Shannon Nutt

No, Greenwald was 100 percent correct. Just because there MAY not be a scandal doesn't mean you don't investigate/ask questions.

RagingBull80

I agree Greenwald was right about investigating it but the Republicans are doing themselves a disservice by making this a huge-giant-nothing-else-matters issue. Were their mistakes made? Absolutely. Is there a scandal? Not necessarily. They are blowing this out of proportion a bit.

And the point that Bill made about the video sparking a riot was right too. When I first heard that the ambassador had been killed and there had been a riot and the media attributed it to that movie I didn't think twice about it. It seemed perfectly reasonable to me. We hear all the time about people being killed or people over there making a big hullabaloo over an article or drawing of the prophet Muhammad. Nothing out of the ordinary.

The point Greenwald made about the differences in Religion were BS in my opinion. Yeah, Americans don't like it when you talk bad about Jesus but the two different cultures certainly handle the situation differently and that was the ultimate point.

Sure, it was a mistake or whatever and needs to be investigated but the Republicans have been after this since day one and there leaving no stone un-turned, not for the truth but to make this administration look bad in some way.

dhmac

Glenn Greenwald is someone who has the viewpoint that Islam is not inherently violence and is no different than any other religion. He attributes any violence done by Islamists entirely to political reasons only and not to religious reasons at all.

Ridiculous! All religions are NOT the same and some are worse than others.

Bill Maher basically dismissed his claims and didn't bother arguing with him because it would do absolutely nothing to change his mind. (Overwhelming evidence to the contrary doesn't affect it.)

MikahC

Offering up non-proof as proof and throwing up your hands in exasperation and disgust when the other side doesn't say, "Oh, I get it now," isn't discussion. So yeah, it's best Bill let it go. He doesn't listen to the evidence to the contrary either.

And I'll say it again... people often confuse (juxtapose) the discussion of Islam and Christianity with the discussion of first world Western nations with 3rd world nations.

What are American Muslims like compared to American Christians? If you're going to compare, do that comparison. Then again, that one's a lot more boring and doesn't tap into the visceral evocations quite as well.

I doubt Greenwald believes Islam and Christianity are the same. I don't think we should attribute thoughts to people they haven't expressed. Rather, I think he believes, as I do, that the xenophobes amongst us are willing to accentuate and vilify everything negative about Islam while ignoring everything negative about Christianity, to support their already held views. Confirmation bias, if you will.

Honestly, it's somewhat frustrating to me. I used to hear all these discussions from liberal friends about George Bush where every single thing he did and said was wrong. The man never had a single good intention. I now hear it from different people about Obama. It's like when a guy breaks up with a girl he was completely in love with a month ago, but now every single thing about "that whore" is horrible. I just can't take it seriously. Why can't we just stick to the reality of situations (as best we understand them) without trying to load the deck by distorting the picture in order to influence opinion? Because frankly, once someone proves to me they're willing to obscure and ignore facts in order to sell their point, I can't trust that person's proclamations anymore.

It's one reason why I'm OK with the Benghazi investigations, even if they don't turn up anything, and even if they're a political witch hunt. It's a subtle social reminder that truth matters.

Oh, and finally... if there were no Islam in the Middle East and only Christianity, I'd lay even odds that the psychos who take advantage of the disillusioned, desperate, and poor would corrupt Christianity to their cause, just as Christianity has historically been used to justify horrible things. You use what's available.

Josh-da-man

This is my belief as well. The insanity in the Middle East is not caused by Islam, it is ingrained in the culture and finds expression through Islam.

People get what they want to out of religion. If you come from a culture that believes honor killings are justified, then you're going to find some justification for them in your religion, whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or any other supernatural belief system.

slop101

I'm a Christian who comes form the Middle East (and there are plenty of Christians in the middle east), and trust me, the onus of violence is completely on Muslims. If you could even come up with one example of modern day violence stemming from Christianity, I can give you hundreds coming from Islam. The two do not even come close to comparing. It's like equating the killing power of a bear with a rabbit. Killing and/or terrorizing non-believer is doctrine to many of them.

MikahC

No, I don't "trust" you. Your perceptions will only be weighted as one person's viewpoint, to be combined with many others to form a more complete picture. I'd point out to you how to have a discussion based in broad (as opposed to anecdotal) observation rather than emotional rhetoric, but I'm convinced all that'd get through to you is more "bunch of ignorant crap". But thank goodness you exhibit a sterling Christian example of good hearted, open minded, tolerance of divergent opinions. Unlike those Muslims.

Gunde

No, but the problem is that they are screaming "SCANDAL!" already.

slop101

Actually, you're the closed minded one here. Now, give me the stats for modern-day violence and human rights abuse born out of Christianity vs those born out of Isalm. If you bother to look into the actual numbers and statistics, you'll see that there's absolutely nothing "anecdotal" about it, as much as your unicorn and lollipop worldview wishes it were.

dhmac

Here is the transcript of some of what Glenn Greenwald claimed...

Glenn Greenwald: "No, but when the government goes on the air and says things that prove to be untrue, that is something that needs to be investigated. And it was a place where President Obama and NATO had gone, and invaded and bombed and changed the regime."

Breaking this down...

GREENWALD CLAIM #1: "when the government goes on the air and says things that prove to be untrue, that is something that needs to be investigated."

FALSE. If everytime a government official said something that later turned out to be untrue, there had to then be a major investigation like this one, everything would grind to a halt because that is a daily occurrence in government. A call for a correction, yes. (which has already occurred in this case). A major congressional investigation. NO!


GREENWALD CLAIM #2: "And it was a place where President Obama and NATO had gone, and invaded and bombed and changed the regime."

FALSE. Obama (really the U.S.) and NATO did NOT invade Libya! They did bomb and provide air support for the rebels who OVERTHREW Qaddafi. Is Glenn Greenwald on the side of Qaddafi instead of the rebels in their civil war?!?? Seriously, does this guy really think a dictatorship is better than a democracy there (which is working far better there than other places in the region)?


And, BTW, Libya is one of the few countries in the region where the majority of the people support the U.S. and have a positive view of America. In fact, after the attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, not only was there a massive demonstration condemning the attack and supporting the U.S. (rare in a predominately Muslim country), but some Libyans even assaulted militant compounds in retribution for the attack (also rare in a predominately Muslim country) - read about that retribution attack here .

Glenn Greenwald is factually wrong and mostly full of shit in everything he said on Bill Maher's show.

orangecrush

How can Greenwald's statement that an investigation should happen be factually false? It is an opinion.

CRM114

Maher screwed up that Mark Bittman interview. Yo, Bill. No one gives a rats ass what you think about food. Let's hear what the New York Times food columnist and author you booked thinks about food.

Gunde

Yep. I was yelling "Shut up Bill" at my TV myself

dhmac

His opinion is wrong. And is it factually false that "when the government goes on the air and says things that prove to be untrue, that is something that needs to be investigated" because, if that was true, then there would be new investigations started every day with the latest thing said by the government that was untrue.

arminius

I agree, the people there are really fucked up and it would not matter what religion they were. They would still treat women worse than animals, hate gay people and want to kill anyone that doesn't think like them even if they converted to Buddhism. They are created from misery, wallow in it their entire lives and want to drag the rest of the world down to their level.

Please sign me up for your newsletter.

dhmac

The culture is based on the Islamic religion! They are not mutually exclusive things. Without the religion, virtually none of those practices would be going on still in the 21st century.

There's a reason it's called "fundamentalism" - because those practices are based on the fundamentals of the religion.

georgec

The problems with Islamic nations are rooted more in sociopolitical and economic issues than they are simply with Islam itself. That's not to say that religion hasn't influenced life in those countries, but at the same time they've essentially lacked the ability to educate themselves and improve their quality of life for a long time.

Shady12

Bingo.

Neil M.

They should investigate murders every time there is a lie told. I don't really understand your opposition to this issue. No one is saying that the Republicans are good guys in the matter, it's just that Obama's team fucked up. They brought this circus upon themselves.

MikahC

5/17 show...

Michael Moore had a little snipe at Bill about his attitude towards Islam. It was nice to see Bill explain his position a little better, though I'd still say it needs refinement.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/othervi...s-pariahs.html

Jack Straw

I have to give Bill credit for having the balls to repeatedly point out the royal elephant in the room about Harry's paternity. Guess duh Nile is not just in Egypt.

creekdipper

Hadn't watched in awhile since it was "same as it ever was every week" but wanted to see the interview w/ the food guy after reading some comments.

What appalled me were the jokes Maher made using the Cleveland kidnapping case as a springboard. Yeah, he's a comedian...so what? He's also a human being, and using the situation as joke fodder pretty well sums up his character, especially since he routinely takes his political opponents to task for their views on women.

The OK tornadoes offer some really good opportunities for levity, too.

dhmac

That article is a completely fallacious Straw Man Argument. The gist of that article seems to be the idea that instead of looking at the reality that fundamentally violent beliefs lead directly to violent behavior, let's pretend that the religion is completely innocuous and all the claims against it are really all just racism against Arab people. (The fact that Chechnyans are Causasian and, by that mere fact, invalidate this Straw Man Argument... just ignore that.)

This is the view of someone who hasn't the slightest idea of what is in religious doctrine or the history of how religion (particularly the more dogmatic and intolerant ones) had been bad for the the progress of civilization. History is marked by this and the violence due to Islam now is closely related to events like the witch-burning by Christianity back in medieval ages, antisemitism throughout history, and the anti-scientific views of fundamentalists today. The religious beliefs are at the heart of this behavior and denying this clear fact is simply not understanding the real problem at all.

MikahC

First, I appreciate you respectfully providing your point of view. I have very little tolerance for those who think they can insult their way to being right.

There are things in the article I felt deserved counterpoint, but it's difficult for me to conclude this well-educated woman who IS a Muslim has no clue. Should our comprehensive view of the religion not include the fact that there are people like her who have absolutely no space in their lives for Jihad? Does she represent the vast majority (at least in America). Or is she just one encoded text message away from taking out her place of employment?

There are definitely dangerous people in the world. There are definitely dangerous Muslims in the world. But those statements don't seem to be enough. There's appears to be some additional statement required. I honestly don't know what that statement is. Islam is evil? I don't believe that, but I do try to listen to people who may. It's just that it'd seem to follow to me if Islam is evil, Muslims are evil. And I can't reconcile that with the Muslims I know. Crazies like the Boston Bomber? Sure. But no recognized American Islamic faction is claiming him.

Maybe if I can understand your views on Islam in America (where I have the most exposure). Do you fear the average American Muslim? If so, why?

Also one other thing I saw mentioned... That "fundamentalists" are responsible for barbarity and terrorism and that is proof that it is inherent to the religion, which is why they're called "fundamentalists" (adhering to the fundamentals of the religion). I'll point out that terminology is very nebulous depending on what you're reading. I've also seen the same type of people referred to as "radicalized" Muslims (as it relates to terrorism).

creekdipper

Michael Moore: Republicans hate America.



Does Maher ever do any other accent other than "southern" when he wants to illustrate stupidity? And why do his guests who keep talking about sticking up for the "middle class" and the "working poor" not complain when Maher keeps bringing up "trailer parks" as an insult? Do they not think that many people who live in trailer parks belong to the same economic class toward which they claim to be so affectionate?

And could someone tell Michael Moore that wearing a ball cap doesn't make you 'working class'? The guy looks as though he hasn't done any manual labor in his life.

Why does S.E. Cupp get interrupted numerous times by Maher, two other guests, and the audience when she's trying to make a point, but the liberal guests don't. Why can't Maher get over his obsession with Sarah Palin, who was old news four years ago?

Maher made some good points about gun ownership for home protection, while Moore's solution was to 'get a dog'. And Cupp shut up Moore...and the idiot audience...by saying that it is a proven fact that mass shootings have gone down over the past 30 years. Whether she's right or not...and she seemed pretty confident of her facts...Moore could only scoff, pull his idiot cap down, and shake his head. He never offered any statistics of his own to refute her claims, and she made him look like an uniformed fool.

And he doesn't even live in a trailer park or have a southern accent.