Sam Harris on the Chapel Hill murders and militant atheism
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/02/18/sam-harris-on-the-chapel-hill-murders-and-militant-atheism-and-why-he-now-fears-for-his-safety/Addresses a lot of the false comparisons seen in the media and in here, and addresses,some,of,the willful misrepresentations of atheism in order to make it just another religion, and make apologetics for other religions a bit easier.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Thank you for posting this! I don't think the whole thing could be broken down and explained better than he just did.
I especially liked this part:
But perhaps people like Greenwald and Aslan think that criticizing Islam is just dangerous because it could be misunderstood by bad people [fascists and the like]. Well, by that standard we can’t criticize anything. As Ali Rizvi pointed out, this would be like saying we can’t criticize US foreign-policy because some number of people overseas will become so agitated by this criticism, by reading Noam Chomsky or Glenn Greenwald, that they will then kill U.S. tourists at random. Is that possible? Sure it’s possible. But we have to be able to criticize U.S. foreign policy.
Some of what people like Chomsky and Greenwald write about U.S. foreign policy is correct. Should they be held responsible if some deranged person takes their writing and uses it as a basis for intolerance or even murder? No. Of course not. And the same can be said of any criticism or of doctrine of Islam.
Exactly!! 
This may seem like frank acquiescence to the charge that “liberals are soft on terrorism.” It is, and they are.
A cult of death is forming in the Muslim world — for reasons that are perfectly explicable in terms of the Islamic doctrines of martyrdom and jihad. The truth is that we are not fighting a “war on terror.” We are fighting a pestilential theology and a longing for paradise....
In their analyses of U.S. and Israeli foreign policy, liberals can be relied on to overlook the most basic moral distinctions. For instance, they ignore the fact that Muslims intentionally murder noncombatants, while we and the Israelis (as a rule) seek to avoid doing so. Muslims routinely use human shields, and this accounts for much of the collateral damage we and the Israelis cause; the political discourse throughout much of the Muslim world, especially with respect to Jews, is explicitly and unabashedly genocidal.
Given these distinctions, there is no question that the Israelis now hold the moral high ground in their conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah. And yet liberals in the United States and Europe often speak as though the truth were otherwise.
We are entering an age of unchecked nuclear proliferation and, it seems likely, nuclear terrorism. There is, therefore, no future in which aspiring martyrs will make good neighbors for us. Unless liberals realize that there are tens of millions of people in the Muslim world who are far scarier than Dick Cheney, they will be unable to protect civilization from its genuine enemies.
and the same lying, racist fuck that supported these atrocities against the Gaza Strip:
Palestinians indiscriminately murdered and used as human shields in Gaza by Israelis:
Israeli destruction of neighborhood in the Gaza Strip:
and Iraq:
gratuitous mass-murder:
Innocent victims: Baghdad shop owner Abu Abdullah, right, cried following 2007 U.S. bomb strike which killed two of his sons:
massive unprovoked terrorst attack: shock and awe:
But of course, in the wisdom of BushCheney, he was displaced and whacked, with the confidence that whatever filled the inevitable power vacuum "couldn't possibly be worse"
a little. 
