watching CNN footage from Sudan, showing rabid fanatics demonstrating in the streets, calling for the death of that poor girl who named the teddy bear Mohamed. this is sick. but i probably just took it out of context.

I just reread the thread and hit upon curmudgeon99's point: "there is a commonality of humanity and love at the source of all religion".
Please: get real! Or better yet: Read what anthropologists and comparative religion scholars can tell you about that claim. It's wishful thinking but otherwise a false statement. If there's one commonality in religions, then it is their arbitrariness but to claim that the thousands of current or previous religions have a common core in something as murky as 'love' or 'humanity' is simply unfounded nonsense. It's a testament to the pervasiveness of our pro-religion propaganda that holds religions exempt from criticism where other social institutions would have long been criminalized, dissolved or ridiculed. Remember the child-rapist priest epidemic? (Our media call it 'child abuse', but rape is the proper term). Went on for decades without prosecution while at the same time some regular, nice American parents were thrown in jail for taking innocent nude pictures of their toddlers.
Brainwashing works. and it works especially well if claims are endlessly repeated.
Free yourself. It's possible.

i am sick of this context bullshit. when the bible or koran, or any other religious book calls for violence of any sort, this is fundamentally wrong. if you cannot understand this, i suggest you learn the concept of humanity. where i come from, it has nothing to do with killing each other.

Generalizations are in order to the degree by which they describe societal reality. Sudanese Muslims streamed out of mosques to call for the execution of the Teddy bear offender, and there was not a single Zoroastrian or Buddhist or atheist among the thousands, not one: nothing in their beliefs or disbeliefs would have elicited such a reaction.
Dialogue between individuals is wonderful and ultimately the best way to bring people and nations together.
But my point is that what you call "their humanity" is a CONSTRUCT greatly influenced by a person's religion. The aspirations ("hopes, dreams, feelings") of a devout Muslim are different of those of a devout socialist or a devout Nazi or a detached atheist. These are meaningful differences, and you ignore them at your peril.
I have had nice personal encounters with families and individuals of various faiths and political convictions on three continents. But some of them are my ideological enemies: some vote for mass murderer Bush/Cheney and send money to Pat Robertson, another supported the Greek military chunta, I've been to the home of a nice Hindu family who I later learned supports the Indian equivalent of the Nazi Party, my brother in law is a war profiteer and market fundamentalist. Yes, they are all nice people in some way but they may also be - because of their ideological and or religious convictions - my ideological enemies. De facto.
Take SHARIA LAW: Anyone who supports sharia law is my political enemy, regardless of the level of personal hospitality they might afford me when we meet privately. Anyone. Sharia law is an inhumane piece of shit derived from dubious religious mythology. You might as well reintroduce Christianity's infamous 1486 witch-hunt manual "Malleus Maleficarum" I'm sorry, but reality is not a love fest in Hippie Town, and it serves no useful purpose to pretend we're all one big happy family.

Quark, thanks for the logic.

Thanks again for your input, dcbeltway.

Interesting how bigots keep going back to 'glittering generalizations' when referring to those different from themselves. Patricia Hagens comments are very germane. They reflect what usually occurs when an individual meets 'others' in their own context. No matter how pre-disposed to dislike, most people are usually pleasantly surprised when they actually engage in dialogue. They experience the the hopes, dreams, feelings, hospitality - the humanity- in the 'others' and find that there is almost no difference from their own humanity.

I reject your insistence on tolerance for the beliefs of others. This is nonsense! I have no reason to be tolerant of false beliefs, hateful myths, and garbage ideologies. They are false, cause great harm that directly results from their absurd claims, and rarely show just an inch of tolerance towards others. Nobody has any rational obligation to be tolerant of nonsense. There are only utilitarian or social arguments for not raising a stink. And yes, this is not singling out Muslims, it applies to all religious mythologies.

Your claim that "people will use anything to justify their actions" willfully ignores what motivates their actions. In many cases, the MOTIVATION comes DIRECTLY and mainly from an ideological conviction, often one hammered into people's brains through early childhood indoctrination. Depending on that ideology/mythology those people do pose a threat to the peace of their fellow humans that can range from negligible to acute.
Okay, let's roll the inevitable Hitler back out of the closet, oldie but goody: Too bad nobody read and took seriously "Mein Kampf", first published in 1923...

You are telling me nothing new about Islam not being monolithic but that does not change the basic facts about Islam being a monotheistic religion which decrees that every single word in the Kuran is Allah's, that the Kuran contains all knowledge humankind will ever need and has authoritative answers to all human problems. It really is as ridiculous as it sounds (and the similarities to other fundamentalism are obvious).

As for context: I suggest you read Ibn Warraq's piece "Out Of Context," Or, How To Argue With A Muslim. He cites a marvellous example, see below.
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2007/09/03/out-of-context-or-how-to-argue-with-a-muslim/?url=http%3...

"For instance, after September 11, 2001, many Muslims and apologists of Islam glibly came out with the following Koranic quote to show that Islam and the Koran disapproved of violence and killing: Sura V.32 : "Whoever killed a human being shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind".

Unfortunately, these wonderful sounding words are being quoted out of context. Here is the entire quote: V.32 :

"That was why We laid it down for the Israelites that whoever killed a human being , except as a punishment for murder or other villainy in the land , shall be looked upon as though he had killed all mankind; and that whoever saved a human life shall be regarded as though he had saved all mankind.
"Our apostles brought them veritable proofs: yet it was not long before many of them committed great evils in the land.
"Those that make war against God and His apostle and spread disorder shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country."

The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. Behave or else is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated and banished!

Behind the textual context argument is thus the legitimate suspicion that by quoting only a short passage from the Koran I have somehow distorted its real meaning. I have, so the accusation goes, lifted the offending quote from the chapter in which it was embedded, and hence, somehow altered its true sense. What does "context" mean here? Do I have to quote the sentence before the offending passage, and the sentence after? Perhaps two sentences before and after? The whole chapter? Ultimately, of course, the entire Koran is the context."

I posted this to another thread so I am going to post it again this time in response to Quark. The singleing out of Muslims on CD this week is really getting hateful and ridiculous. I'm getting sick of the ignorance and yes it is malicious. Reading any holy book out of context you can find plenty of passages to advocate for peace and plenty to advocate for violence. Particularily translations of the Quran into English are imperfect as the Quran is meant to be read in Arabic where it can best be understood. Islam is not a monolith unlike say Catholicism which follows strict guidleines set forth by the Pope. In Islam there is no religious hierarchy like in Catholicism. There are different branches in Islam just like in Christianity and there are some more progressive and others more conservative. There are many pushing for reformation and reinterpretation in the Islamic world. Islam is a younger relgiion compared to Christianity and Judaism which has been around longer so there has been more time to come to the process of reformation. As greater gains are seen in education in the Islamic world I believe we will see greater reforms in Islam also.

Here's an answer to your post Quark originally written by Edward Flaherty. By the way Islmophobia is also hate and I strongly suggest you cut out the hate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many people have been quoting the Quran out of context in an effort to show that Islam promotes violence. A recent op-ed piece by Cal Thomas is a high profile example.

This is pure nonsense. Thomas and others doing this are taking selected passages and reading them completely out of context to support whatever argument they wish to make. I can do the same thing with the Bible.

Here are some choice passages from the KJV Bible which when read in isolation makes the Bible appear to be a primer for evil:

1) In Leviticus 25:44-46, the Lord tells the Israelites it's OK to own slaves, provided they are strangers or heathens.

2) In Samuel 15:2-3, the Lord orders Saul to kill all the Amalekite men, women and infants.

3) In Exodus 15:3, the Bible tells us the Lord is a man of war.

4) In Numbers 31, the Lord tells Moses to kill all the Midianites, sparing only the virgins.

5) In Deuteronomy 13:6-16, the Lord instructs Israel to kill anyone who worships a different god or who worships the Lord differently.

6) In Mark 7:9, Jesus is critical of the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as prescribed by Old Testament law.

7) In Luke 19:22-27, Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him.

Context is important, of course, and many of these seeming cruelties disappear when read as such. However, this would not stop a Christian terrorist from interpreting the Bible in a manner necessary to concoct a religious justification for unspeakable horrors, as Pope Urban II did, for example, when he preached the First Crusade in 1095 or as many American preachers did when they used Leviticus to defend slavery.

Political and religious extremists have abused Islamic, Jewish, or Christian scriptures continuously throughout history. Cal Thomas, a man who claims to be Christian, would do well to learn something of his own faith s scriptures and history before accusing Islam s Quran of promoting violence.

– Edward Flaherty On-line since 1993 E-mail: Web site: http://members.home.net/flaherty15/index.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
People who are anti-religion are often as hateful and intolerant of the beliefs of others as some of those who believe in religion Quark. They claim a moral superiority and claim they are more enlightened. This in itself is intolerance for the beliefs of others. So yes it does all come down to the actions of people. People will use anything to justify their actions whether its religion or the absense of religion.

Different political ideologies have different consequences. -- a rather uncontroversial statement.
Different religious ideologies have different consequences -- oops, my bad, everything is of equal worth.
Really??

Also, it's easy to get riled up over "excesses" (and the media sure helps) such as executions for apostacy or riots over perceived (falsely, or correctly) insults as in the Muhammed teddy bear case. But please: look at how religious ideologies oppress, kill and maim when they are in peace, meaning in the majority and in possession of power. Look at El Salvador (which drags women injured in back alley abortions to prison for 20+ years, look at Islamic states like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or.

It is naive to assume that all religions carry equal potential for destruction. Monotheistic creeds with their absolutist claims (we have the truth, all others are deceived or satanic) are right at the top (but 'nature religions' in South Africa still burn 'witches' on a regular basis). Islam's scriptures offer plenty of justification for aggression and inhumane treatment of others, and only little that a more humanistic and tolerant Islamic reformation could tag on to. This is not malicious claim, it's a fact, and it's easy to see: just compare a random page of the Kuran with a random page of Buddhist, Pagan, or Unitarian Universalist scriptures. Don't try comparing with bible texts, as these 'holy' texts are replete with mayhem, violence, and ancient idiocy, admittedly, although is has to be said that Christianity went through reformations which allowed the resulting splinters to ignore or reinterpret texts at their whim.
Apologists for religions are fond of shifting the burden of guilt to "the people", saying basically that humans can do bad things. Sure can, but some religions lend themselves much more easily than others, and nothing fuels violence as much as an indoctrinated brain.

This is interesting and from Voice of America a media outlet:

Is Islam Misunderstood in America?
By Mohamed Elshinnawi
Washington, DC
24 May 2006

A new survey of U.S. public attitudes toward Muslim-Americans and Islam finds that a majority of Americans -- 55 percent -- regard Muslim-Americans favorably, but that smaller numbers - only 41 percent -- have favorable impressions of Islam as a religion. The study by the Washington, D.C.-based Pew Research Center indicates that many Americans perceive a link between Islam and violence, with more than one in three saying Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence among its believers. Experts on Islamic-American relations believe such negative views stem from American ignorance of Islamic culture.

Muslims and Islamic culture have long been an integral part of American society. But today, almost years after the 9/11 attacks by radical Islamists and the start of America's war on terror, many Americans associate Islam with violence and extremism.

We asked a random sample of people in downtown Washington, DC, what immediately comes to mind when they hear the word "Islam". "Unfortunately, the first thought that I have is something maybe a little charged with aggression and negativity," said one woman. A man remarked, "The fact that I work in Washington, DC, makes me especially fearful of Islamic terrorism, especially in the time after September 11." Another woman shared her thoughts: "I know it is a religion founded by Muhammad, and that he was a General, a warrior." Another man talked about his fears: "It brings a little bit of fear to me after being here on September 11th and watching the planes go in."

Gregory Smith
The Washington, DC-based Pew Research Center did a more scientific survey. Gregory Smith, who co-authored the study say, "Only about four in 10 say they have favorable views of Islam, and there is also a minority of the public - but a substantial minority, about one third in our survey last summer - who say that they are concerned that Islam encourages violence among its believers."

Nihad Awad

American Muslim leaders blame the US news media for generating what Nihad Awad, Executive Director of the Council for American Islamic Relations calls "Islamophobia".

"The kind of coverage that the American audience has been receiving about Islam and Muslims leads one to just one conclusion, that Islam is bad and Muslims are violent," he said. "The media has failed to capture the reality of the Muslim world and only focused on the actions of the few."

One of the problems with the media's portrayal of Islam, experts say, is that violent acts committed by Islamic terrorists aligned with al-Qaida make the news far more often than the peaceful aspects of Islamic culture.

Dr. Yvonne Hadded
Dr. Yvonne Haddad is Professor of Islamic History at the Center for Muslim -Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington, DC. "It is very difficult for Americans to distinguish between al-Qaida and not al-Qaida," she said. "It is very difficult for them to distinguish between the few people who are terrorists and the rest of Muslims who are just people trying to make their living, trying to raise their kids and have a peaceful life."

According to the Pew Research Center study, public perceptions depend heavily on a few key factors. Gregory Smith explained. "One of the most powerful factors shaping views of Islam is education," he said. "Those Americans who have more education tend to be more favorable toward Muslim Americans and Islam than Americans with less education. Interestingly, age was also a good predictor of views of Muslim Americans and Islam, with young people tend to be more favorable than were older people."

Betsy McCormick
Betsy McCormick, a working professional, says she gained a more positive view of Islam by traveling and having direct contact with Islamic culture in the Middle East: "I guess there are a lot of distorted views, because I have traveled to Egypt and I sort of witnessed the practice of the religion and I found it very enriching and very interesting," she said.

Some Americans, including Patricia Hagen, believe a dialogue among the people of the three monotheistic faiths - Christianity, Islam and Judaism - is the best approach to overcome misunderstandings. "Better understanding - and I think it is got to come from within all of the three major religions, to work together," she said. "Coming from a Christian background, Abraham is the founder of Judaism [and] Christianity as well as Islam, so we came from the same foundation, now we have to build upon that foundation."

But building that trust will be a challenge. The Pew study suggests many Americans believe the terrorist attacks of recent years are just the first salvoes of an intensifying conflict between Islam and the West.

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-05/2006-05-24-voa33.cfm

Mea Culpa

I agree with dcbeltway - all religions have their zealots and Sudan is not one of Islam's poster countries, just as we are not a Christian poster country and Israel is Not a Jewish poster country.

We have gotten off the topic of the press inciting tensions and I am as much to blame as anyone - sorry.

Acts such as Sudan are carried out by human beings not a religion. None of us are perfect and when we perpetuate the MSM 'blood leads' syndrome, we are just as much at fault.

There is a commonality of humanity and love at the source of all religion. We must remember that those acts which we condemn, by whatever religious persuasion, as not honoring that common humanity, are carried out by human beings who do not understand that common humanity and love.

We need to blame ( fell sorry for?) those individuals who carry out the inmumane deeds - not make blanket and often erroneous
statements about the religions themselves.

there is nothing wrong with faith, if you need that to get you through. it is religion that is the problem. also, Hitler was a catholic to the end."Hitler said it again at a Nazi Christmas celebration in 1926: "Christ was the greatest early fighter in the battle against the world enemy, the Jews ... The work that Christ started but could not finish, I -- Adolf Hitler -- will conclude."
Hitler regarded himself as a Catholic until he died. "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so," he told Gerhard Engel, one of his generals, in 1941.
When Hitler narrowly escaped assassination in Munich in November, 1939, he gave the credit to providence. "Now I am completely content," he exclaimed. "The fact that I left the Burgerbraukeller earlier than usual is a corroboration of Providence's intention to let me reach my goal." Catholic newspapers throughout the Reich echoed this, declaring that it was a miraculous working of providence that had protected their Fuhrer. One cardinal, Michael Faulhaber, sent a telegram instructing that a Te Deum be sung in the cathedral of Munich, "to thank Divine Providence in the name of the archdiocese for the Fuhrer's fortunate escape." The Pope also sent his special personal congratulations!

Bligh but plenty of Christians did follow Hitler and Jews died as a result of this idea of religious superiority. Christian serbs slaughtered Muslim Bosniaks not too long ago. Plenty of Christians in America signed up for war in Iraq for the opportunity to get revenge against Muslims for 911. Nevermind no Iraqi had anything to do with 911. Bush called for a "crusade" and this was how it was taken in the Arab world. The use of depleted uranium by Western armies is another example in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. There are other example in our modern era so the best thing is to stick to the premis that all religions can and should be critiqued and none should get a free pass Islam and Christianity both included. Finally we should be saying actions are caused by individuals and followers of religions but not the religions themselves and not all the followers.

dcbeltway- I agree with you that nutjobs and injustice occur in all religions and non-religions (atheists).
The problem is that TODAY, not the past, religion carries the weight of law only in some Muslim countries- through the implementation of Sharia.(please don't burn up my computer by saying the U.S. does too, it doesn't). But to point out that this may not be the best thing, and can cause a lot of abuses, opens you up to the charge of "Islamaphobia".

Christianity is held up for critical review almost daily on CD (as it should be). There is no reason that Islam should get a free pass.

FWI - Hitler was NOT a Christian. He called it a religion "invented by weak-minded people" and said that he would make sure that it "died a natural death within 200 years".

Individual members of every religion have committed acts of great evil. Don't forget militantliberal and bligh that Hitler commited the holocaust and was a Christian, the Crusades were done by Christians, the genocides of natives in the Americas were done by Christians who wanted to convert the heathens, and that the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were dropped by Christian westerners. The occupation of Palestine is done by Jews against Christian and Muslim Palestinians. Pointing the finger at Muslims without failing to point the finger at bad people of all relgious backgrounds smacks of Islamophobia and hate. Again, there are violent members of the human race who hail from all religous and ethnic backgrounds. I condemn all these people whether they are Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist etc.

I might also add the first people to criticize the Saudis are usually other Muslims and Arabs particularily the Shia and Sufi Muslims as the Saudis persecute these sects.

I will have to agree with terryb! Religion is one of the big evils of this world. More people have been murdered in the name of religion than for any other reason down through history. But, let's face it terryb. A lot of people need that crutch to lean on just to get through life. That's about the only solace that religion offers them. Organized religion is like a octopus. It is devouring or society whole. Most of them are already wealthy beyond belief. But, their greed has no boundary's. They don't have any taxes, but they want to stick their hands deeper into the taxpayers pocket for us to pay for their pet projects. They want to be able to ram their religious belief's down our throats. They want us to follow their arcane religious dogma when it comes to sex, gays and abortion. I don't see where we are the better for it either. More bigotry, racial hatred, intolerance and etc is rearing it's ugly head again. Bush unleashed the religious nuts on our society when he welcomed them into government. It's time to try and put them back in their place where they belong. I am a firm believer in the Separation of Church and State. I am sick to death of having a Fundamentalist preacher in the White House. When I vote I look at people's religious belief's. If they are ones who are willing to keep their religion to themselves or want to impose it!

Just in - Boy names teddy bear "Jesus" in Tennessee. Police arrest mother and Tennessee Supreme court sentences her to 40 lashes in public. Yeah, right.

it wasn't that long ago that christians were burning witches at the stake. now a rape victim in saudi arabia is condemned to 200 lashes, and jail time by islamic law. how much sicker can it get? as far as i'm concerned, organized religion is the bane of mankind. the sooner we get rid of it altogether, the better.

Curmudgeon99 wrote: "Hey islamophobic militantliberal - what do you think would be the case if she named a teddy bear Jesus in Tennessee, or Iowa or..."

Honestly? I think there would be no news story at all. And if it were, it wouldn't be about the government prosecuting the teacher for "inciting religious hatred." If there has been a similar case in the U.S. or anywhere in the Western world since 1750 A.D., I'd like to know.

Yes, I am an Islamophobe. What of it? I am also a Naziphobe, a Bushphobe and an imperiophobe. Islam, Nazis, Bush and imperialism are all threats to our freedom. Ad hominem labels and attacks are no substitute for dealing with facts.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says "it's time to promote the idea that diversity is a virtue, not a threat."

Diversity is a virtue. The only threat is the presence of lunatics within that diversity. How can we successfully remove the wheat from chaff?

Yes, the US media are facile, and I cannot believe how the idea of objective journalism has eroded almost into nothingness. On the other hand, Western journalism is still freer and fairer than anywhere else.

Where does the UN get the chutzpah to criticize American media for stereotyping and cheap assumptions when Arab media print cartons perpetuating every anti-Semitic canard ever fabricated and treat The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as fact?

Ever hear about pots and kettles?

Does the media incite (religious) tensions?

A rhetorical question.

If it bleeds, it leads. That is the mantra of the (mainstream) media, and has been from reported time.

Hey islamophobic militantliberal - what do you think would be the case if she named a teddy bear Jesus in Tennessee, or Iowa or....

curmudgeon99---I actually heard the quote read in full Monday on public radio---I think it was Talk of the Nation. That kind of hateful stuff gets heard but I have yet to hear Dennis Kucinich's voice calling for impeachment.

Think propaganda machine--not MSM. That well of information is totally contaminated--only poison to be had, and I refuse to partake.

What sells is the principle that determines all commercial media outlets. The more outrageous an article, the more titillating, the more spurious, the greater the distribution. Free press means you can yell fire in a crowded theater if no one holds you accountable. Unchecked capitalism is a blight on our nation and the world.

I agree the media too often rush to press with rushed judgments. But sometimes stories that "provoke" religious conflict are perfectly legitimate. Consider the latest lunacy to come out of the Islamic world: an Englishwoman charged by the government of Sudan with "inciting religious hatred" for letting her students name a teddy bear "Muhammad". She faces up to 40 lashes. The Sudanese Assembly of the Ulema (clergy) accuses her of serving a plot against Islam. Maybe they should flog the kids too. See http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071128/ap_on_re_mi_ea/sudan_british_teacher. Then there was last year's case of German citizen Abdur Rahman, charged in Afghanistan with apostasy from Islam, which carries the death penalty. If this is what happens to Western citizens when the media are watching, what are these devout, moral governments doing to their own when we aren't looking?

A fellow blogger noted elsewhere the following comments after reading the ditribes:

"Did you also wonder what this kind of article was doing on Investors Business Daily?

One would expect to find such questions and story line to be found on the CBN "news" site. Not Investors Business Daily.

I was shocked as I perceived how the questions were being phrased and the premise "framed" for the Congressman. Was any one else reading the article and also wondering WHOAAA! What's Goin On Here???

Thanks for the links.

I have just had a post removed from this article. In it I pointed out the press refuses to carry anything about S1959 - Patriot Act Lite while they carry Islamophobic diatribes of 2 Congressmen - Tancredo of Texas and Myrick of N.C.

What gives here at Common Dreams - Censorship is really rampant.

my message was 'mediated' right out of here!!

I'm trying again to include Islamophobic diatribes:

When you include Congressional Reps like Tancredo and Myrick who state the following quotes in the referenced articles, the situation becomes even more ominous to all U.S. citizens, but especially to Muslims.

"There are consequences to open borders beyond the 20 million aliens who have come to take our jobs," a voice intones. "Islamic terrorists now freely roam U.S. soil, jihadists who froth with hate, here to do as they have in London, Spain, Russia. The price we pay for spineless politicians who refuse to defend our borders against those who come to kill."
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2007/nov/27/campos-americas-worst-congressman/

For more of the same from another Congressman:
U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick Representing North Carolina's Ninth District February 26, 2007 Contact: Andy Polk(202) 225-1976

Understanding The True Nature of Terrorism

"My principle concern in this day and age of terrorism is: the general public doesn't understand the threats we face from radical jihadists, who they are, what they want, and what we can do about the threat. Americans are not being properly informed about the nature of the jihadist threat and their plans to do us harm……"
http://www.house.gov/list/speech/nc09_myrick/TerrorismCaucusoped22607.html

Congressional Paul Revere Warns Nation About Islamofascist Threat

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1502&status=article&id=280364244485437

Of course look at the rise of hate crimes since 911!

of course they do. they sold the United States a war with Iraq ...

question is, can they continue to sell us death and destruction for money

"The Globe and Mail is peddling World War III: Will Canadians buy a war with Iran as easily as Americans bought Iraq?"
http://www.chycho.com/?q=node/1335