[Mr. Thorne]

Actually, having read IBD (it's quite conservative), I would venture to say that the journalist in question is not asking out of HIS ignorance, but rather to quash the liberal notion that an Islamist is a Sikh is a Fundamentalist Christian.

As an example, let us leave out that question and answer from the article. We still have a nice dissertation on the ills of radical Islam, which any of us could discuss. We also, however, have an opening. An opening for a mouthpiece for CAIR, or any other Islamic organization, to come onto a news program and say, "sure, you say it's bad, but is it any worse than (insert preacher's name here) imposing his morality on us?"

Now, however, IBD's interviewer and Mr. Pipes have nipped it nicely in the bud, with but a single question and a single answer.

IMHO, of course.

[LiteKeeper]

read again later

[VOA]

I would venture to say that the journalist in question is not asking out of HIS ignorance, but rather
to quash the liberal notion that an Islamist is a Sikh is a Fundamentalist Christian.

I second your contention.
All one needs to do is listen to the moral-equivalency apologists who frequent
the public forum in places like California to know that a lot of the US public
still doesn't "get it" in regard to radical Islam.

[1bigdictator]

I can see your interpretation of this interview, however it would be refreshing if American journalists didn't presume they had to pander to P.C. apologist propaganda. If you listen to other conservative media outlets, i.e. Rush ect..., he doesn't even entertain these fools whose positions lack any logical or rational support. On the other hand, in light of your take, more liberal readers probably would pay more attention having their assuptions answered. BTW, good catch.