one fair and balanced individual.

No doubt about that. (drippy sarcasm thing goes here.)

[mrreowwr_kittty]

2. So he prefers the neo-con Zionists and the Rapture Right?

Because those two elements have a disturbing amount of influence over Israel and U.S. foreign policy.

[VioletLake]

3. Smell the desperation.

In no time Muslims will be driving their tanks on I-95 and beheading Americans on MTV. So let's overlook the most basic moral distinctions and give our murderer-in-chief permission to "stay the course" and do "whatever it takes" to "rescue" Western civilization.

My fellow liberals? Liberal bone fides? LOL

Liberals are soft on terrorism? Perhaps in the same way that Harris is soft on necrophilia.

If you can’t tell that this is shit, you should stick to activities that are more your speed. If you endorse and promote this shit, you’re a vicious hypocrite and you probably deserve what your "leaders" - the only real threat to Western civilization - have in store for you. If you write this shit, you’re an immoral opportunist as well as a champion ass-clown.

The EVIL in this deception-masquerading-as-an-argument is a clear sign that Western civilization is indeed fucked. And the money you pay in taxes is being used to fund the ride to hell!

[VioletLake]

5. Activating Assets

Who didn’t know a year ago that the fuckstick was headed for this?

[bemildred]

4. Cartoonish generalizations.

Littered with the usual propaganda memes. If he was throwing these stereotypes around about an ethnic or religious group he would be rightly called a bigot. Because the target is a sort of straw man stereotype of "liberals" (and Muslims), we are supposed to think it's OK.

[Demit]

6. The author claims that his correspondence with liberals is the basis for

his thesis in this essay, but he cites not one example. Not one. He just blithely generalizes in such phrases as "liberals continue to imagine", "misconstrued, ignored or obfuscated by liberals", "alleged by liberals ", "liberals can be relied on to overlook the most basic moral distinctions".

It's a badly argued presentation of a point of view and I am surprised that a major newspaper would accept it. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the author got remuneration from either the administration or, more likely, from one of its right-wing think tank cutouts, to write it. What crap.