Hat-tip Lordrag of DelphiForums for the tip.
From David Neiwert of Crooks and Liars:
Brian Kilmeade sez: 'Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.' Oh really?
By David Neiwert, October 15, 2010 11:00 AM
Brian Kilmeade, defending Lord Bill O'Reilly from the nefarious Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar, gives voice to the basic Fox News view of the world:
Kilmeade: They can't handle the give and take of the debate. They were outraged that somebody was saying, uh, there's a reason, there was a certain group of people that attacked us on 9/11. It wasn't just one person, it was one religion.
Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.
Oh really, Brian.
Well, just as we had to do for Sarah Palin back in 2008, let's do a little reminder session for Kilmeade et. al.:
David then goes on to remind folks about Eric Rudolph, James Kopp, The Phineas Priesthood, Timothy McVeigh, Buford Furrow -- in fact, there's a lot of 'em:
Indeed, as we recently reported, there has in fact been an uptick in domestic terrorism cases in the past couple of years.
That's sixteen major incidents in a two-year period -- significantly more than we've seen over the same timespan from domestic radical Muslims. The BPC's report enumerates a total of seven incidents in 2009 -- two attacks and five serious plots (not to mention four attempts to join terrorist organizations). We've had the same number of right-wing extremist-related incidents of domestic terrorism in 2010 so far -- and the year isn't even over yet.
This has in fact been quite predictable, especially considering that both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the ADL have reported a significant increase in recruitment by right-wing extremists, particularly white-supremacist and radical "Patriot" groups, in the wake of President Obama's election. These two factions, after all, have been responsible for the overwhelming majority of domestic-terrorism cases of the past thirty years and more. Indeed, the problem is serious enough that the Pentagon has finally begun to clamp down on the far-right extremists who have been infiltrating the ranks of U.S. troops in recent years.
But right-wingers are always eager to dismiss the reality of right-wing extremists -- even in the face of overwhelming data. So this means, evidently, that when we now assess terrorism on a "bipartisan" basis, we must omit them altogether.
Finally, perhaps the more important point: We were not attacked by one religion. We were attacked by fringe fanatics from that religion, not the religion en masse. Some of our important allies in this fight, as it happens, are Muslim.
Indeed, the Reichwing supporters of domestic terror see nothing wrong with their misguided and violent self-righteousness: according to the majority of them, that's the way God & Jesus want them to be to defend America.
It's their own fundamental version of the Taliban, adapted / adopted / coopted to help them become the most tea-baggery incarnation of The American Taliban and hypocrisy, all wrapped up in instability and peppered with some heavily armed & dangerous weapon-weilding zealotry.
Welcome to the Right's vision for America: where violence against political opposites is par for the course, provided you're on the right (reich) side of their unHoly, unAmerican, unChristian point of view.
So, what's your take? Comments are open -- and remember, this is an Open Thread.