Bigoted Religious Extremists

On the subject of hate, extremism, terrorism and sedition, and treasonous behavior, I present to you 2/3rds of a nuts own admission of affiliation to the same!
.
Sorry you guys, and slightly OT, but it is worth seeing:
Oh, BTW, 2/3rds of a nut:
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/11/06/lol/#comment-108380
.
I really appreciate you handing me the ammo to point out just exactly how on - targaet I've been!
.
Thanks, 2/3rds...

I once was chastise by Friar Tuck for making this observation:
.
Religion is simply politics seasoned with the extra confidence that comes from thinking that the Creator of the Universe has your back.
.
The sad fact is that there are fewer effective ways of justifying what would otherwise be unambigously immoral behavior than by asserting that it's "God's will" In that regard there might be a correlation between religious extremism and violence. But its the desire for violence that comes first and to blame a particular Brand of faith for abberant behavior is to conflate effect and cause.

I think Joe, on topic this time, and pointing to the example above presented by one of our own commenters, that the common denominator is not religion, but a platform.
.
This may sound nitpicky, but it is not. Ideologies and religions both have a component of unquestioned faith. I am not taking aim at religion at all, but when either are taken to extremes, the end result is the same...

Thank you for the excellent article/opinion Joe. As a non-believer that views all of the fanatically devout with a wary eye, I see little difference in the bigotry regardless of faith. The vast majority of all faiths just want to practice their religion and to be left alone. The terrorists that use their faith as a justification for violence are the exception, not the rule. Hasan was a disgrace to his religion. Those that assassinate abortion providers are a disgrace to theirs. Those that advocate, justify or condone the violence are a disgrace. Period.

http://phd9.blogspot.com/2007/06/discussion-on-religion-arose-at.html

All religions have been used over time by extremists as an excuse for appalling behaviour. In addition to Christianity and Islam let us not forget the violence perpetrated by Hindus and Buddhists - in recent times in India and Sri Lanka where ethnic differences have relgious roots. In India it has been Hindus versus Muslims; in Sri Lanka we have Hindus versus Buddhists. People like Marty Peretz have ladled out a steady diet of hypocrisy and outside his magic circle I doubt he has much traction. Same for La Pasionara.

Sacredh has it right: "the majority of all faiths just want to practice their religion and be left alone".

Joe..are you writing this from a plane and don't have access to the news..other than MSNBC. You truly are nothing more than an extreme liberal mouthpiece.only worthy of appearances on MSNBC. Did you not hear.

He was yelling " Allah Akbar" while murdering everyone.

He was handing out copies of the Koran the morning of the butchering

He had conversations with a muslim store owner stating he couldn't shoot another muslim.

The FBI had him on a watch list after monitoring him on a muslim extremism web site making dangerous remarks.

You really need to read a chapter on objectivity if you want to be taken as a serious news person rather than the extreme liberal partisan hack that you have become,

"Do extremely religious people tend to be more psychologically damaged than less religious people?"

.
Only when they are egged on by liberals in general, and liberal journalists in specific.
.
I say that when you hear our own citizens chanting and blogging "Bush should die". "Bush is a blood thirsty tyrant". "America is an imperialist country". and on and on and on...
.
You can't have your cake and eat it too, Joe. You cannot demonize your country in one breath, and then not believe that someone like Hasan with a twisted and perhaps delusional mind not take it upon himself as an Islamic Fundamentalist to "kill the Great Satan". The same goes with your title to this specific blog. Perhaps when you do run into a true bigot, he or she will simply act on your accusation simply to prove the point "if they are going to call me one, then I'll show them".
.
Your monologue does not have anything to do with religion or God. Simply mad men who have made a choice to use it as a means for their own evil. I do not think Hasan was insane or psychotic. I find his actions to be fully premeditated. Choices that he has made. Choices that he will have to answer for, now and in the future.
.
So far as your question about violent insanity and whether it is more prevalent within religious folks. I have seen a higher incidence of Psychotics with religiosity as the basis for their psychosis. But, no more than I have also seen someone with a psychotic event who perceives and hallucinated about snakes crawling all over the place. Usually fixed delusions and hallucinations tend to be the deep rooted fears within the mind. I do not think you will find much scientific data on any one thing in specific.

JK:
" ..Do any readers have access to polling or academic studies about the incidence of violent insanity among the devout? "

Like in the case of the christian named Hitler?

"devout"? That is subject to interpretation.

However, we have strong hints: The events leading to the expression of violent insanity that was the invasion of Iraq.

Consider the sustained, targeted incitement and the various (push) polls carried out in USA before the invasion of Iraq.
Remember that the religious zealots pushed the idea of a "just war" to their devotees.
And we know many who prayed hard that we would be "victorious" in that adventurism.
And our devout ones at the WH printed Bible verses conspicuously on the covers of our slaughter, I mean war plans/reports

And as they torture, rape and murder in Iraq many christians carried small copies of bible verses with them. And they say a prayer. "The Lord is my Shepherd ..."

[Now as to what we would say if a Koran-carrying Muslim said a prayer, or praised the lord loudly before he shot missiles from a drone into a house full of kids ....
does it matter if he said a prayer or praised the lord prior to the violent incident?]

.
And exude a stench of extreme blind, zombie-grade devotion/fanaticism for apparently sane hard-working Americans (who question the expenditure of every dollar in their state and county budget) to meekly - and indeed in apparent stupor - ship billions of dollars of their hard-earned tax revenue to a foreign country oversees to maintain the foreigners (who denigrate us an don't even speak American English) in cozy circumstances while over 30 million of our own Americans wallow in starvation, destitution, disease and death?

--

ilikechips; " .. He was yelling " Allah Akbar" while murdering everyone. .."
And what do the coalition guys in Iraq yell in their chapels or as they go about "murdering everyone"?
"Praise the Lord"?

Can you translate that into Arabic?

Can you help us understand the nature of your stress by translating "Allah Akbar" into English?

Does it matter critically if one who commits a heinous violent act is a devout christian? Atheist?

Do any readers have access to polling or academic studies about the incidence of violent insanity among the devout?
.
There's not much academic science because, I think, both by training and disposition, psychologists are loath to try to study religion. Some clinicians make the case that there's nothing innately dysfunctional about what we might call religious fanaticism ("transpersonal experience") but that disorder ("Transperson Identity Disorder") comes with problems of integration - harmonizing that experience with more the more rational experiences and less religious people in life. Though, they seem keen not to apply value judgments to fanatical thinking mostly to avoid disaffecting patients:
.
On Religious Fanaticism

.
But when it comes to extremism and group behavior, especially group violence (including what we might mistakenly believe is based upon religious belief), this social science is always relevant and important:
.
The Authoritarians

...and as far as the neocons go, their extremism and racism is well established. Naturally they would project on others acting out in an extreme fashion, regardless of whether they actually knew anything about their motives. Fascinating as an act of subconscious self-identification though, don't you think?

We know one thing from experience: extremist clerics of the Christian faith must be watched.

Joe Klein:

Do any readers have access to polling or academic studies about the incidence of violent insanity among the devout?

This is from the American Journal of Insanity,
(link to pdf document) October, 1848:

Article I.
.
SELECTIONS AND CASES FROM LATE REPORTS OF LUNATIC ASYLUMS
.
Hanwell Lunatic Asylum
.
This Asylum, in the vicinity of London, is the largest in England. The whole number of patients at the close of the year 1847 was 941, viz: 411 men and 560 women. The admissions during the year were 100; recoveries 20 ; deaths 59.
.
The Report of the Chaplain and the Resolutions of the Committee of Visitors respecting schools, are, we think, worthy of attention and re-publication.
.
THE CHAPLAIN'S REPORT,
.
Presented to the Committee of Visitors, January 12th, 1848
.
GENTLEMEN, ----I have the satisfaction to be able to state that the public religious services of this Institution continue to be numerously attended by the patients, whose orderly and devout behavior increases rather than suffers diminution.

Perhaps I should try for something a little more contemporary, I suppose...

Sheperdwong,

Thanks for the articles! (I've only read the Religious Fanatacism one) but it's compelling!

As a Christian, I've seen that happen a couple of times, people who start out normal and then as the years go by end up considering only their perspective of God to be correct. You just start to wonder 'How did this happen?'

It really digs into the why... Which in a way, is comforting to know that it's a natural accuring phenomena.

Thanks again!

Hitler was not a Christan. If anything he was Pagan but he wasn't religious nor were the other famous mass murderers of the last century such as Mao or Stalin or Lenin or Pol Pot or the lessor thugs like Castro and Che. The only religion that advances murder is Islam and it clearly was a factor in Fort Hood. While being Christian or Jewish doesn't make one immune from sin neither religion if as openly and proudly violent as Islam is. Let us know the next time a priest or rabbi issues a fatwa Joe.

Joe, I appreciate your assignment of "la pasionara of the neocons" to Jennifer Rubin, but in my mind, the lady who deserves the title is Danielle Pletka. No one woman has managed to put so many of her fellow Americans in wooden boxes.

Joe Klein:

Do any readers have access to polling or academic studies about the incidence of violent insanity among the devout?

Not getting that much closer, but here's something (link):

On a July afternoon in 1984, Dan and Ron Lafferty, members of a tiny Mormon fundamentalist sect, appeared at the door of their sister-in-law's American Fork, Utah, duplex, forced their way in, beat her, and slit her throat with a 10-inch boning knife. Moments earlier, Dan, a chiropractor and father of five, had found his 15-month-old niece standing in her crib. ''I'm not sure what this is all about,'' he told her, ''but apparently it's God's will that you leave this world; perhaps we can talk about it later.'' Then he cut her throat.
.
The Lafferty murders are the centerpiece of Under the Banner of Heaven, Jon Krakauer's fascinating exploration of fundamentalist Mormonism, a harsh, decentralized faith that encourages men to take multiple wives and is practiced by more than 30,000 people in scattered pockets throughout the western U.S., Mexico, and Canada. Most fundamentalists don't kill women and babies any more than most Muslims fly planes into office towers. But, Krakauer argues, the Lafferty murders, as well as the widely publicized 2002 abduction and rape of Elizabeth Smart, are firmly rooted in radical Mormon history and theology.

Communists, Socialist and Fascists are all far left totalitarian religions. They are by definition Big Govt. Neocons are by definition far right and small govt
-
Dude, what are you smoking? Communism and Socialism are far left, but fascism is far right. And while you're right that all are big gov't, so are neocons. Don't believe me?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism
-
http://www.publiceye.org/conservative/neocons/neocon.html
-
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neoconservatism

The libertarian right died in the late 80s, when Reagan traded the libertarians for the theocrats in the republican coalition.
-
I'm sorry. Did reality just bite you on the a$$?

Thousands of people died on 9/11. Those that were in the towers and the pentagon, police, fireman etc. Many attacks besides these of course, here and around the world, but for now I'll just use these as an example. Who were these people that died and what religion(s) did they practice? What were their races? I think you could safely say just about all religions and all races, and of course the non religious. What religious ideology was behind these horrible tragedies? Can anyone venture a guess?

Go ahead liberals, continue to defend these monsters.

"Don't believe me?"

Absolutely not. You can't go quoting wikipedia as a reliable source. Fascism is without question a rellgion of the left. The Nazi's were a national socialist party who didn't want to own business but rather control business and all aspects of society. That is modern liberalism. .All totalitarian systems are by definition religions of the left. Conservaratives and neocons are about liberty and freedom from excessive govt here and abroad. . .

Anytime you see any restrictions suggested on free speech or any of our basic freedoms, i.e., gun rlghts, religion, etc. those restrictions come from the left. Only a lefty / liberal wold promote speech codes and hate crimes because only libs seek to control speech and thought. Fox makes your head explode because you can't stand free speech.

If any typical liberal wwre made king of the USA the 1st thing they would do is shut down talk radio and Fox. This is the natural fascist tendency embedded within the genes of liberals.

Totalitarian = left, Freedome from totalitarian = Right

You're point about some conservatives not being for small govt is well taken. GWB is the obvious case in point. But Bush was opposed by conservatives on all of his spending increases and new govt programs. GWBs own belief, not shared by any mainstream conservatrive, was to imbue current govt programs with conservative values. For example Bush wanted to reverse the comtemptable liberal practice of social promotion, a form of educational genocide, and replace it with performance requirements. He was supported in that effort by conservatives but not his efforts to increase funding.

Every single mainstream conservative labels his weakness on spending as his biggest failure.

"Reagan traded the libertarians for the theocrats in the republican coalition.
-
I'm sorry. Did reality just bite you on the a$$?"

Reagan's greatness was in never trading anyone. He was the 1st authentic modern conservative to take office and he managed a true revolution restoring American exceptionalism from the Carter debacle. Regan always understood he was a mere President living with a divided govt and not a king. He always had to create a consensus on the major issues and his effort of lower marginal rates from 70% to 28% ranks as one of greatest legislative acheivements of all time. He was not a theocrat unless you are referring to suppy-side economics but then as an economist and experienced businessman he knew more about economics than almost everyone else in Congress, and definitely everyone in the media.

The Reagan coalition is alive and well having been given a new lease on life by Obama. Independents are already revolting over healthcare, Cap and Tax, Card check, the deficit, unemployment and a foreign policy that's failed everywhere. It's hard to know which has been mangled worse, Palestine, Honduras, Iran, Russia or Afghanistan. Wait until he's groups see he can't go to Copenhagen. He promised the rest of the world and he's not going to deliver. He can't even show his face.

"What they are against is a large government being distracted from its fundamental and defining objective: enforcing Israeli policy."

This gets more pathetic every month. Israel is safe and secure behind defensible borders with a booming economy because they shifted right on their own. Ariel Sharon is the ultimate neocon. A fierce and brillliant warrior he gets no credit for the economic emergence that has made so much of Israel's military strength possible. GWBs brillliance was in staying out of the way and supporting Israel as we would any true democracy.

Don't blame the $3.6B in aid the USA provided each year. Jimmy Carter signed the treaty providiing for $3B per year to Israel and Egpyt. GWB did increase it by 20% but it is to buy American products so we get some benefit.

AIPAC and the jews don't contol US policy. Without question the strongest supporters of Israel are Christians. Liberals blaming AIPAC and the Jewish lobby are venting, not thinking. The left has been so inept regarding Palestine it's hard to believe.

Yasir Arafat walked away from a peace deal and started blowing up school buses filled with little girls. It was a preposterously stupid thing to do made even moreso by 9/11. Sane Americans will not accept or excuse terrorism under any conditions. There are no root causes worthy of any level of conversation let alone consideration.

There's no right-wing conspiracy or super jewish lobby. There's lefty ineptitude and massive contempt for the same. As long as Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran practice terrorism and threaten Israel the jews will have very wide and very deep support from the USA. I wish I could say conservatives and the jewish lobby are this smart to control public opinion. Alas, it's entirely the work of the left and their total mismanagement of the issue.

Oizydioiy : "enforcing Israeli policy."

There is going to be significant progress regarding Israel under Obama.

The left doesn't pay enough attention of economics. Netnayahu was Sharons Finance minister and the two enacted a series of tax cuts, regulatory and trade reforms ala Reagan and revitalized the Israeli economy. They had a nice a boomlet. Israel was also hit by the recession but is begining to emerge ins good shape.

Consider the numbers. GDP is near $200B and sustainable growth 6%. Defense spending as a percent of GDP had been consistently falling but increasing on inflation adjusted terms. It is somewhere near $15B s year. US aid is $3.8B largely on defense supplies from US suppliers.

Over the course of the next 5 years Israel will spend $80B of their own money and $18B in US aid on defense and probably still lower defense spending to 6% of GDP.

If you've noticed they won major wars in Southern Lebanon and Gaza while the West Bank has been calm and most likely, cooperative. BiBi recently removed > 100 roadblocks in the WB reducing manpower reqirements and expense, not insignificantly.

Thus Israel is almost certainly able to shift defense spending from the WB to Gaza and Southern Lebanon or just bank the savings.

One other point. One of the outcomes of a professional army at war is they constantly improve all aspects of their business. The tools, techniques, training, etc. I believe in Iraq we are on our 4th generation of body armour in 7 years. Drones are larger with double the missle capacity while all optical and targeting electronic are 3 generations advanced.

Israel solidly defeated Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon but lost nearly 50 soldiers and civilians. 3 years later in Gaza, thanks to a lot of additional training and support from the USA. Israel managed to a kill ratio of 150-1 losing 12 men, 4 to friendly fire. It was a total humiliation for Hamas.

Now add all that up, $80B for defense PLUS $18M American. Much better equipment simly the result of the powerful US military-industrial complex. Relative peace with the West Bank and a Hamas and Hezbollah licking their wounds looking at some very daunting math should they choose to attack.Israel again.

Will Fatah follow Israel the next time?. In Gaza Israel focused on the Hamas military wing and minimized the ground assault. Hamas and Fatah are in the middle of a fairly bloody civil war and the US with Arab assistance is working to create a more professional security force in the West Bank. In orher words strengthen Fatah relative to Hama. What happens if Hamas attacks Israel again, with longer range missles and does more damage? Obviously Israel will seek to eliminate Hamas completely. This time they might 'allow' Fatah in after to enforce the piece and finish the job. Fatah gets to eliminate their biggest threat and gets control of all of Palesitne. What's not to like about that deal.

Obama won't promote any of this but they won't be asking him to either.

Off-course it's another Neocon ploy.

Seriously, Joe, who can speak on behalf of the muslim religious orthodoxy - secular atheists like you or "moderates" like Yusuf Al-Qaradawi ?

Yet another pile of PC BS

Martin Peretz an extremist? He is one of the most urbane and sophisitcated journalistsin the field.Oh, I forget: he's JEWISH and what's more he is a Jew that does want to go back to Auchwitz . He's a Jew thqt insists on surviving.
That's what makes a "Jewish Extremist" unlike the left wing Jews who not only insist on immolating themselves, but are actually t begging for the fule to start the conflaguration.