While the threat may not be as dire as the nervous Nelly's on the right pretend, they are absolutely right about what the likes of Osama bin Laden aspire to achieve

And I aspire to spend my retirement on the Moon, but barring a lot of things coming together in short order, it ain't happening.

Ditto with Bin Laden. The 9/11 attacks were over a decade in the planning and execution. Regardless of what he 'aspires to achieve', he and his network are ultimately as human as the rest of us (and therefore just as prone to error and failure). How about we treat them as such?

Mr. Greenwald. However, this phenomenon is not new. Back in the 80's a third rate movie called Red Dawn (and hundreds of post apocalyptic books like the Traveler series) actually had any number of fools believing that the Soviet Union would conquer the United States. After the fall of the USSR, the next big bogy man was Japan (see Back to the Future II).

Now the big bad threat is Islam Radicals. Are these people nuts? The forces of Jihad and Hamas can't even take out Israel, never mind the United States. Dumb, but it keeps the rubes voting for the Right and against their own economic interest.

I just assumed GB was telling the truth. I guess I shouldn't be surprised though. A guy whose best answer to the dangers of religious fundamentalism is to denounce a whole religion should probably warrant a little scrutiny.

As for the young republicans who turned their protest into an opportuntiy to stomp some ragheads' flags, what a bunch of thugs. They're exactly the same guys who'd be bombing us if they were Muslim. Mirror images.

You confirm your narrow view with: its nowhere near the threat to American society the current Administration poses . . . Tell it to Salman Rushdie.

My concern is what my country is turning into under the current Administration. The fact you decline to acknowledge its lawless behavior or the small Mr. Rushdie is still alive after all these years (as is Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali), doesn't especially prove your point does it?

By all means, go and tell the many inmates held at Camp X-Ray how much better the United States is in comparison to, say, Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan or even Iran. I'm sure they'll get a laugh out of it.

I don't want to downplay the problems in Europe re: assimilating Muslims into liberal democracies, although I don't believe that liberal democracy is existentially challenged there either. Despite these problems I do not believe a liberal democracy should EVER capitulate to intolerance or curailing of civil rights out of deference to any sect, creed, religion, etc.

But the fact is, Islamic extremists couldn't take over us or Europe. If they COULD, I'd agree with Simon, frankly. But the simple fact that the folks who would have some sort of caliphate are incapable of making that happen is the most important fact of all. Conflating what Islamic extremists DESIRE and what they're actually capable of DOING has been a standard fallacy of all of the war backers, and very few have challenged them on this. It's as though their sheer hatred and ruthlessness can build bombs, procure nucs, etc. It cannot.

The cultural clashes in Europe cannot be addressed with wars - especially when those wars only increase existing divides. Islamic extremists who turn to violence must be treated as international criminals. There really are no alternatives that make sense, as the mess in Iraq demonstrates.

Tied for first place in the history of world terrorism are the United States and Soviet armament industries of the cold war. A worldwide weapons auction and buffet for decades.

Second place isn't even in shouting distance.

... Salman Rushdie has said many times that the Bush administration is doing more than anything else to feed both militant Islam specifically and general anti-American sentiment around the world.

So, you know, since people like you don't actually have Muslim wingnuts chasing you around on a daily basis trying to kill you, that kind of puts you in an awkward position, doesn't it? It kind of makes you sound like a complete jackass.

Instead of defending your country and your civilization you all are cowering in the corner flinching at shadows. You're a disgrace.

Can you answer the question as to how "creeping Islam" is somehow going to take over our political, governmental and financial institutions, take charge of our schools and workplaces and homes, force the women into burkas, force the men into facial hair, put us all under shari'a law, and have us all saying Allahu Akbar instead of the Pledge of Allegiance?

So far, there is NOTHING that suggests that the dreaded Islamists/Islamofascists or whatever boogeyman-du-jour term you all are calling them these days can do anything other than carry out terrorist attacks.

Frankly, the lack of any practical evidence -- and no, sorry, quotes from Christopher Hitchens, Latin debate terms and the media's failure to publish cartoons do not qualify as evidence -- is very instructive, and makes it quite evident that anti-Islamic hysteria is being whipped up for reasons that are, well, beyond reason.

-Aruru

P.S. Not interested in a login name, but thanks for caring.

We've been through this before. Why do you still side with the Muslim extremists in their corrupt interpretation of what it means to be Muslim? The Muslim extremists are a tiny but vocal and active minority within the huge Muslim population of the world. They are dangerous and should be opposed, but the best way to do that is by working with the rational, peace-loving majority of Muslims around the world. When you claim that Islam is inherently all the things the extremsits say it is, you're playing right into their hands. Why would you continue to do that?

Many American Muslims want to see their religion become more tolerant. Why would you work against them by claiming the extremist are correct and that their religion doesn't actually allow that? You seem strangely eager to agree with the extremists and their dangerous interpretation.

Religions are whatever their practitioners say they are. No religion is inherently anything whatsoever. Look at Christianity for chrissake. A religion supposedly based on loving your enemy and turning the other cheek--and it was practiced that way for the first couple hundred years--is now used by Bush and many Americans Xians to justify going to war against another religion. Jesus must be rolling in His grave. But there it is--Xianity is whatever it's adherents say it is.

For some reason you've decided to agree with the freaks of Islam and claim it is supposed to be interpreted the way they want. Since there are so many Muslims in the world, and they're not going away, the best thing we westerners can do is encourage the more tolerant interpretation. Every time you come here and claim Islam is a violent, intolerant religion, you play right into the extremists hands. Knock it off. Or are you thinking we could kill them all off?