More Racism at Loonwatch

July 31, 2012

The topic of ‘warrior monks’ isn’t a bad idea shedding light on the dark side of Buddhism is a relevant project; provided it doesn’t steer into the realm of PRC apologia (ie Michael Parenti’s neo-colonial propaganda). Yet as usual danios steers into imbecilic hatred he mentions religious conquests but then justifies Islamic conquests using historical illiterate reasoning:

“Islamophobes often complain that Islam gobbled up a significant part of the Christian world, which is true. Yet, the Christians themselves had conquered these lands aforetime.

Many colonies experienced multiple periods of foreign rule, the imperial Japanese (a state that danios views as a victim) were the worst colonizer in southeast Asia in what is now Indonesia they killed three million people (the total amount of victims is in the 20-30 million range) yet only an idiot would try to dismiss Japanese rule in Indonesia by arguing that “Japanophobes ignore that the Dutch had conquered these lands aforetime.” The abuses of an empire are not excuse by pointing out the existence of other empires or the fact that an empire was not the first to conquer a territory, only a neo-nazi would try to excuse the nazi occupation of Greece by arguing that “Germanophobes ignore that the Ottomans conquered these lands aforetime.”

“Is this simply not a case of Christians crying foul play when another religious group does to them what they did to the rest of the world”

Real or imagined Christian atrocities have no relevance to the question of Muslim conquests as any community college student who has enrolled in a logic 101 course knows. Danios is using red herrings and whataboutism to dismiss colonial abuses that relies on the strawman that any Christian that brings up the history of Islamic imperialism must be an apologist of Christian empires.

This isn’t the first time that Danios has stuck up for Islamic imperialism, from another post:

“If the Islamophobes insist that the Armenian Genocide, which took place in the span of eight years, defines the Ottoman Empire (which existed for over 600 years, meaning the Armenian Genocide lasted only 1% of its existence), then would they be consistent and use this logic to argue that the ethnic cleansing of the American Indians (which spanned more than a century and a quarter, or 53% of America’s existence) defines the United States?”

Danios insists on defining the US by its negatives, yet here he is defending an empire that was far more cruel than the US and culturally inferior to the US (unlike the US the ottoman empire was an autocracy with widespread illiteracy). Its also a bit of a strawman, I’d like to see an example of someone defining the empire by the Armenian genocide. And he’s attempting to dismiss a genocide by pointing to something that isn’t remotely comparable, its about as stupid as comparing the Sino-Japanese war to the war of 1812. The Hamidian massacres of 1894-96 claimed 80-300,000 lives, then came the Armenian genocide of 1915 that took at least one million lives thats including the Greek and Assyrian genocides that occurred at the same time.

By contrast historian William Osborn tallied every atrocity involving Indians from the first contact to the closing of the frontier he found that “7,193 people died from atrocities perpetrated by whites, and 9,156 people died from atrocities perpetrated by Native Americans.” Furthermore his definition of an atrocity is very broad (including actions like torture that didn’t cause deaths) so the total of 7193 Indians could in fact be an over count, more people died from 20th century gang warfare than from American actions in the Indian wars. Either way danios is an anti-American bigot, a dolt and an apologist for the Armenian genocide. We could compare manifest destiny to the Ottoman conquests (which lasted far longer than the Indian wars) but even that doesn’t work; four thousand Greek civilians were killed in the fall of Constantinople, thousands more were killed were killed during the Ottoman conquest of Greece. Danios’ absurd comparison only proves his historical ignorance. The article which has that quote whines that the US has been at war since 1776 yet the Ottoman empire was at since 1453.

Back to the article:

“I would also like to take this opportunity to distance myself from those who are using the violence in Burma to further Buddhaphobia.”

Buddhaphobia? Certainly anti-Buddhist bigotry is real but ‘buddhaphobia’ is a neologism that clearly means a fear of buddha describing bigotry as fear of a religious figure is absurd.

” Yesterday, the Jews were ethnically cleansed by the Nazis; today, they ethnically cleanse the Palestinians. ”

Yup danios has equated the genocide of six million Jews to the low intensity Arab-Israeli conflict which has since Israel’s founding claimed 15,000 lives; equating Israel to nazi Germany (as danios has done) is retarded, racist and too goddamn stupid for words Danios should apologize for such vile anti-Semitism.

Totalitarian Propaganda on Loonwatch

July 12, 2012

Now I’m not a fan of; they’ve linked to srebrenica genocide denial material for example but the recent material on LW crosses an ethical line. Most on their latest article (“ Working to Streamline the American Empire’s “War on Terror”) repeats their idiotic attempt to blame Islamic terrorism on the US and parrots the ‘American empire’ claim (if that was true the US would not have allowed Iraqis to elect a government with policies contrary to US interests). See my previous post for a response to that.

The real unethical material is at the end:

“Absent from most discussions regarding terrorism is the role of state sponsored terrorism, especially the United States involvement in giving both “material” and “direct support” to groups that they themselves have designated as “foreign terrorist” organizations. Whether it is the Mujahidin-e Khalq (MEK)”

Claims that the US funded the MEK rely on Seymour Hersh’s hearsay, critics have pointed that only Israel has the capacity to operate like that and they already supported Balochi rebels while claiming to be Americans.

“or the less well known relationship between NATO and the AlQaeda affiliated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG),”

Its rather stupid to claim that an intervention in which the US played a minor role equals the same as a shadowy alliance with an AQish group, particularly since Libya is not being governed by the LIFG but by secular and as Juan Cole pointed out the Libyans are set to elect secular officials, Islamists are going to receive the lowest number of votes. Loonwatch crosses the line separating stupidity from depravity by supporting their claim about Libya by linking to a pro-Gadaffi hate site called ‘’ which blatantly denies Gadaffi’s crimes:

“A pretext of fiction
Crimes against humanity – and logic – blamed on the Gaddafi regime and used to justify the war:
– Massacring Protesters: Really? – Important! Even the part about shooting demonstrators isn’t looking so certain.”

The specific article they link cites racists like taliban fan Yvonne Ridley.

“or the current quagmire in Syria where US made arms and ammunition are finding themselves in the hands of rebels, some of whose ideological foundations mirror AlQaeda.”

Loonwatch’s hypocrisy was revealed by how they whine about Israel constantly (going so far as to blog about petty vandalism as if its the worst thing evah) but remaining silent about the Assad regime, which is anti-Sunni Muslim apartheid state that under Hafez Assad killed 40000 Muslims in Hama. The sentence above contains nothing even close to condemnation of the Assad regime and blames the US for the situation which is a hilariously idiotic lie designed to defend a state modeled after the third reich. The number one pro-Assad propaganda claim is to present anti-Assad forces as ‘Al-qaeda’ which is what LW is doing and its particularly stupid since the key rebel group the Free Syrian army is lead by defected secular army officers. So there you have it loonwatch parrots pro-Assad and pro-gadaffi propaganda; the funny thing is that that puts them on the same side with anti-Muslim bigots who supported Gadaffi (seeing him as a bastion against Islamism) and continue to support Assad for similar reasons.

Loonwatch Tries and Fails to Blame the US for Islamic Terrorism

June 19, 2012

The number of the sharks that Danios has jumped could fill an entire ocean, in his latest rant he tries to blame the US for Islamic terrorism in fact the title reads like a parody.

“It’s because they know what is painfully obvious: it is U.S. military intervention in the region that is most responsible for creating the problem of terrorism.”

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, Danios has written apologia the key task of an apologist is to place the blame for a crime onto the shoulders of another party. For example:

“Nasser Oric provoked the Srebrenica massacre.”

“If she hadn’t gone out dressed like that she wouldn’t have been raped.”

Now then onto the rest:

“Al-Qaeda in Iraq was founded with the intent to “[e]xpel the Americans from Iraq” and topple the interim government propped up by the United States. The Iraqis can thank the United States for creating the conditions that spawned this terrorist group, as well as for the resulting violence.”

Then by that logic the atrocities of confederate raiders can be blamed on Lincoln since they ‘didn’t exist’ before the war, obviously that would be just as immoral and illogical as danios’ rancid claims. The problem is that insurgent groups including AQ overwhelmingly targeted civilians out of sectarian motives not US troops, if you’re trying to expel the US why spend most of your time killing harmless people from other sects and religions? Its not exactly a sound tactic.

“With the U.S. invasion Iraq went from having a virtually non-existent terrorism problem to becoming the world champion of terrorism, a title it continued to hold up until 2010. It is difficult to attribute this to mere coincidence.”

Apart from Saddam’s atrocities if we are to blame another party for insurgent actions it would be those who created the conditions which would be the Baathist state (who fomented sectarianism) and Al-Qaeda (whose actions in 2006 sparked much of the sectarian conflict) not the US.

“In 2011, Iraq dropped to second place, being overtaken by another one of America’s arenas of war: Afghanistan. This war-torn country is a second example of how U.S. military intervention created the problem of terrorism.”

“According to the NCTC reports, the Taliban have been responsible for the vast majority of terrorism-related deaths in Afghanistan. ”

So there have it loonwatch admits that the taliban have killed the largest number of people.

“Yet, prior to the invasion of Afghanistan, the Taliban were not terrorists, at least not how the term is commonly employed today by the United States.”

Terrorism basically refers to tactics carried out against non-state armed groups who want to kill as many civilians of a nation or group as possible, so Danios is relying on a technicality.

“Certainly, they were theocratic tyrants who imposed a frighteningly fundamentalist interpretation of Islam on the Afghan people. But, the Taliban at this time weren’t associated with Al-Qaeda style tactics such as suicide attacks, car bombs, or IED explosives.”

Many of the worst taliban atrocities were committed prior to the US presence; they committed massacres in an attempt to exterminate hazaras (10,000 slaughtered in one town alone), slavery on a massive scale and other atrocities, so one reason to avoid the t-word would be that it understates what the taliban did at that time. The fact that the taliban have switched to certain tactics and can be called terrorists only proves that they are no longer a state entity and that they don’t have the strength to carry massacres like they did in the 90s, it doesn’t prove that the US is to blame.

“The Taliban resorted to terrorist tactics in their fight against foreign occupiers and the U.S.-installed puppet regime in Kabul.”

“The Taliban resorted to terrorist tactics in their fight against foreign occupiers and the U.S.-installed puppet regime in Kabul.”

This sounds like taliban propaganda, even if that wasn’t his intent the northern alliance is the actual government of Afghanistan which has US recognition while the taliban were only recognized by three countries and imposed by Pakistan.

“This conflict, almost wholly a result of U.S. actions, is responsible for the violence and wave of terrorism that has rocked Afghanistan for the last decade.”

Pure fiction, the taliban were created in 1994 by Pakistan which has continued to support them throughout the war and many of the worst taliban atrocities were committed before the US presence in the 90s civil war so if any other state is responsible for the taliban and the conflict its Pakistan.

“The U.S.-led War in Afghanistan has created a worsening terrorism problem for Pakistan as well. There are many complex reasons for this spike in violence within Pakistan (which are beyond the scope of this article), but all are ultimately rooted in America’s War on Terror.”

If we are to blame any state for Taliban attacks on Pakistan it would be pakistan that created the Taliban in the first place and is to blame for the state of Afghanistan, Bhutto was quote clear when she called herself the mother of the taliban. Any kid with wikipedia can find out that danios is a liar:

“The Taliban were largely founded by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) in 1994.[12][60][61][62][63][64][65][66] The ISI used the Taliban to establish a regime in Afghanistan which would be favorable to Pakistan, as they were trying to gain strategic depth.[36][67][68][69] Since the creation of the Taliban, the ISI and the Pakistani military have given financial, logistical and military support”

Keep in mind that LW is very pro-pakistan, going so far as to smear Hitchens and Amis as bigots “spreading hatred” for criticizing Pakistan and here they are placing blame on American shoulders that actually belongs on Pakistan’s back.

“We can actually trace American war-making using Muslim corpses as an indicator. Obama promised to shift focus from Iraq to Afghanistan. U.S. troop levels in Iraq were a quarter of what they were in 2011 as they were in 2007; coincidentally, in the same time span Iraqi fatalities from terrorism fell to a quarter of what they were (according to NCTC data).”

The above is a classic example of the cause and effect fallacy.

“Obama has also stepped up the war in Pakistan. NCTC data reveals a 600% increase in terrorism-related fatalities in Pakistan from 2005 (338) to 2011 (2,033). In 2011, Pakistan had the dubious honor of entering into the top three when it comes to terrorism, coming behind Afghanistan and Iraq. What but the War on Terror could have so efficiently created such an epidemic of terrorism in Pakistan?”

First of all the pakistan government supports droning in the tribal belt, basically they get the US to do their job for them:

Second the worst military actions in the tribal belt where committed by the Pakistani military:

“On the other hand, Pakistan Air Chief Marshal (Retd) Rao Qamar Suleiman made a rare and startling revelation in his address to a conference of air chiefs in Dubai in November 2011. He claimed the PAF had flown 5,000 strike sorties and dropped 11,600 bombs on 4,600 targets in Pakistan’s troubled tribal areas since May 2008. While sharing the lessons learnt, the chief further revealed that until May 2009 when the PAF had acquired Goodrich DB110 electro-optical reconnaissance pods for its F-16s, it had to rely on Google Earth imagery for attacks against the militant targets.”—-myth-and-reality/

So even by Danios’ reasoning the guilt for taliban attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan belong to Pakistan.

“In the year 2000, there were a total of 404 terrorist attacks in all of the Middle East and South Asia. By 2006, this number jumped to 5,738–an increase of more than 1400%! This is what America’s War on Terror has done for terrorism in the Muslim world.”

Again its the cause and effect fallacy, it also doesn’t make any sense terrorist atrocities (the Algerian civil war for example) occurred before the war on terror and the attacks against Spain which danios would probably argue in the fault of Spain. In closing Danios is not only completely wrong but dishonest and an apologist for Islamist barbarism.

Loonwatch Smears Mona Eltahawy

April 27, 2012

Mona Eltahawy’s article predictably provoked a furor from various portions of the left; despite the fact that its tame compared to material produced by that political subculture defaming Israel

“Why then did Mona Eltahawy evoke such a hostile reaction from even the Arab women whose rights she seeks to protect? The easy answer, one that Eltahawy and her supporters might argue, is that these women are simply brainwashed. Too much “Islamism” in their little brains. The problem with this argument is that it’s sexist. It’s basically saying Arab women are too stupid to think for themselves.”

Its true that certain Westerners with MENA roots had a hostile reaction to her article, people in the US enshrine their ethnic roots,

” In fact, her racist (and somewhat babbling) screed is nothing short of a vicious attack on their entire civilization.”

Lets recap Danios’ track record; he’s defended Qaradawi who praised Hitler and cited Shahak AKA David Duke’s favorite Jews, he is no position to smear others as racist.

“A man can love his wife and still abuse her. He can have undying affection for his daughter but still wrong her in horrible ways. But, by going so far as to say they hate women, Eltahawy has dehumanized them.”

This is bizarre to the point of imbecility; a man who abuses his wife and daughter doesn’t love them and yes someone who engages in such activity does hate women. Dehumanize? Thats rich coming from the guy who dehumanizes Israelis.

“Women’s rights is an area of concern in many parts of the developing world, not just the Arab world. Why single out Arabs? Women face major obstacles in India. Should we demonize the Hindu religion and the great Indian civilization?”

The ‘demonize’ card is frequently a way to dismiss legitimate criticism; its nothing more than a whine and yes Hinduism deserves a great deal of criticism Hinduism’s dark side is one of the many reasons why the Islamophobic claim of Islam as uniquely flawed is comically false. Also if there was a Western civilization like India that had many great achievements but a caste system and other such problems do you think Danios’ spectrum of the left would whine about ‘demonization?’

“Racists don’t see nuance. They lump all people of a certain group altogether. ”

Smearing Mona as a racist is comically absurd, if she hates Arabs it doesn’t explain her activism in Egypt and the beatings she’s taken for Arabs causes or her pro-Palestinian stance.

“During my travels in the Muslim world, I saw all sorts of people, with a broad diversity of views. I met conservative Muslims, liberal Muslims, atheists, Christians, Communists, hippies, you name it. No sweeping generalization could be made about them (aside for, perhaps, their disgust of American foreign policy).”

After misrepresenting her article Danios moves onto his next logical fallacy; anecdotal evidence.

“so too does Mona Eltahawy’s article tap into historically racist Orientalist attitudes towards the Arab world.”

As even Danios’ favorite source salon explains Eddie Said’s miserable little tome has no basis in reality; so ‘orientalist’ is a meaningless little eiphet nothing close to a real argument.

” But, like Irshad Manji and Asra Nomani, Mona Eltahawy has an official “I’m a Muslim” card.”

Manji isn’t a bigot like Nomani the worst thing that Danios could find about her was an inaccurate tweet about Gadaffi which only displays his own idiocy and desire to smear Irshad.

“As other pundits have noted, Mona Eltahawy is–along with Irshad Manji, Asra Nomani, Tarek Fatah, Zuhdi Jasser, etc.–acting in the role of the “native informant.” Monica L. Marks writes on the Huffington Post”

The article in question is mind boggling rant smearing Irshad Manji and Azar Nafisi as “native informers” who are in fact coyly “manufacturing” consent for wars yet none of those women have written in support of wars, Nafisi is a staunch opponent of war with Iran. Remember loonwatch cites nominal Jews like Shahak who has written positively of pogroms as legitimate Jewish critics of Israel and dismissed criticism of them as “smears” yet they attack people like Manji with transparently false accusations. The ‘native informer’ smear is a conspiracy theory; indeed its as stupid as David Icke claiming that his critics are in fact agents of the reptilian conspiracy theory and just as much of a non-argument.

“These native informants just tell us what we want to hear. Their job is to increase hatred of Arabs and Muslims, something that is needed in order to sustain our multiple wars of aggression”

See above.

“Instead she chose Foreign Policy Magazine, which was founded by none other than Samuel P. Huntington. His famous Clash of Civilizations theory pit the Judeo-Christian West against the Muslim world. How very fitting that Mona Eltahawy’s us vs. them article was published in the magazine he founded.”

Except foreign policy has published the rants of far leftists sympathetic to MENA causes; Danios’ whine is even more insipid given that he’s cited that mag before.

“Indeed, the issue of human rights was routinely used by the colonial powers to justify the conquest and expropriation of land.”

Its true that certain colonial powers cited abuses as justification; the thing is none of them actually improved things, its more comparable to Maoism with its claim of “liberating Tibet” rather than Mona’s article. Danios’ attempt to link Mona to colonialism is absurd, desperate and laughable.

“The Americas, including the land that is now the United States, was brutally conquered and stolen by Europeans on this very basis. The indigenous peoples were portrayed as savages needing civilizing.”

First off a handful of European countries participated in campaigns against Indians, second they used Christianity not human rights to justify their conquests it was more like the Ottoman empire’s jihads none of them claimed to be bringing democracy to the Indians. The hypocrisy is also stunning by Danios’ own reasoning he should vilify Arabs just as he uses the Indian card to bash the US; since the Arabs conquered land occupied by indigenous peoples such as the Berbers (more of a blanket term for multiple peoples), Assyrians, Samaritans, Persians etc. Not to mention I doubt Danios would use the Mongol conquests and their centuries of oppressing East Slavs to bash Asian heritage.

“And yet, whatever failings the indigenous peoples had in their culture and civilization, it is now widely understood who the real savage was.”

See above.

” But, none of that will change the fact that we are the ones waging wars of aggression and occupation in the Muslim world. We are the ones killing hundreds of thousands of their innocent men, women, and children.”

First of all the Iraq was legal under international law, the US did not ‘invade’ Afghanistan but entered with permission from its UN recognized government; Danios can hate his country but he can’t play fast and loose with facts. Any cursory look at the middle east shows that the idea of the US being the only baddie in the ‘Muslim world’ (whatever the dickens that is) is a lie; Syria continues to butcher its people by the thousands prior to that it occupied Lebanon, Indonesia waged a brutal campaign against Aceh, Algeria fought a brutal civil war with innumerable atrocities etc. The last sentence is the usual far left tactic of inventing imaginary numbers to vilify the US; a favorite tactic of taliban propaganda.

“It was in another article, also published in Foreign Policy with almost the exact same title–Why They Hate Us?–that Prof. Stephen Walt calculated the number of Muslim lives the U.S. has extinguished”

Walt recently praised Gilad Atzmon who admires Hitler, Walt’s opinion matters as much as Atzmon’s. Besides his arguments make little sense; he repeats the lie about Iraq sanctions killing thousands, he compares Afghan deaths to US military deaths when the real comparison should be how many people the taliban have killed vs. how many the coalition have killed. Besides countless Muslim nations like Morocco and Saudi Arabia participated in operation desert storm and their are Muslim countries in the Afghan coalition.

“To use a jazzy catchphrase of my own: mutilating a baby girl’s genitals is horrible, but dropping a bomb on her head is much worse.”

This is a vile argument which dismisses the horrors of FGM in favor of standard US bashing, it also makes little sense since as I pointed out countless Muslim countries are currently dropping bombs in wars of their own.

Typical Anti-American Garbage From Loonwatch

March 13, 2012

Like any decent person I was immensely saddened to hear that a soldier had gone beserk and killed civilians; he deserves the harshest penalty. Obviously loonwatch was quick to jump on this, since the site has long revealed its pro-taliban slant; they regard any war against the taliban as ‘Islamophobia’ and presented some guy relieving himself on a talib corpse as a horrible crime. Loonwatch couldn’t actually care less about Muslims; its agenda is inherently anti-Western or to be more specific anti-American which was made obvious by the use of anti-Muslim sites like which get a pass because they share LW’s anti-American fanaticism.

“We are told that in Afghanistan they only get upset when the occupying forces “burn Korans.”

The US entered Afghanistan only with the permission of its UN recognized government, the most recent opinion poll showed that “foreign interference” is at the very bottom of the list of things that worry Afghans.

The ugly implication of the “occupation” card is that it grants legitimacy to the taliban (a Pakistani proxy) as if LW seems to think that the war is an Asian sequel to the battle of algiers.

“The protests, we are told, have nothing to do with the bombing and murdering of innocent civilians, you know the Greater Islamophobia.”

Their entire argument, that war against an entity is a war against whatever religion that party practices, is imbecilic as I’ve already explained. Of course loonwatch has never mentioned taliban atro- oh I’m sorry “resistance to occupation” such as this atrocity:

“Bombs devastated two shrines in Afghanistan Tuesday, killing at least 54 people – including children – in Kabul and four in Mazar-i-sharif. The bombs coincided with the Shiite celebration of Ashura, which was banned under the Taliban.”

Somehow I wouldn’t be saddened if the perpetrators were shot and then weewee’d on; how monstrous of me. If you actually do the opposite of loonwatch and engage in a factual study of the Afghan war a pattern emerges; when the US killed civilians it was either unintentional or it was done by mad men that were not following orders. Taliban war crimes however are committed by men following orders and trying to kill as many people as possible in areas that have no military significance. Loonwatch takes these things out of context in order to present a caracture of the Afghan war as evil Americans killing innocent Afghans; as if they were transcribing a taliban video but adding cheap sarcasm.

Next loonwatch compares apples to oranges:

“History has a horrifically persistent way of repeating itself, almost 106 years ago to the date US soldiers massacred more than 600 mostly unarmed Muslim Moro villagers in the Phillipines. Today we hear news of the bloody massacre carried out by an Army Staff Sergeant in Afghanistan, killing 16 civilians, mostly women and children as they slept in their homes.”

No honest person would describe the barbaric slaughter in Afghanistan as a “repeat of history” loonwatch’s own source makes it clear that the soldier in question was not following orders but was in fact “rogue” and currently “detained.” The Philippines massacre on the other hand was carried by multiple soldiers following orders; two different slaughters. Clearly loonwatch is trying to present the US as having a history of killing Muslims which is a falsehood; the Philippine war was waged against a Christian majority country, the Moros were and are a religious minority. Obviously there are states with a long history of preying upon Muslims such as Russia which has been at war with Muslims since end of the Tatar yoke, but the vast majority of US wars with waged against Christian majority countries. Does that mean that the US is guilty of the “greater Christianophobia” or whatever? Besides the salvation army is the only army with a flawless history; all the Philippines post proves is that they know how to use google, which places them slightly above the average fourth grade computer student. Its about as stupid as attempting to demonize the British armed forces by making inaccurate comparisons to the black and tans in the Irish war for independence; which is actually younger than the Philippine war.

The cringe inducing Kony campaign, an obvious campaign, provoked an annoying response from Danios who whines that:

“Yet, all of this pales in front of the crimes committed by the leaders of the United States, most of whom are “good, white Judeo-Christian folk.”

This is what we in the sane community refer to as a red herring, nothing more than a cheap diversion tactic, yet even his comparison is flawed since by his own admission he “couldn’t find a cumulative tally for the last two decades” thus he doesn’t have even an estimate to compare something to. In order to bash the US he cites an article by Stephen Walt whose blog hosts support for the vicious anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon (literally a neo-nazi); clearly Walt has little to no credibility. Responding to news about a vicious criminal with whataboutery is incredibly stupid; perhaps Fritzl’s attorney said in court that “oh yeah well other people have raped more women than my client! So there!”

” As our generation’s most important intellectual Noam Chomsky”

Most important intellectual?! Chomsky’s a hack with a record of supporting dictators; to elevate such a cheap shill to that pedestal is like a fifteen year old praising Stephanie Meyer as the “greater writer evah!” What further proof could someone ask of Danios’ ignorance and sheer gullibility? Thing is Danios doesn’t understand how a Chomsky quote destroys his silly red herring, the quote states that pointing to other atrocities ” has about as much ethical value as denouncing atrocities that took place in the 18th century.”

“For most citizens, however, the situation is exactly reversed. Indeed, American interest in human rights abuses falls into one of three categories”

“1. They are most vocal about the inequities of their enemies, especially when there is a national interest involved and the villain is a Muslim (i.e. Iran).”

This can be debunked merely by looking at the title of his post; surely if this was true a campaign about a Christian terrorist group wouldn’t have gone viral. Besides the chickenhawk material about Iran generally argues that Iran cannot have nukes, most of Iran’s worst abuses (such as the Ahwazi Arabs) remain obscure.

“They are generally silent about (or merely pay lip service to) the human rights abuses committed against people belonging to nations where no national benefit can be expected ”

This makes no sense logically; is danios suggesting that the US can’t intervene in Afghanistan without intervening everywhere? Not to mention the sheer amount of US aid that goes to countries that are not vital to US interests.

“3. They are wholly ignorant about, adamantly deny, or justify the crimes committed by their own government (i.e. the United States) or stalwart allies (i.e. Israel).”

Apart from the obvious strawman criticism of Israel is valid, but not from someone who posts anti-Semitic such as cartoons comparing Israel to nazi Germany; except by his own illogic he must give Israel a pass since countless other states have killed far more people, loonwatch in a typical show of stupidity smeared critics of Pakistan as “Islamophobes” a state far worse than Israel.

“As George Orwell famously said”

Given that danios thinks that Chomsky is a godlike intellectual I doubt he’s read Orwell or any book apart from goose bump paperbacks.

“We always wonder how it was that the Germans claimed not to know what Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were doing. Yet, how similar is our general state of apathy today toward what our own government commits on a daily basis. The reality is that the American can never come to grips with the wickedness of the crimes his nation commits.”

How to top imbecilic Chomsky praise? Easy; make comically inaccurate nazi comparisons and strawmen, besides if danios was transported back to the WWII era he would be equating dresden with Hiroshima and making “what about stalin” arguments.

“Their mannerisms do not change their deeds, which are heinous. The U.S. presidents have killed more Muslims than Kony has killed Africans. Noam Chomsky opined:

If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged.”

This is stupid on so many levels; his Walt source isn’t remotely credible and Danios himself admitted that he has no idea how many people the LRA have killed, thus his thesis and title is a complete lie. Lastly the Chomsky quote is a baseless claim; that doddering old fool has no legal background to make such a claim; Danios might as well cite a janitor’s view of chemistry in a paper for whatever community college has to put up with him and it goes to show that despite the left’s love of nazis comparisons if they were transported back to those trials they would condemn them as “hypocritical” for failing to prosecute stalin or bomber Harris.

Eric Li’s PRC Propaganda

March 11, 2012

The view of oriental despotism holds that Asians are unfit for something other than autocracy; Eric X. Li promotes a version of this narrative in articles published in mainstream sources like the new york times that praise the PRC’s inhuman oppression. Li according to his bio on the huffingon post is a:

“Eric X. Li is a venture capitalist in Shanghai. He serves on the board of directors of China Europe International Business School (CEIBS) and is vice chairman of its publishing arm CEIBS Publishing Group. Mr. Li is a Henry Crown Fellow of the Aspen Institute.”

No intelligent person would consider someone like that to be a credible source. Eric’s most widely circulated article is either called “Why China’s Political Model Is Superior” or “Globalization 2.0: Democracy’s Coming Demise” such titles might send a chill through impressionable spines but they don’t stand up to fact; the Swiss democratic tradition survived two of the most destructive wars in history. Now onto the garbage that NYT and HP decided to publish; in fact we can debunk his claims just by pointing out how a Chinese person who wrote an article praising the American system would fare in the PRC.

“China sees its current form of government, or any political system for that matter, merely as a means to achieving larger national ends.”

Eric admits that the PRC sees its people as a resource.

“In the history of human governance, spanning thousands of years, there have been two major experiments in democracy. The first was Athens, which lasted a century and a half; the second is the modern West.”

As Norman Davies points out the link between modern democracy and athens is “tenuous” and an 18th century myth; therefore Eric is ignorant about the basic history of what he is attacking.

“If one defines democracy as one citizen one vote, American democracy is only 92 years old. In practice it is only 47 years old, if one begins counting after the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — far more ephemeral than all but a handful of China’s dynasties.”

Desperate to muddle the waters Eric ignores that the Western view is that republicanism and democracy (the two are conflated in the US) are the best systems and republicanism has a very long history; whether its the republics of south America, medieval Russia, the Swiss Confederation, the Three leagues, the commune movement, maritime republics, Iceland, Indonesia and its local traditions, Kemalism etc. Its a very long list which is why I had to omit so many examples which have weathered innumerable storms; thus I’d say that republicanism and democracy are not in danger of a ‘demise’.

“Why, then, do so many boldly claim they have discovered the ideal political system for all mankind and that its success is forever assured?”

Eric is essentially asking, “why is it a good idea to let mankind decide its own fate” while standing on a teetering ladder of collected fallacies.

“Two fundamental ideas were at its core: the individual is rational, and the individual is endowed with inalienable rights. These two beliefs formed the basis of a secular faith in modernity, of which the ultimate political manifestation is democracy.”

Attacking subjects by labeling them ‘faiths’ or ‘religions’ is a common fallacy for those without arguments of substance and it has a nasty history; neo-nazis label anyone who doesn’t the holocaust as followers of a holocaust ‘religion.’ Eric’s attempt to dismiss rights is not only vile it makes no sense, how can a ‘faith’ be secular?

“The political franchise expanded, resulting in a greater number of people participating in more and more decisions.”

In other words Eric considers egalitarianism to be a flaw.

“In Athens, ever-increasing popular participation in politics led to rule by demagogy. And in today’s America, money is now the great enabler of demagogy.”

This is an apples to footballs comparison (the American system isn’t comparable to Athens) along with the implication that autocracy is necessary to prevent chaos.

“Elected representatives have no minds of their own and respond only to the whims of public opinion as they seek re-election; special interests manipulate the people into voting for ever-lower taxes and higher government spending, sometimes even supporting self-destructive wars.”

This is nothing but an insult devoid of actual argument; the point about wars is a billy since one can easily point to peaceful democracies whereas China has waged some of the bloodiest of the 20th century.

“The modern West sees democracy and human rights as the pinnacle of human development. It is a belief premised on an absolute faith.”

Again this isn’t an argument and its easily dismissed especially since the PRC’s system demands utmost faith in the party and worship of Mao, projecting much Eric?

“Its leaders are prepared to allow greater popular participation in political decisions if and when it is conducive to economic development and favorable to the country’s national interests”

Translation: the party will allow for a few domestic ‘reforms’ like all tyrannies such as the Tsar’s establishment of the powerless Duma as a bone to the plebs.

“However, China’s leaders would not hesitate to curtail those freedoms if the conditions and the needs of the nation changed.”

So in his words the previous sentence is meaningless.

“The 1980s were a time of expanding popular participation in the country’s politics that helped loosen the ideological shackles of the destructive Cultural Revolution. But it went too far and led to a vast rebellion at Tiananmen Square.

That uprising was decisively put down on June 4, 1989. The Chinese nation paid a heavy price for that violent event, but the alternatives would have been far worse.”

Eric is essentially arguing that oppression is necessary due to something that might happen; thats not an argument its an imbecilic claim that only proves that the PRC’s system isn’t superior and that he supports mass murder.

“The resulting stability ushered in a generation of growth and prosperity that propelled China’s economy to its position as the second largest in the world.”

Isn’t amusing that PRC apologists dismiss Chinese communist atrocities with financial gain? By the rambling above Franco’s atrocities were okay since he improved the Spanish economy.

“The West seems incapable of becoming less democratic even when its survival may depend on such a shift. In this sense, America today is similar to the old Soviet Union, which also viewed its political system as the ultimate end.”

The fact that the West won’t dive into the sewer of autocracy for ‘survival’ is a merit not a negative; again Eric has not presented an argument or explained how the “survival” of the West would require PRCish tyranny which would damn, rather than save, the West. In an embarrassment of an article Eric has only demonstrated his own misanthropy and didn’t prove the “superiority” of the PRC just the opposite.

Loonwatch Supports Another Anti-Semite

March 11, 2012

I’m far from a fan of Daniel Pipes, he has no credibility as evidenced by his support for fascist lunatics like Robert Spencer. Its very easy to criticize Pipes; so there’s excuse for how loonwatch copied and pasted an article by anti-Semite Franklin Lamb, along with a link to the hate site electronic intifada.

Who is Lamb? A google search shows that Lamb is involved with the neo-nazi website ‘veterans today’ which represents vets as much as one million moms represents mothers; its a vile site featuring holocaust denial and other related material; either LW has no problem with that or they can’t bother to do basic research or my bet: both. Lamb is a supporter of Hezbollah, the Iranian and 911 truthers, he appeared on Presstv to say that ““Ahmadinejad is absolutely rational and correct on this, that the American people are now coming to the point of demanding an international inquiry into 911″ both and neo-nazi Gordon Duff interviewed and praised Kevin Barrett of Muslims for 9/11 Truth.  Franklin also wrote a “tribute to Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah” which he praises using language that makes a princess di memorials seem subtle; in reality Fadlallah was a member of Hezbollah who held nazi views.  What’s next will loonwatch use David Duke (whose views differe little from Lamb’s) as a source?

Loonwatch Tries (and Fails) to Dismiss Islamist Misogyny

February 23, 2012

“Whenever a Western power wants to invade and or bomb a Muslim nation one invariably hears about how the “women are oppressed in ________(insert Muslim nation of choice)” and “we must liberate them from the clutches of those evil, backward, misogynistic Muslim men.”

This is a total strawman; the invasion of Iraq was based on faulty intelligence Iraqi women were not mentioned as a justification. Its true that the unique suffering of Afghan women was cited as justification for the Afghan war but that wasn’t an invasion, the US role in the war had more to do with crushing an organization synonymous with Al-Qaeda; the facts do not support LW’s strawman. There is a nasty argument among the far left to dismiss Islamist misogyny as “colonial feminism” or “propaganda” which is exactly what garibaldi is doing. Also if LW cannot even get the basic facts about the Afghan war right, they’re in no position to criticize it.

“That is one of the reasons we’ve termed the bombing, invasion and occupation of Muslim lands, the Greater Islamophobia.”

Which is an incredibly stupid idea; does that mean that anyone going to war with a Christian majority country hates Christians? Besides I doubt loonwatch would condemn any state going to war with Israel as anti-Semitic, so again more hypocritical garbage from loonwatch. The only intervention that fits their template is the Iraq war, which wasn’t a Muslim state; its as stupid as claiming that intervention in the Balkans was ‘Christianophobia.’

“Interestingly, when one analyzes say…the number of women in positions of power in countries across the world, we see the percentages of women in parliament to be higher in many majority Muslim nations than in parts of the West. [These statistics also buttress the fact that more Muslim nations have had female leaders, (Presidents, Prime Ministers) than the USA!]”

One could bring that up to debunk the ideas that Islam is inherently sexist and anti-Democratic but LW’s argument is imbecilic; they are trying to dismiss Islamist misogyny with cherry picked examples.

“Below we have a list of countries whose percentages of women in parliament is higher than the USA, which ranks a dismal 71st.”

Which only means that women have not chosen to run for senate or other offices in the US. One commenter makes a good point:

“Let’s take Tunisia for example, since this article placed emphasis on Tunisia. Well it may be true that Tunisia has more women in parliament than say the U.S. (which doesn’t have a parlimentary system of govt to begin with) such an argument misses a key point. The overall general women population in Tunisia have limited access to the political process or political rights.

Tunisia was ranked 76th overall best place for women and out of a score of 100 it only received a 28.9 in the category entitled “politics.” This indicates that only a minority of the women population in Tunisia have access to the political process or political rights.”

See the full list here:

“*Afghanistan (I have added an asterisk here because this nation is under foreign occupation and the results for many are not considered legitimate.”

The majority of Afghans support the military presence and its not an occupation since there was no invasion; the use of the word ‘legitimate’ is chilling but not surprising since loonwatch gets angry over taliban corpses getting peed on but remain when the taliban kills people. The taliban were the only ‘foreign occupation’ in Afghanistan after the soviets; they were imposed in Afghanistan by Pakistan under Bhutto (one of the many reasons why anyone citing her in an attempt to dismiss Islamist misogyny is a complete dolt).

” However it is still interesting that Afghanis, some of the most vilified people in the world today when it comes to views of women vote for them at a higher percentage than Americans.”

The loonwatch forest of strawmen continues to grow; first of all Afghanis are the names of a currency Afghanistan’s population are referred to as Afghans, this goes to show how ignorant LW bloggers actually are, second, the idea of trying to dismiss criticism of the taliban as ‘vilification’ of Afghans is too stupid for words.

“Tunisia is not a surprise to many who know the country, but lets put these numbers into perspective. The Islamist party Ennahda won elections, they are known as “moderates,” but within the media, especially the Right we see an effort to translate Ennahda’s victory into a harbinger for the repression of women’s rights and other usual hoopla associated with Right-wing anti-Islam rhetoric.”

Ennahda passed a law stating that the Tunisian head of state can only be a Muslim and is heavily anti-Semitic even Juan Cole voiced concern, imagine if Israel were to pass a similar law can you imagine the wailing from LW? Putting aside their hypocrisy and praise for anti-Semites that isn’t a reason to view the Tunisian revolution as a mistake; but it is a reason to condemn Ennahda and support those trying to reform the government.

“Here are two Western nations who you’d think would have done better in the numbers and who wax eloquent about “women’s rights,” even using it as a pretext to bomb and invade nations:”

Once again the “pretext” claim is complete garbage as I’ve already shown, the rest of his argument is moronic the fact that Pakistan has more females in office just means that more have chosen to run for office it doesn’t mean that Pakistan, a country where a Christian woman could be murdered by the state for drinking from a well, has a better record on womens rights than the US. Their take on Pakistan becomes even more obscene given that they have seriously argued that anyone critical of Pakistan is an ‘Islamophobe’ while holding up anti-Semites as ‘critics of Israel.’ For example if I was to avoid running for office in a small town, it would be pretty stupid to argue that that the fact that no one voted for me somehow proves that the population of that town hates my guts. There is nothing stopping American women from running for office or being elected; the fact that few have chosen not to do so doesn’t mean that Kazakhstan or Indonesia (which has a high rate of female genital mutilation) treat women better than the US.

“Of course some of the above Muslim nations still have low percentages, however my purpose here is not to draw conclusions but to add to the empirical evidence when it comes to the discussion of women, women’s role in Muslim societies and women’s rights.”

Sure you could bring it up to show that Islam doesn’t turn people into sexist beasts but the idea of using to dismiss misogyny is obscene, the list they use shows that Cuba has more women in parliament than Switzerland does that mean that a dictatorship like Cuba is a paradise while Switzerland is a sexist hell? Of course not, it just means that few Swiss women stood for elections or lost in elections. Its about as stupid as arguing that the PIRA terrorists were a feminist group since gosh they had female fighters. Perhaps loonwatch will support Ennahda’s Hungarian counterpart Jobbik? After all Jobbik has a prominent female politico and the party’s views on Israel and Iran are virtually identical to LW opinions:

“Gyongyosi further told the Chronicle, “I always support the position of a threatened country.

Iran is in the center of a Middle East axis that Israel and the US want to subjugate and keep under their control. Iran is an extremely peaceful country and never started a war, unlike Israel, which has declared wars on anything and everybody around it.””

Counterpunch Shills for Assad

February 20, 2012

It isn’t shocking to see one of the most psychotic far left sites shilling for the Syrian regime; after all counterpunch promotes Bosnian genocide denial, support for multiple regimes such as Belarus and anti-Semitism. CP’s take on Syria cannot be excused as merely one article that got in by error; its penned by head honcho Alexander Cockburn; a man whose sociopathy is balanced only by his irrelevance.

Hypocrisy in counterpunch jargon is a synonym for ‘bullshit-relativist-whataboutery’ cheap diversion tactics are their favorite method of defending crimes; its a five year old’s non-argument that can be used to defend any action.

“Few spectacles have been more surreal than senior US officials – starting with the President, the Secretary of State and the US ambassador to the UN – solemnly lecturing Assad and his beleaguered Syrian government on the need to accommodate rebel forces whose GCC sponsors are intent on slaughtering the ruling Alawite minority or driving them into the sea.”

Right off the bat Cockburn is content to lie; the Syrian resistance is ill organized and has expressed no desire to slaughter Alawis whereas CP does support Hamas and supported neo-chetniks both of whom tried to slaughter entire populations. Cockburn’s attempt to paint Assad as a bold defender of Alawis against demonic rebels and an international conspiracy sounds straight out of Syrian state media.

“In 1993, the first year of the Clinton administration, federal agents launched an armed assault on a religious group in a compound outside Waco, Texas. The Feds deemed the compound and the Branch Davidians therein, headed by David Koresh, an affront to their authority. After seven weeks, Attorney General Janet Reno concluded that negotiation with the besieged Christian fundamentalists was useless and ordered an assault. Seventy-six Branch Davidians were burned alive. Autopsies showed that five children were among those shot to death by federal agents. The outcome was widely endorsed by the national press and Attorney General Reno commended for her resolve.”

This sounds identical to the rants of Cockburn’s fellow moral relativist; Timothy McVeigh who used whatabouterish excuses to justify his actions, its like a rapist claiming he should go free because a different rape occurred in the 90s, its immoral and illogical. If Alexander the not so great was to have the shit beaten out of him, I doubt he would accept an excuse that the guy who beat him up should be let go because of a 90s beating; because only his pain matters to him. Cockburn’s whining about the 60s and 70s shows how he lives in the past and the comparison doesn’t work; if the US at that point was not a fascist state run by a scientologist crime family who slaughtered protesters en masse by the thousands.

“No one could doubt that determined separatist activity or armed challenges to the government of the United States are always met with immediate, overwhelming and lethal ferocity.”

See above, second of all this isn’t even true: separatists are involved in the Alaskan state government they haven’t been purged and sent off to gulags, neo-confederates can spew their poison as much as they want, the michigan militia can hold drills, the SVR’s following hasn’t been massacred by the thousands; Cockburn is a dullard and a moral cretin.

After a weak attempt to disguise his support for the regime, he states that “there is every reason to press Assad towards reform” thus he support a dictatorship modeled after nazism.

The Continuing Failure of Loonwatch

January 31, 2012

Loonwatch continues to use the comical hate site ‘Islamophobia watch’ as a source; its the far left equivalent of jihad watch, which either LW has no object to support for Islamism or they are too naive to check sources either way they are not even close to a legitimate source. The most recent article is a response to an expose; which starts off well I agree with their points about criticism of Islam even though they cite hateful anti-Semites as “critics of Israel” ie the bizarre Shahak. But here’s it goes wrong: “Yet meticulously documented statistics on the website Unknown News put the figures in proper context” Unknown news is a conspiracy hate site run by an old married couple; its not even remotely credible. Loonwatch’s next source? “Every life is sacred and precious, and reducing individuals to statistics is a grisly calculus. However, we must make the point that war consistently kills far more innocent civilians than terrorism. What justifies the myopic focus on the latter?” First of all its a wrong way to frame it, the taliban and baathist Iraq were in power for decades; by LW’s own logic their atrocities dwarf casualties committed by US forces. ” We advocate universal human rights, and refuse to give anyone a free pass.” Really? Then why present the taliban as victims? Why shill for the IRI? “critics” insist we haven’t condemned terrorism, and have even had the audacity to smear us a terrorist spin control network.” I was killing to give them the benefit of the doubt about that, until LW produced multiple articles exhibiting more outrage over a few taliban corpses being weewee’d on than the taliban leadership did. “The 9/11 terrorist attacks paved the way for the US to bomb, invade, and occupy one Muslim country after another, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.” So many lies lets count them off: 1. There was no invasion of Afghanistan, if LW cannot even get the basic facts its not a credible source. 2. Iraq was a Baathist state; thats about as silly as presenting the Korean war as an attack on Korean religions. 3. Again there was no invasion of Libya, the intervention was supported by the Libyan people and the US played a very minor role; those are the basic facts which LW is either ignorant or or lies about. 4. Countless Somalians died from an artificial famine due to Islamist control, kids stuff compared to the drone strikes or does LW think the US has invaded Somalia? 5. One word: darfur. 6. Pakistan has not been invaded or attacked or occupied, wikileaks shows that drones are operating in Pakistani territory with the expressed support of the government. “Syria and Iran may be next.” I don’t support war with Iran, but the fact that they are opposed to intervention in Syria reveals their depravity; to begin with Syria is a heavily anti-Muslim state that oppresses the Sunni majority and committed one of the largest massacres of Muslims in history at hama the lowest is 20,000 dead. Imagine if Israel was killing Arabs in number that are approaching six figures, but no their sympathies lie with the Baathist regime. “The Islamophobia that germinated in the aftermath of the attacks has rooted itself in the public imagination and continues to deepen and expand, despite the loons’ absurd claims it doesn’t exist.” It exists but its more of an online subculture, if its such a problem why are so many of the most prominent Islamophobes non-Americans like Wilders? Surely if the US was a frothing mass of anti-Muslim hatred we should have our Wilders, instead Gellar has to invite him over. The US is far from the most anti-Muslim, the real anti-Muslim states are Russia, China and France, the Tsarist and Soviet regime spent centuries slaughtering Muslims. Then they go on to reproduce paragraphs of danios’ anti-American rants which I have already covered. “Decades before the War on Terror, the late civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” How cute I’m guessing their other heroes include Jesus and Einstein. ‘The US dominates the world through military power” Waging war against a few tyrannies does not constitute ‘dominating the world’. ” maintaining over 700 bases in more than 130 countries” Which is an obsolete cold war tactic, not some sort of atrocity; those bases are there with expressed permission of the respective governments of those countries, you might as well bash the national guard for violating ‘states rights.’ The idea that bases constitute imperialism is absurd; I don’t recall the Romans conquering Dacia by installing and later removing bases. “and is still bombing and invading nations with impunity.” Such as what, Libya? Already covered this. “The US has been variously bombing and starving Iraqis for more than two decades” Again we can use their previous arguments to defend intervention in Iraq, the fable about sanctions ‘starving’ Iraq is one of the most transparent lies rooted in support for baathism. During sanctions the Baathist state constructed countless palaces, imported gold and marble and still had billions from gulf states, clearly the responsibility for any starved Iraqis lies with the Hussein regime. ‘How is it possible to fixate on acts of terrorism while simultaneously ignoring the colossal crimes the US has visited on the once prosperous nation of Iraq?” Here we have a question that presents a fascist regime regime as a paradise lost brought down by an American snake; how repulsive. “Iran hasn’t attacked another country in over 200 years.” Again another lie, Iran declared and waged a “holy war” on the Kurdish people; the declaration did not describe the targets as “rebels” either. “Even as the US threatens to launch a war against this relatively peaceful nation, many Americans continue to view their country as peace-loving and standing firmly on the moral high ground.” The idea that the US is on the verge of war with Iran is a complete lie; year after year IRI fans whine about imminent war with Iran, the president’s response to Iran has been restrained, ridiculously so. Apart from the blatant lies about US foreign policy we have a clerofascist state represented as a peaceful utopia under siege; after parroting lies LW has the nerve to complain about “propaganda.” “We condemn all acts of terrorism and the killing of innocent civilians, no matter who is responsible. Again, our question to critics: Do you? ” As we can see from the article crying on about taliban members being used as porto potties and support for Turkish militarism LW does not. “Muslims have not (yet) been subjected to pogroms or rounded up en mass and herded into internment camps, and the point is to make sure that doesn’t happen. We have learned the lessons of history.” What a crock, especially since LW has cited Shahak as self hating Jew beloved by neo-nazis as as source and posted anti-Semitic cartoons resembling nazi cartoons. LW whines at any comparison of Muslims to nazis (which is repulsive to the memory of the Muslims who fought in the Free French forces) but they end the article comparing Americans to nazis; which is too stupid for words. A constant anti-theme has been mocking Americans as being ignorant of geography, LW goes through this routine with an out of date poll. “What does it say about a people when they support bombing a country before even knowing where it is?” This is silly even at first place, does he expect his readership to believe that the vast majority of MENA people can find delaware, Quebec or Costa Rica on a map? Also danios doesn’t apply the same standards to said MENA people, a recent poll showed that a stunning majority of Arabs feel no sympathy for holocaust victims or Jewish victims of terrorist attacks.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.