Newsprint is such a crappy medium, I have learned to do without. (Books, on the other hand, are harder to replace.) What I do miss a bit is flipping through a newspaper, judging the stories both by their headlines and lengths. But this is only possible after the front page since almost everything there is "continued". Overall, I think a good monitor is much better for me.

Now, I ask you - how was my argument flawed?

It is not necessary that the world began by the act of a being you could identify as a creator. It is not obvious that we can understand the world at such a fundamental level.

Hydro power is about 6% of US generation. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/renewable/water.html) It cannot go up much, but renewable generation as a whole must go way up. Losing some hydro is not significant. Let's keep the fish.

The Islamic world is embroiled in violence with a vast array of non-Muslim groups in a host of socio-political situations. You simply want to ignore that inconvenient truth and search for excuses in the tired blame-the-West political rhetoric.

But they are mostly not over here; we are very much over there. (Do I have to say I mean that in a military sense?) Do you think that might have something to do with it?

wrote:

Isn't the term"the American political class", a stereotype, and simplistic.

Please feel to make that argument, but it does not change what I wrote.

wrote:

My point was that I simply don't see how rejecting terror activity, no matter what the supposed basis, is somehow proof of a generalized, acted-upon hatred of Muslims in America. That seems to be Greenwald's allegation.

I think you missed the point of Glenn's post. It is quite short, and you could easily read it again. In the second paragraph, there are four links to articles by members of the RW press concerning the treatment of Christian minorities. This is followed by:

Episodes like these -- where a declared Tyranny like China violently acts against citizens with whom we empathize -- are ones about which, in general, the American political class loves to sermonize.

He is writing about "the American political class", and its concerns. He is also writing about the US government and who it declares as enemy combatants. Also:

For all the Serious analysis about the War on Terror, so much of it has been driven by nothing more complex or noble than sheer hostility towards Muslims. Muslims generally -- not just Al Qaeda -- replaced Communists as our New Enemy and became the new enabling force for our endless state of War and never-ending expansions of executive power.

Again, this is about "the American political class." He does not write about "generalized, acted-upon hatred of Muslims in America". The difference is subtle, perhaps, but it is there, and careful study reveals it.

wrote:

Are we supposed to support the Uighers ... because "they are training for homeland independence"?

There is a difference between supporting them in general and releasing a dozen locked up at Gitmo. Apparently you think they should stay there. Why?

It's wrong, but we do it, have have done it, and we likely will do it again.

Very likely we will.

wrote:

...you are a member of a race and distinguish others as members of a seperate race.

True for everyone, and thus, everyone is a potential racist. Everyone can be greedy, too. But I think some people are willing to leave some of their greed unsatisfied in order to remain racist.

Its sound as if you are defending both racism and bigotry. Are you?

No. Are you saying that anyone who holds a belief is ignorant? You are trying to understand a complicated aspect of human behavior with one word. What is the word that describes what you are doing?

Is the person who studies the psychology of serial murderers defending serial murder?

Racism and bigotry is a result of IGNORANCE!

Ignorance is a factor in a lot of undesirable aspects of human behavior, but there have been plenty of racists who are not ignorant people. It is just not that simple.

wrote:

.....likewise I don't think you can easily hold on to racism once the advantage of it's rejection is made clear.

I disagree. I see racism as growing out of emotional responses that are quite fundamental to all people, but enhanced or reduced by many environmental factors. Greed is but one of those factors.

Based on what, precisely? In other words, arresting black people in black.....

Please reread Glenn's post and my response to your post. You should see that what you have written in the post quoted above does not respond in a sensible way to what I wrote.

wrote:

Except that the Uighurs themselves don't view it as a religious issue

They view it as cultural and linguistic suppression much the way the Tibetans do. That the Uighurs are in fact Islamic is somewhat besides the point.

I think the point was that the US was able to keep them locked up for so long because they are Muslim. This has nothing directly to do with their view of their suppression by the Chinese government.

Probability.