Abysmally clueless indeed.

Think this guy ever crawled out from under his rock or ever travelled overseas to get an idea how other people tick?

Even worse that he seems to be able to rely on a voter base that got this ignorant fool where he is. But so does Peanut Khadr...

You go figure...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at May 24, 2008 12:27 PM

to compare terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of profound confusion

I love it.

This statement sounds nervous and it suggests that more than one person compares "terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism"

Posted by: FreeSpeech at May 24, 2008 12:36 PM

for ideology, how about

Islamic dominion, from the Orient to Spain (then beyond), until none is worshipped except Allah?

Posted by: Occupant at May 24, 2008 12:42 PM

I think we need to start giving IQ tests to people who are in Congress. Just because people get degrees doesn't mean they have an IQ over 90 because they can skate through some colleges.

Gee, I had to take an IQ test to joing the USMC - the very least an IQ test to people that are our lawmakers should be given!!

Posted by: R_not at May 24, 2008 1:28 PM

"But to compare terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of profound confusion".

With that written statement Senator Biden openly demonstrates an ignorance of the Islamic ideology that is all encompassing, and fully inclusive to the teachings in the Qu'ran, and the hadiths for the umma (all Muslims). That naivete is sadly, also prevalent among most of our politicians, including President Bush.

What never ceases to amaze me is that these politicians with the touch of a fingure have some of the greatest access to information than anyone can almost imagine and yet they still don't get it.

Posted by: Mackie at May 24, 2008 1:42 PM

The guy's an ignorant fool.

When you see him and Chucky Schumer being so vociferous and "strong" in a stupid position, one cannot help thinking of an individual believing he is tough talking to unionists to try and impress them.

Not a Scoop Jackson amongst these fool Dems.

If they run a 'conservative' Dem, they be sure to cut off his balls before he enters the legislature.

Posted by: dgene at May 24, 2008 1:49 PM

and Biden is being considered a VP candidate.

Posted by: pulsar182 at May 24, 2008 1:56 PM

Senator Biden is answerring Joe Liebermans piece also in the WSJ of a few days previous. In that piece the Connecticut senator bemoaned the democratic party being so influenced by radical leftists, and the UNfortunate habit of blaming america first, and also last and anywhere in between.

Liebermans piece is located here http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121132806884008847.html

from JLs oped,

"...in 2000, Gov. George W. Bush promised a "humble foreign policy" and criticized our peacekeeping operations in the Balkans. Today, less than a decade later, the parties have completely switched positions. The reversal began, like so much else in our time, on September 11, 2001. The attack on America by Islamist terrorists shook President Bush from the foreign policy course he was on. He saw September 11 for what it was: a direct ideological and military attack on us and our way of life. If the Democratic Party had stayed where it was in 2000, America could have confronted the terrorists with unity and strength in the years after 9/11. Instead a debate soon began within the Democratic Party about how to respond to Mr. Bush. I felt strongly that Democrats should embrace the basic framework the president had advanced for the war on terror as our own, because it was our own. But that was not the choice most Democratic leaders made. When total victory did not come quickly in Iraq, the old voices of partisanship and peace at any price saw an opportunity to reassert themselves. By considering centrism to be collaboration with the enemy- not bin Laden, but Mr. Bush - activists have successfully pulled the Democratic Party further to the left than it has been at any point in the last 20 years. Far too many Democratic leaders have kowtowed to these opinions rather than challenging them. That unfortunately includes Barack Obama, who, contrary to his rhetorical invocations of bipartisan change, has not been willing to stand up to his party's left wing on a single significant national security or international economic issue in this campaign."

I see the revival of an old strain of american politics, it has made its home in various parties, I see it as the sort of copperhead political reaction, that was strongest during the civil war.

The copperheads have no qualms about charging the president with crimes, with evil genius political manipulation and also downright moronic delusions.

The old dance of american politics is to swing to the left or right in the primaries and then to swing back to the middle for the general election.

Mrs. Clinton if she ends up losing will do so because she did not swing far enough to the left early, and if Senator Obama loses it will be because he swung to far and will not be able to get back to the center.

I was glad that the democrats did not put all their delegates solely in the voters hands, we have in my opinion have had weaker candidates because primaries do not attract the same level of interest as general elections, caucusses attract even less of the average person though they do bring out the most devoted activists.

Depsite the old cliche of smoke filled rooms, it was professional politicians who knew their states counties and cities and how they would likely vote that gave us candidates such as FDR TR and Lincoln.

Of course they have also given us POLks and Buchanans.

The democrats though will not be able to treat the general campaign rationally, to do so would risk losing the support of black americans who routinely vote democratic by margins exceeding 60 percentage points.

I do not like McCain, but it seems that the democrats choice seems to be to lose the general election and retain the power in cities and states that they enjoy, or to gain the executive branch at the risk of alienating their most loyal indentified group.

Posted by: stickman at May 24, 2008 2:01 PM

dumbest man I have ever seen

Posted by: lonewolf at May 24, 2008 2:01 PM

Mr Biden thinks that because sunni and shia have had their fallings out that they have no common source. Their common source is Islam, they have slightly differring views, which sometimes makes for the most vehement and intractable conflicts.

It is usual for any ideology to have those whose viewpoints on its applications and import differ, thus stalin a communist murders trotsky, Hitler a nazi has Roehm murdered, communist russia and communist china fight a border war.

Islamism becomes an ideology when sharia law is included as part and parcel of it, to an Islamist they like communism or naziism see the goal as being total domination of the world, I just hope our marketists do not follow in the footsteps of other ideologues.

Posted by: stickman at May 24, 2008 2:13 PM

People, people… calm down… he’s entirely correct at least in this one sentence, he’s just unaware how he is correct and is merely parroting the normal PC stands. But as they say, put a million monkeys in a room with typewriters and you might get some thing worth while.

Now let us now take a closer look at what he said here, “to compare terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of profound confusion".

He’s right, terrorism is a military tactic like blitzkrieg. And we should end this pandering to the totalitarian and change the name from the “War on Terror” to what it really should be called, the “War on Totalitarians”. We do have to understand that some on the LEFT AND RIGHT of the political spectrum will howl as they realize their precious dreams of domination are also being targeted.

Terrorism is a tactic and strategy used mostly by organizations of all-encompassing ideologies like Communism, Fascist and Islamism for example Sri Lanka Tigers, Brown Shirts, and Hezbolla.

With a little more effort this poor Senator might actually full understand this invaluable lesson he needs to learn, before his constituents are dead.

VIVA FREEDOM OF SPEECH
VIVA FREEDOM OF RELIGION
VIVA FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

VIVIREMOS LIBRE

Posted by: senor doeboy at May 24, 2008 2:29 PM

Actually, it may not be as bad as it sounds.

What this means is that Biden, somehow, got the message.

For now, he rejects it. Once the awful reality sinks in, the truth is self-evident. What's abysmal is that it takes so long. So many years after 9/11 and these guys (there are too many like him, left & right) are still shameless enough to put their ignorance on display, which makes Americans overall the laughing stock of the world.

Many here on JW/DW have been knocking the Euro-weenies, and rightly so. Because their appeasement and cowardice is appalling. But all in all, I don't think they are altogether as ignorant as the Americans are when it comes to the global jihad.

Both sides are despicable as they are self destructive.

The Euro- side is driven by nothing other than economic, mercantile deliberations, cunning polit-props and traitors who are willing to take a whole continent to the abyss just to stay in power, and on the other side of the pond we see the same, but totally naive, ignorant and oblivious of the threat we're up against.

How many more years before the ugly reality is identified?

From thereon, nothing can defeat us. The question is simply: will the West wake up in time before Muhammedanism destroys us?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at May 24, 2008 2:31 PM

"Terrorism is a means, not an end, and very different groups and countries are using it toward very different goals. Messrs. Bush and McCain lump together, as a single threat, extremist groups and states more at odds with each other than with us: Sunnis and Shiites, Persians and Arabs, Iraq and Iran, al Qaeda and Shiite militias. If they can't identify the enemy or describe the war we're fighting, it's difficult to see how we will win.
-- from Joseph Biden's Wall Street Journal article, quoted above

This would be a ludicrous performance were it the work of a high school student. It is the work, in fact, of a United States Senator. Not just any Senator, but a Senator who is in his sixth term --that is, he has served for more than a third of a century in the Senate. And not just any long-serving Senator, but a Senator who has long been a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And not just a Senator who has long been a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, but the current Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Yes -- the current Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Swing your purse or your minaudiere, as you do your Bette Davis imitation, and exclaim:

"What a dope!"

Posted by: Hugh at May 24, 2008 2:37 PM

Put a Democrat in the White House and have him or her speak about the danger we face and then watch Joe Biden become the most ardent hawk he has ever been.

Posted by: PMK at May 24, 2008 4:02 PM

Don't there politician read anything? and then try to formulate an objective decision? Or is absolutely everything liberally subjective?

Posted by: Sounder at May 24, 2008 4:58 PM

I agree with Biden, for the first time in my life. Terrorism is not the ideology. Islam is.

Posted by: Goob at May 24, 2008 5:17 PM

Though I'm no Joe Biden fan, I'm finding the criticisms here to be rather questionable as well.

If I'm to believe that Salafis are just chomping at the bit to live under a Shia Imam, I'm not buying.

Nor if I'm to believe that Irania Shia and Hezbollah truly want to live under an Al Qaeda-inspired caliphate, that strikes me as rather laughable.

If I'm to believe that the Al Mahdi Army came into existence so it could stalk Americans around the world and try to attack the US homeland, so we'd better stay in Iraq or else, that seems rather specious as well.

Moving to the theological front, it seems the treatment of jihad here is rather truncated, and doesn't at all deal with the subject through the lens of ijtihad operating on a multiplicity of levels. One can find quite a number of arguably orthodox Islamic jurists and academics who hold that people being non-Muslim is not and cannot be a sole, sufficient basis for waging jihad warfare against them.

If I'm to take the word of non-Muslims here over the treatsie of a rector of Al Azhar Univeristy, Mahmoud Shaltut, the same place Mr. Spencer cites in backing his assertions about Umdat al Salik, I haven't yet seen the irrefutable, solid proof for this.

Posted by: fairuzfan at May 24, 2008 5:25 PM

A central and key problem with many Western thinkers, both left and right, is that religion does not matter.

Secularists tend to compartmentalize religious views to the private sphere due to the dominance of liberal theological ideas in Western society. Blame Schleiermacher who's influence was huge in the mainline Protestant Churches of the 1900's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Schleiermacher

Religion for most in the world is not a personal matter, but rather a reality shaping narrative out of which they make choices and determine life. And in the case of Islam, must be determinative in the life of others according to their theology. This is why I argue that Islam is so toxic due to the supremacist and other-controlling direction of its narrative. It can not allow others, even others willing to live in harmony with them (ex Baha'i in Iran), to be equals. It can not allow others to practice anthor religion equally. Sure it will allow Dhimmis live on only to wither and die, but that is the extent of Islamic "love". The best it can offer us is dhimmitude, and I say no thanks.

Islam can not live in mutual harmony with others. This is why it is a false system of belief which must be opposed by all people of good will.

Posted by: James Martel at May 24, 2008 5:32 PM

That Senator, Joe Biden is an ignorant fool is bad enough. What is many times more dangerous is that ignorant fool, Joe Biden is a senator, if you see the difference.

Posted by: Alert at May 24, 2008 6:55 PM

"...to compare terrorism with an all-encompassing ideology like communism and fascism is evidence of profound confusion."

Liberals do NOT like being called terrorists.

Biden. Keeping it Real.

Posted by: XRDC at May 24, 2008 8:54 PM

Our "leaders" are hopeless.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at May 24, 2008 10:05 PM

Speaking of profound confusion, I've digested a lot of meaningless, incomprehensible gibberish and drivel in my time, but then there's fairuzfan.

Treatment of jihad 'round here has been insufficient and "truncated," eh?

I guess we shoulda got ourselves a real scholar from al-Azar. When will we learn?

"One can find quite a number of arguably orthodox Islamic jurists and academics who hold that people being non-Muslim is not and cannot be a sole, sufficient basis for waging jihad warfare against them."

LOL. "Quite a number" and "arguably orthodox," no less. And, gee, it makes me feel so much better knowing that my being an infidel is only one factor to weigh in determining whether or not to kill me.

How could we have failed to note, fairuz, that jihad is such a many-splendored thing, particularly when it comes to the opinions of the arguably orthodox?

Thanks for the lesson. I can see the treatment 'round here has been "truncated" indeed.

Putz.

Posted by: Haid Dasalami at May 24, 2008 10:34 PM

Liberals do NOT like being called terrorists.
Posted by: XRDC

Liberals don't like being called liberals either.

Posted by: duh_swami at May 25, 2008 3:21 AM

"Clueless"?

Senator Biden knows exactly what he is doing.

Consider all that he has in common with the islamosupremacists:
- start with hatred of the USA
- a fellow seeker of absolute control and power (totalitarianism)
- a fan not of capitalism (takes away universal authority and can't be totally controlled by a small group of the "annointed")
- pro stalinist-socialist (look at history and what nation and global movement empowered and enabled the current-form islamosupremacists through training, funding, propagandizing, to fight its battles via proxies, : hint - it supposedly ceased to exist circa 1991...). Remember bin laden stated that it is best to fight along with the "socialist brothers" for the time being - as he and they are at war with a common enemy. And what closely-related movement continued to do so in the case of the Balkans after the main-movement "dissolved" - e.g. islamisation of Southern Europe -i.e. Kosovo
- at whom are Senator Biden's most vitriolic chastisements directed (as are those of the very many of similar character and goals)? Such are not aimed at the islamosupremacists. In fact how often do our "leaders" (of any label) publically criticize the islamosupremacists as harshly as they do their own people and nations?
- cowardice - much much safer to attack one's own
and on and on.
- ... Start your own list.

Senator Biden is not "clueless". He (and many like him holding power in the West) agrees with the islamosupremacists.

The enemy of his enemy is his friend and he is defending the islamosupremacists and their movement as both are anti USA and anti West.

Posted by: TINBH at May 25, 2008 5:59 AM

Biden knows as much about Islam as he did with his short run for the Presidency. Nothing!

Posted by: flowerknife_us at May 25, 2008 8:00 AM

Terrorism is a means, not an end, and very DIFFERENT GROUPS AND COUNTRIES are using it toward very different goals.

This is a brilliant observation, but it fails to make an important conclusion. The sentence should be followed by the next sentence. IT IS INDEED EXTRAORDINARY THAT MUSLIMS CONSISTENTLY AND REGARDLESS OF SECT OR COUNTRY APPEAR TO ADOPT TERRORISM AS THEIR PREFERRED METHOD TO INTIMIDATE INFIDELS OR FELLOW ADHERENTS.

Let's make a checklist of where sunnite to shiia remarkably agree regardless of SECT OR GROUP OR COUNTRY:

Kill infidels until they pay the jizah and feel themselves subdued?
Yes!
No compulsion in religion except as described above?
Yes!
Intimidate infidels to establish the primacy of islam?
Yes!
Murder non-muslims if expedient to promote allah?
Yes!
Murder women and children of the non-muslim community precisely to terrorize infidels and establish allah?
Yes!
Allow muslims to kill infidel women and children knowing they will be killed when killing infidels?
Yes!
Kill muslim children, women and retarded people to promote islam?
Yes!
Encourage muslim children, women and retarded people to murder infidels when expedient?
Yes!
Lie to the infidel to achieve allah's community?
Yes!
Claim you believe in god only, but require in the same breath that you state mohammed is god's apostle every time you say you only believe in one god?
Yes!
Be punished with death for denying islam if you do not recant in three days?
Yes!
Be immediately killed if you criticize Mohammed's message?
Yes!
Treat women as property?
Yes!
Cross amputation for mischief?
Yes!
Establish sacrosanct community respect for paternal property rights to women as chattel of their father or husband?
Yes!
Obtain specific religious permission and guidance to murder, rape, pillage, pimp or slave non muslim as gift from allah for establishing him?
Yes!
Death for critical thinking or questioning?
Yes!
Find an extra reward in heaven, if after you have pimped an infidel woman who prefers to be chaste, to allow her to become chaste (but you do not have if you need income from pimping her)?
Yes!

IT IS INDEED EXTRAORDINARY THAT MUSLIMS REGARDLESS OF SECT OR COUNTRY APPEAR TO CONSISTENTLY ADOPT THESE TERRORISTIC PRINCIPLES AS THEIR PREFERRED IDEOLOGICAL METHOD TO INTIMIDATE INFIDELS OR FELLOW ADHERENTS. The consistency of islamic pathology is indeed indicative of something fundamentally rotten in islam which takes the worst elements of Nazi volkishness (ummah) and the worst elements of communist tyranny and control (sharia).

Posted by: David England at May 25, 2008 8:49 AM

fairuzfan--
The fact is when it comes to Jihad, when it comes to the common enemy, Shi'a and Sunni have worked together. As far back as Arafat's (sunni) Fatah training what would become the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Lebanon (Imad Mugniyeh, Hizballah's master terrorist started out as a member of Arafat's Force 17). Arafat was the first foreign guest in Iran after the Revolution. Hizballah were in bin Laden's training camps in Sudan. Al Qaeda terrorists were trained in explosives by Hizballah. Bin Laden & Mugniyeh met in 1995. The Iranians had a hand in Al Qaeda's East Africa bombings and Khobar Towers. Al Qaeda's Saif al-Adel took refuge in Iran after the '98 embassy bombings. The cozy relations continued through 9/11 & the dispersal from Afghanistan thereafter. Iran & Hizballah are heavily involved with all Palestinian jihadists, see the recent revelation of Hamas leaders being trained in Iran. Iran has aided both Shi'a and Sunni in Iraq against Americans (and Iraqis) and against each other. These are all facts you need to explain if you claim an unbridgeable chasm between sunni & shi'a. The enemy of my enemy is my friend seems to be more the operational guideline.

Posted by: Nick Danger at May 25, 2008 1:08 PM

I've quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2008/05/re-abysmally-clueless-biden-to-compare.html

Posted by: Consul-At-Arms at May 26, 2008 2:18 AM