The New York Times: fit to print? (ANN COULTER TO APPEAR ON CROSSFIRE TONIGHT!!)

CNN.COM ^ | August 20, 2002 | cnn

[jjm2111]

Mr. Crazy Ivan, I can well and fully appreciate the dangerousness of radical Islam. I'm going to be putting my life on the line (potentially) to try to do something about it. I'm a reservist who is going active. I went through the Trade Center every day to and from work. My business also often took me there on a regular basis. Care to make any more uniformed guesses as to how much I understand the threat of radical Islam?

[MadIvan]

Mr. Crazy Ivan, I can well and fully appreciate the dangerousness of radical Islam. I'm going to be putting my life on the line (potentially) to try to do something about it. I'm a reservist who is going active. I went through the Trade Center every day to and from work. My business also often took me there on a regular basis. Care to make any more uniformed guesses as to how much I understand the threat of radical Islam?

It was not I who said that it didn't "faze" me anymore.

Also: given your position, you being more outraged by Ann Coulter's statements than by what the radical Islamists have to say is truly ridiculous.

Ivan

[jjm2111]

"It was not I who said that it didn't "faze" me anymore." Hearing the same garbage from the same people (i.e. wild-eyed clerics) over and over tends to dull the senses.

"given your position, you being more outraged by Ann Coulter's statements than by what the radical Islamists have to say is truly ridiculous." I never said I more outraged.. Don't put words in my mouth.

No wonder you like Coulter so much. You're always on the attack. I give you an extremely good reason why I might have a pretty good understanding of the threat that Islamofacism presents and then instead of saying "Gee, I guess you're right on that one." you attack me again. Priceless. My amusement only grows.

[MadIvan]

." Hearing the same garbage from the same people (i.e. wild-eyed clerics) over and over tends to dull the senses.

I cannot speak about your instincts for self preservation or war, but I would find that kind of constant provocation impossible to ignore or dismiss. Judging by the reaction on FR as a whole, I'd say I'm not alone.

I never said I more outraged.. Don't put words in my mouth.

You said you found Ann Coulter's statements "outrageous", and you also stated you weren't "fazed" by the Muslims anymore. Given the horrendousness of Muslim statements, one wonders why you found her "outrageous" in the first place.

No wonder you like Coulter so much. You're always on the attack. I give you an extremely good reason why I might have a pretty good understanding of the threat that Islamofacism presents and then instead of saying "Gee, I guess you're right on that one." you attack me again. Priceless. My amusement only grows.

If you don't want to be attacked, then don't make puerile statements about a subject of which you admittedly know little. You haven't even bothered to read her books, and thus appreciate why so many appreciate her.

I also doubt sincerely you are amused, rather, trying to claim "amusement" as some sort of way to get me to allow to have the last word. Unless, of course, you are some sort of masochist.

Ivan

[jjm2111]

I'm not going to even continue. You insulted me personally, claiming that I had no idea of the seriousness of the threat the USA faces. When I inform you that I not only have a good reason to understand the nature of this threat, but that I am PERSONALLY going to do something about it, the result of which could end in my untimely death, you still insult me and then rationalize your insults.

This long ceased to be a calm, rational discussion about the merits of Ann's writing. You are a hate-filled individual. I'm not going to stoop to your level and insult you personally, however much as I may want to. Go away.

[PeaceBeWithYou]

"Piffle." "We should invade their countries...and convert them to Christianity." Tell me that's not outrageous. The U.S. did not forcibly convert Japanese to Christianity after WWII. There's no precedent for it.

Context. Ever heard of it?
Date of statement: Sept.12, 2001.
Preceding statements:We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now.

We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.

Proceeding statements: We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

Circumstances: The day after we suffered a devastating terror attack, amoung the murdered was a close personal friend of Ann Coulter, Barbara Olsen.

Given the when, why , and qualifications of the cherrypicked statement you site as bombastic, I think Ann showed considerable restraint.

In context of the whole article that statement is even sarcastic, in that Islam, where it has the resources to do so, has invaded non-Islamic nations and killed/converted the populace to Islam. Just look at Indonesia, Afganistan, Pakistan, Sudan, India, the Phillipines, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Bosnia, etc. for the evidences of this.

This "Islam is a Religion of Peace" is a sham, to get a point of presence in the target country(s). The goal of the Islamic religion is total conversion of the world to Islam, and killing one or billions of infidels is indeed sanctioned by all sects, not just the radical ones. If you don't believe it just follow the money.

And BTW: Mac did inject Christianity into Japan after WWII-he called in thousands of missionaries and distributed thousands of Bibles - and we did the same in Korea, both with some success.

More importantly we gave them choices and the freedom to exercise those choices. Monotheistic countries tend to be unbalanced and repressive. Germany already had Christianity, though always supressed by the State. There restoration of the people's freedoms was all that was needed. But we went farther and helped them rebuild as we did with Japan and Korea.

[jjm2111]

I don't dispute with what you said. See my post 61.

[MadIvan]

I'm not going to even continue. You insulted me personally, claiming that I had no idea of the seriousness of the threat the USA faces. When I inform you that I not only have a good reason to understand the nature of this threat, but that I am PERSONALLY going to do something about it, the result of which could end in my untimely death, you still insult me and then rationalize your insults.

I was merely pointing out the logical inconsistencies in your arguments - that you feel the need to get worked up and attack Ann as being "outrageous" which seems silly in light of the threats you've received from the Islamic militants. But not only do you find Ann "outrageous", you aren't "fazed" by the Islamic militants any longer.

This is logically inconsistent. I am pointing out these inconsistencies to you and you are reacting emotionally, if not hysterically.

This long ceased to be a calm, rational discussion about the merits of Ann's writing.

I am perfectly calm. You, apparently, are not.

You are a hate-filled individual. I'm not going to stoop to your level and insult you personally, however much as I may want to. Go away.

I take it that you are less than "amused" any longer. No sir, I am not going to go away merely because you find my arguments inconvenient.

Ivan

[Jim Scott]

Your direct responses and counterpoints to 'jjm2111' have been top notch. You saved many of us much typing as your posts laid out the points that we wanted to make.

I believe that Ann would be proud.

I find it interesting how the some 'conservatives' can tolerate literally hundreds of liberal voices in newspapers, magazine and TV every day yet simply can't stop criticizing Ann Coulter, one of the few effective conservative voices out there, turning the tables on the liberals and skewing them with the same lind of attack they bring to conservatives, 365 days a year.

I suspect that her very effectiveness is part of the problem for these people. "She's too strident, too blunt, too outrageous, too tall, too thin, too this, too that... It's transparent which side they are on here, despite all the protests about "really liking Ann" (as long as she doesn't say or write anything bad about liberals). Rather transparent.

The fact that conservatives applaud, support and admire Ann Coulter is somehow a complete mystery and a source of pretended 'amusment' for these folks. But they always deny being liberals. Yes, yes, of course. Libertarian is it? Yes, I see.

This thread is typical of this worn-out ploy but your nailing of the no-longer-amused 'jjm2111' was worth reading. Good job.

[PeaceBeWithYou]

How dare you disagree with jjm2111! There must be a reason for this...

You must be a mad hate-filled indiviual, or an angry drooling militia type tempted to go to work with a gun.

Geeesh, right out of the lefts playbook. Ann is correct yet again, and jjm(2111) prolly is a leftist professor at Columbia Universty. and may have even made it into the book.

Anyone have a copy of Slander handy? Mine is loaned out.

[TLBSHOW]

You finished yet with slamming Ann? Grow guts and call liberals what they are and where they should go.

[MadIvan]

My sincere thanks for your kind words.

Best Regards, Ivan

[TLBSHOW]

jjm2111 is just a worthless liberal ratty rat!

[jjm2111]

Hmm. I agree w/ you and yet you make fun of me. I'll never understand some people.

I'm a registered Republican BTW.

[jjm2111]

Yeah, I noticed my response was deleted. Oh well. It was said it in anger anyway. Your link was funny. Good thing I'm twenty years younger than that guy.

I have to give Mad Ivan credit for one thing. He's an effective debater. I still think he insulted me personally, and should apologize, but he can debate well. Some of the tactics he used were impressive. He got me angry, so I give him round one.

I'm gonna see If I can borrow Slander from the library and read it. If I can poke any holes in it, I'll be back.

[jjm2111]

And TLBSHOW is a loser nyah nynyah nynyah nya. Please.

[jjm2111]

If not, I'll come back and publicly say "Ann is Wonderful!"

[MadIvan]

I still think he insulted me personally, and should apologize, but he can debate well.

Pointing out inconsistencies and lacking logic is not a personal insult. You will not last very long on this board if you take it as such. I would not suggest that you wait in hope for an apology.

I'm gonna see If I can borrow Slander from the library and read it. If I can poke any holes in it, I'll be back.

It is aggressively footnoted and well researched. I hope that it will make you "see the light".

Ivan

[borkrules]

...I'll come back and publicaly say "Ann is Wonderful"

Uh-huh.

I won't be holding my breath.