info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Bill Maher Becomes Christianity’s Unlikely Defender
33 views
Skip to first unread message
Ubiquitous
Mar 27, 2017, 1:29:01 PM3/27/17
to
And this is a freedom that entertainers have that, unfortunately,
our politicians have to tip-toe around.
You’re not going to catch me cheering on Bill Maher, as a general
rule.
The man is no friend to Christians, having made our beliefs a target
of scorn and ridicule for years.
That being said, he’s not exclusive with his disdain for religion,
and he has not held his tongue in the usual, liberal way, as far as
protecting Islam from criticism.
Again, he’s no champion for Christ, but in a recent episode of “Real
Time,” Maher came out hard against apologists for Islam, in forcing
them to look at the differences between Christians in the world and
followers of Islam.
On Friday’s broadcast, the recent terror attack in London, where
four people were killed was the hot topic.
One guest, Louise Mensch, a former Conservative member of the U.K.
Parliament, and current Heat Street columnist jumped to the defense
of the Islamic community in London.
The guy was British-born. His name was Adrian before his
converted. And partisans of Russia were out in the streets
saying it was an illegal immigrant who did it, trying to
turn the London people against our Muslim friends and
neighbors. And you’re not going to do that.
Maher responded:
"Let’s not pretend this has nothing to do with Islam, the
religion,” he said.
“It doesn’t,” Mensch responded. “It has nothing to do with
Islam the same way Timothy McVeigh had nothing to do with
Roman Catholicism.”
Ugh.
Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
“Every time some bomb goes off, before it goes off, somebody
yells ‘Allahu Akbar!’” said Maher. “I never hear anybody go
‘Merry Christmas! This one’s for the flying nun!’”
Heh. Good one.
Of course, those who feel the need to cover for Islam won’t let
facts slow them down.
“When Christians do anything like this, do we ever say,
‘Christian terrorism’?” asked Yale professor and author
Timothy Snyder.
“No. But is Christian terrorism as big a problem?” asked
Maher in response.
“If you lived in Oklahoma City in the 90s,” injected MSNBC
host Chris Hayes. “We’re talking about London here.”
Seriously? I think we have enough problems in the now that gazing
backwards is probably counterproductive, at this point.
You’ve got to have more than that.
“That’s a false equivalency,” Maher shot back. “Are there
Christian terrorist armies like ISIS?”
“The IRA that blew up London for 15 years!” Hayes exclaimed.
“Yes. But that’s the past! We’re living in the now. There
was also the Inquisition,” retorted Maher.
Nice way to get in front of that, because you knew it was coming,
eventually.
“Are there Christian terrorist armies now. .. like ISIS, Al
Qaeda, al-Shaabab, Boko Haram? Are there armies like that
in the world that aren’t Muslim?” he asked. “Let’s not fuck
around anymore! Can we get real?”
“I literally don’t agree with you,” Mensch said. “Russia
is sending Chechen militants into ISIS trying to leverage
this against a billion people.”
He made sense.
He made a lot of sense, but the contortionist views of the left
won’t be easily bent.
It makes me wonder if they actually hear themselves.
When they’re alone at night with their thoughts, do they ever go
back and question their rationale, in the face of reality? Are these
real beliefs they have, or are they so bound to their ideology that
the narrative is all that matters?
I’m cautious about handing out kudos to somebody who has been so
vile and insulting to the very core of who I am, but I’ll just hang
one on the end of a very long pole and extend it to Maher, here. He
was right on the money.
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
our politicians have to tip-toe around.
You’re not going to catch me cheering on Bill Maher, as a general
rule.
The man is no friend to Christians, having made our beliefs a target
of scorn and ridicule for years.
That being said, he’s not exclusive with his disdain for religion,
and he has not held his tongue in the usual, liberal way, as far as
protecting Islam from criticism.
Again, he’s no champion for Christ, but in a recent episode of “Real
Time,” Maher came out hard against apologists for Islam, in forcing
them to look at the differences between Christians in the world and
followers of Islam.
On Friday’s broadcast, the recent terror attack in London, where
four people were killed was the hot topic.
One guest, Louise Mensch, a former Conservative member of the U.K.
Parliament, and current Heat Street columnist jumped to the defense
of the Islamic community in London.
The guy was British-born. His name was Adrian before his
converted. And partisans of Russia were out in the streets
saying it was an illegal immigrant who did it, trying to
turn the London people against our Muslim friends and
neighbors. And you’re not going to do that.
Maher responded:
"Let’s not pretend this has nothing to do with Islam, the
religion,” he said.
“It doesn’t,” Mensch responded. “It has nothing to do with
Islam the same way Timothy McVeigh had nothing to do with
Roman Catholicism.”
Ugh.
Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
“Every time some bomb goes off, before it goes off, somebody
yells ‘Allahu Akbar!’” said Maher. “I never hear anybody go
‘Merry Christmas! This one’s for the flying nun!’”
Heh. Good one.
Of course, those who feel the need to cover for Islam won’t let
facts slow them down.
“When Christians do anything like this, do we ever say,
‘Christian terrorism’?” asked Yale professor and author
Timothy Snyder.
“No. But is Christian terrorism as big a problem?” asked
Maher in response.
“If you lived in Oklahoma City in the 90s,” injected MSNBC
host Chris Hayes. “We’re talking about London here.”
Seriously? I think we have enough problems in the now that gazing
backwards is probably counterproductive, at this point.
You’ve got to have more than that.
“That’s a false equivalency,” Maher shot back. “Are there
Christian terrorist armies like ISIS?”
“The IRA that blew up London for 15 years!” Hayes exclaimed.
“Yes. But that’s the past! We’re living in the now. There
was also the Inquisition,” retorted Maher.
Nice way to get in front of that, because you knew it was coming,
eventually.
“Are there Christian terrorist armies now. .. like ISIS, Al
Qaeda, al-Shaabab, Boko Haram? Are there armies like that
in the world that aren’t Muslim?” he asked. “Let’s not fuck
around anymore! Can we get real?”
“I literally don’t agree with you,” Mensch said. “Russia
is sending Chechen militants into ISIS trying to leverage
this against a billion people.”
He made sense.
He made a lot of sense, but the contortionist views of the left
won’t be easily bent.
It makes me wonder if they actually hear themselves.
When they’re alone at night with their thoughts, do they ever go
back and question their rationale, in the face of reality? Are these
real beliefs they have, or are they so bound to their ideology that
the narrative is all that matters?
I’m cautious about handing out kudos to somebody who has been so
vile and insulting to the very core of who I am, but I’ll just hang
one on the end of a very long pole and extend it to Maher, here. He
was right on the money.
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
thinbl...@gmail.com
Mar 27, 2017, 1:41:33 PM3/27/17
to
On Monday, March 27, 2017 at 1:29:01 PM UTC-4, Ubiquitous wrote:
> And this is a freedom that entertainers have that, unfortunately,
> our politicians have to tip-toe around.
>
> You’re not going to catch me cheering on Bill Maher, as a general
> rule.
>
> The man is no friend to Christians, having made our beliefs a target
> of scorn and ridicule for years.
>
> That being said, he’s not exclusive with his disdain for religion,
> and he has not held his tongue in the usual, liberal way, as far as
> protecting Islam from criticism.
>
> Again, he’s no champion for Christ, but in a recent episode of “Real
> Time,” Maher came out hard against apologists for Islam, in forcing
> them to look at the differences between Christians in the world and
> followers of Islam.
> And this is a freedom that entertainers have that, unfortunately,
> our politicians have to tip-toe around.
>
> You’re not going to catch me cheering on Bill Maher, as a general
> rule.
>
> The man is no friend to Christians, having made our beliefs a target
> of scorn and ridicule for years.
>
> That being said, he’s not exclusive with his disdain for religion,
> and he has not held his tongue in the usual, liberal way, as far as
> protecting Islam from criticism.
>
> Again, he’s no champion for Christ, but in a recent episode of “Real
> Time,” Maher came out hard against apologists for Islam, in forcing
> them to look at the differences between Christians in the world and
> followers of Islam.
> “Every time some bomb goes off, before it goes off, somebody
> yells ‘Allahu Akbar!’” said Maher. “I never hear anybody go
> ‘Merry Christmas! This one’s for the flying nun!’”
>
> Heh. Good one.
"Gawd Blesh Uh-mer-ca!"
> yells ‘Allahu Akbar!’” said Maher. “I never hear anybody go
> ‘Merry Christmas! This one’s for the flying nun!’”
>
> Heh. Good one.
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
FPP
Mar 27, 2017, 8:36:34 PM3/27/17
to
On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
Eric Robert Rudolph.
> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
--
White House: "Don't call it Trumpcare." 3-8-17
"How bad does something have to be, that Donald Trump doesn't want to
put his name on it?" -SNL 3-11-17
Rhino
Mar 28, 2017, 8:57:49 PM3/28/17
to
On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
> On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
>
>> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
>> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
>
> Eric Robert Rudolph.
>
>
Rudolph was a single individual operating alone (as far as I've ever
> On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
>
>> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
>> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
>
> Eric Robert Rudolph.
>
>
heard). That's a *lot* different than tens of thousands of people
affiliating themselves with ISIS or Al Qaeda or Boko Haram and doing
violence.
--
Rhino
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
David Johnston
Mar 28, 2017, 10:18:53 PM3/28/17
to
On 3/28/2017 6:57 PM, Rhino wrote:
> On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
>> On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
>>
>>> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
>>> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>>> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
>>
>> Eric Robert Rudolph.
>>
>>
> Rudolph was a single individual operating alone (as far as I've ever
> heard).
But that's typical of Muslim terrorists in the west as well. Rudolph
> On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
>> On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
>>
>>> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
>>> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>>> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
>>
>> Eric Robert Rudolph.
>>
>>
> Rudolph was a single individual operating alone (as far as I've ever
> heard).
was a member of a group that still extols him as a hero.
FPP
Mar 29, 2017, 4:05:00 AM3/29/17
to
On 2017-03-29 00:57:46 +0000, Rhino <no_offlin...@example.com> said:
> On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
>> On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
>>
>>> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
>>> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>>> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
>>
>> Eric Robert Rudolph.
>>
>>
> Rudolph was a single individual operating alone (as far as I've ever
> heard). That's a *lot* different than tens of thousands of people
> affiliating themselves with ISIS or Al Qaeda or Boko Haram and doing
> violence.
Anti abortion advocates act alone, the same as the ISIS sympathizers
> On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
>> On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
>>
>>> Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference
>>> point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>>> Christianity – that, and the Crusades.
>>
>> Eric Robert Rudolph.
>>
>>
> Rudolph was a single individual operating alone (as far as I've ever
> heard). That's a *lot* different than tens of thousands of people
> affiliating themselves with ISIS or Al Qaeda or Boko Haram and doing
> violence.
here have acted alone.
The ISIS sympathizers who have acted in this country are lone wolves...
they're not directed by ISIS any more than Rudolph was directed by
Operation Rescue.
McVeigh was involved with militias... organized militias.
> McVeigh and Nichols begin experimenting with explosives on James
> Nichols’s farm, meeting with members of the nascent Michigan Militia
> (see April 1994), and proposing to launch violent attacks on judges,
> lawyers, and police officers.
--
"We have to accept that the winner of this election was a Washington
outsider who no one thought had a shot at running this country:
Vladimir Putin - Stephen Colbert
Adam H. Kerman
Mar 29, 2017, 12:36:18 PM3/29/17
to
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
Ubi hid the citation in his headers yet again. Fuck you, Ubi.
For the 4,231st time, this is what a citation looks like:
http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2017/03/26/bill-maher-becomes-christianitys-unlikely-defender/
"Bill Maher Becomes Christianity's Unlikely Defender"
Posted at 12:30 pm on March 26, 2017 by Susan Wright
>Ugh. . . .
I saw this exchange.
On the Saint Patrick's Day episode, Maher had, how shall we put this,
nothing positive to say about terrorism, er, "The Troubles", in Northern
Ireland and London and elsewhere, and very much said it was religious
based. Maher absolutely doesn't let religious-based terrorism, Christian
against Christian, off the hook. However, on this episode, he said the
The Troubles were in the past whereas on that episode, he was recalling
events in recent enough memory that most people alive today would
remember them.
Mensch made a false equivalence to McVeigh because McVeigh was taking
revenge for Waco and other receent disastrous federal raids and never
said he had a religious motive. Maher called her on that, as he should.
The trouble was that Maher always talks over people. If Mensch was going
to talk herself into a corner, let her. In the later exchange about
Russians sending Chechen militants into ISIS wasn't an exchange at all.
Maher again talked over her. If she was going to make an interesting
point there, he prevented her from doing so.
I'm troubled by Ms. Wright's belief that religion needs defending.
Religion can take care of itself. If Maher is irreligious (which he is),
there's no reason to suggest he shouldn't have an audience and it's
outrageous to attempt to damn all liberals just because politicians
like Mensch put themselves in a position to say absurd things in
defense of "our Muslim friends".
I don't believe for a moment that the terrorist who had been radicalized
and also converted to Islam (no clue as to which came first) was a
false convert to Islam who created a fake terrorist incident to turn
public opinion against Islam. I doubt the guy was all that strategic a
thinker. She had no basis for making that statement.
Our Muslim friends? I've heard a handful of Muslims condemn religious-based
terrorism and the phony prophets who would radicalize the simple-minded
looking for an outlet for their anger, most of whom never would have
committed murder except for encountering these villains. They get away
with radicalizing others under the cover of religious doctrine because
the societies they live in aren't free societies and don't allow
anyone to question religious belief. Hell, in some countries, they execute
those who question religious orthodoxy.
We always have religious types in the West who appreciate religious
freedom for themselves but question whether anyone else in those societies
are free to practice or ignore the religious doctrine they believe in.
Maher gets a lot of things wrong. He's still an entertainer first. I
wanted to hear what the professor from Yale had to say, who did everything
he could to try to tell the audience what he believed in unequivocable
terms, while Maher interrupted him with lame comedy. At one point,
because Maher got offended at the same time as he was trying to get
the professor to make a historical comment to explain his position,
he said "Tell them and not me". Maher interrupted again to make sure
the television audience understood that Maher already knew about the
historic point. He forced the professor to turn toward a different camera.
The director didn't switch to that camera or maybe it took some time
to get the camera into that position as Maher had fucked up the interview.
It pretty much prevented the professor from making his point.
Eh. Maher's personal beliefs can be a little contradictory and when he's
arguing a point, he can be a touch hypocritical as to whether a historical
events that took place over very long periods of time and still within
the last 30 years were recent enough to be applicable to this week's
discussion. Maher's no more fair in debate than anyone else.
He sucks as an interviewer because he often lacks the ability to
suppress his own ego.
We don't need Maher to change his political beliefs to better defend
Christianity or anything else. We just need Maher to suck less at
interviewing and letting his guests get their points out. We really
really need Maher to suppress his own ego, because the interviewer
isn't supposed to be the smartest guy in the room, just the guy
who encourages the subject of the interview to make his points
concisely and coherently.
The world's greatest interviewer is Brian Lamb.
As far as criticism of Maher, we don't need polarization crap painting
all liberals alike, same as we don't need liberals insisting that all
conservatives have the same beliefs. There can certainly be Christians
with deeply-held religious beliefs who manage to avoid taking offense
when enountering others who don't share their religious beliefs and
even recognize that other people have freedom of conscience to decide
for themselves what to believe in.
Ubi hid the citation in his headers yet again. Fuck you, Ubi.
For the 4,231st time, this is what a citation looks like:
http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2017/03/26/bill-maher-becomes-christianitys-unlikely-defender/
"Bill Maher Becomes Christianity's Unlikely Defender"
Posted at 12:30 pm on March 26, 2017 by Susan Wright
I saw this exchange.
On the Saint Patrick's Day episode, Maher had, how shall we put this,
nothing positive to say about terrorism, er, "The Troubles", in Northern
Ireland and London and elsewhere, and very much said it was religious
based. Maher absolutely doesn't let religious-based terrorism, Christian
against Christian, off the hook. However, on this episode, he said the
The Troubles were in the past whereas on that episode, he was recalling
events in recent enough memory that most people alive today would
remember them.
Mensch made a false equivalence to McVeigh because McVeigh was taking
revenge for Waco and other receent disastrous federal raids and never
said he had a religious motive. Maher called her on that, as he should.
The trouble was that Maher always talks over people. If Mensch was going
to talk herself into a corner, let her. In the later exchange about
Russians sending Chechen militants into ISIS wasn't an exchange at all.
Maher again talked over her. If she was going to make an interesting
point there, he prevented her from doing so.
I'm troubled by Ms. Wright's belief that religion needs defending.
Religion can take care of itself. If Maher is irreligious (which he is),
there's no reason to suggest he shouldn't have an audience and it's
outrageous to attempt to damn all liberals just because politicians
like Mensch put themselves in a position to say absurd things in
defense of "our Muslim friends".
I don't believe for a moment that the terrorist who had been radicalized
and also converted to Islam (no clue as to which came first) was a
false convert to Islam who created a fake terrorist incident to turn
public opinion against Islam. I doubt the guy was all that strategic a
thinker. She had no basis for making that statement.
Our Muslim friends? I've heard a handful of Muslims condemn religious-based
terrorism and the phony prophets who would radicalize the simple-minded
looking for an outlet for their anger, most of whom never would have
committed murder except for encountering these villains. They get away
with radicalizing others under the cover of religious doctrine because
the societies they live in aren't free societies and don't allow
anyone to question religious belief. Hell, in some countries, they execute
those who question religious orthodoxy.
We always have religious types in the West who appreciate religious
freedom for themselves but question whether anyone else in those societies
are free to practice or ignore the religious doctrine they believe in.
Maher gets a lot of things wrong. He's still an entertainer first. I
wanted to hear what the professor from Yale had to say, who did everything
he could to try to tell the audience what he believed in unequivocable
terms, while Maher interrupted him with lame comedy. At one point,
because Maher got offended at the same time as he was trying to get
the professor to make a historical comment to explain his position,
he said "Tell them and not me". Maher interrupted again to make sure
the television audience understood that Maher already knew about the
historic point. He forced the professor to turn toward a different camera.
The director didn't switch to that camera or maybe it took some time
to get the camera into that position as Maher had fucked up the interview.
It pretty much prevented the professor from making his point.
Eh. Maher's personal beliefs can be a little contradictory and when he's
arguing a point, he can be a touch hypocritical as to whether a historical
events that took place over very long periods of time and still within
the last 30 years were recent enough to be applicable to this week's
discussion. Maher's no more fair in debate than anyone else.
He sucks as an interviewer because he often lacks the ability to
suppress his own ego.
We don't need Maher to change his political beliefs to better defend
Christianity or anything else. We just need Maher to suck less at
interviewing and letting his guests get their points out. We really
really need Maher to suppress his own ego, because the interviewer
isn't supposed to be the smartest guy in the room, just the guy
who encourages the subject of the interview to make his points
concisely and coherently.
The world's greatest interviewer is Brian Lamb.
As far as criticism of Maher, we don't need polarization crap painting
all liberals alike, same as we don't need liberals insisting that all
conservatives have the same beliefs. There can certainly be Christians
with deeply-held religious beliefs who manage to avoid taking offense
when enountering others who don't share their religious beliefs and
even recognize that other people have freedom of conscience to decide
for themselves what to believe in.
Adam H. Kerman
Mar 29, 2017, 12:50:34 PM3/29/17
to
Rhino <no_offlin...@example.com> wrote:
>On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
>>On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
Actual citation in Ubi's quote:
>On 2017-03-27 8:36 PM, FPP wrote:
>>On 2017-03-26 19:19:11 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> said:
http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2017/03/26/bill-maher-becomes-christianitys-unlikely-defender/
"Bill Maher Becomes Christianity's Unlikely Defender"
Posted at 12:30 pm on March 26, 2017 by Susan Wright
"Bill Maher Becomes Christianity's Unlikely Defender"
Posted at 12:30 pm on March 26, 2017 by Susan Wright
>>>Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He's the go-to reference
>>>point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>>>Christianity -- that, and the Crusades.
>>>point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of
>>Eric Robert Rudolph.
>Rudolph was a single individual operating alone (as far as I've ever
>heard). That's a *lot* different than tens of thousands of people
>affiliating themselves with ISIS or Al Qaeda or Boko Haram and doing
>violence.
also confessed to bombing a lesbian bar and two abortion clinics.
His bombs were vicious, filled with nails to maximize harm from
schrapnel. There can be no question that any number of Rudolph's
murders and bombings had religious motivation.
So yeah: Rudolph is no different than those radicalized by the groups
you mentioned.
Bill Steele
Apr 5, 2017, 1:52:27 PM4/5/17
to
On 3/29/17 12:47 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> There can be no question that any number of Rudolph's
> murders and bombings had religious motivation.
How long before we have people posting here complaining about the lack
> There can be no question that any number of Rudolph's
> murders and bombings had religious motivation.
of Christian villains on TV shows.
Will it be OK if the Christians are black?
moviePig
Apr 5, 2017, 3:19:43 PM4/5/17
to
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
0 new messages