Non falsifiable.

Whataboutism

Sure, you can pretend that Amendments 16 & 17 didn't happen, as well as the Federal Reserve Act, and the freezing of the size of the House of Rascalzentatives in 1910, did not form the basis for a major course change in U.S. history.
Here's your song.

It's about structuring the system.
The 1787 Constitution was distinct states delegating explicit powers to a central government.
~100 years ago, Progressivism started a trend that has us sliding in the direction of a tyranny, POTUS by POTUS.
The EU seems to want to flirt with such a collapse, if the Treaty of Lisbon is any indicator.
As a Chrisitian, a single world tyranny seems inevitable. As a practical matter, I don't foresee any of these bumbling oafs in office (for now) as capable of managing such.

Again, I think that among the chief differences in play is relative size.
How you manage a start-up coffee shop is *not* how you manage IKEA. In the latter case, you've either got a strong corporate culture and a lot of policies in place, or the organization crumbles.
Here in the U.S., we've had lying scumbags of all parties busily carving up our electorate into little constituencies for the sake of pitting them against each other. Which is great for maintaining a small clique in power. For a time.

I sincerely hope the relative homogeneity and deeper sense of history one (I'd expect) encounters in Sweden can support a more enlightened outcome.
However, I'm skeptical about whether the Swedes can really whip organizational behavior. But by all means: school me. :-)

I have a hard time tracking how a reasonable person can make a reasonable "Jews and Christians, as such, are terrorists, too" argument.

I'll take your word for it. I'm completely unfamiliar with the group under discussion.

I'm in violent agreement, from the standpoint that history is immutable.
Osama, like Zed, is dead. Tell me again what he won?


Let's step back and model the whole question from a more abstracted vantage point.
What's at stake here is the groupings that we do for cognitive ease, and the causal relations between individuals and groups over time.
Also, there is a desire for the system to reach some final, "win/loss" state.
So far, so far?

Oh for crying out loud in the dark: this is Slashdot, where the signal-to-noise ratio is both constant and lousy.

A little digging indicates this is "Alexander Peter Kowalski". Do you think that's correct?

Which pretty much dissolved after 9/11. Can you name another outfit?

I don't quite grasp what, if anything, has been shown here.

Something about the mass murderers often shouting "Allahu akbar" tends to lend a bit of theological spin to the reporting. Also, the abject cowardice of journalists and bureaucrats.

Who is APK, exactly? I hope the emoticon made it clear that it was just a Rocky Horror reference, and not an attack.

I have neither time nor inclination for a sock puppet. I think I may have had a troll account over ten years ago, but the name escapes me.

Well, you're already infamous as a sweet transvestite from Transsexual, Transylvania. :-)

Well, at least you're not denying reasoned argument or something illiberal like that, damn_registrars.

I guess you're referring to the IRA?

Happy to give it up, as I've met plenty of Muslims without explosive outerwear.
At the same time, can we cut out the "Muslims fear backlash" noise after the latest butchery, as though the victims and host countries are subtly at fault for the carnage?
As a thought experiment, what about minimizing the media hype somehow? It's almost as is journalists are somehow amplifying a bad situation. . .