So by pointing to what you consume, you establish that it's not more than enough? Very convenient, isn't it?

There are a couple of aspects that play significant parts in this regarding useful idiots

Those who support the idea that Islam is a religion of peace and that somehow Islamic terrorism is not related to the faith. As an indicator, I see that there are again violent protests about the insult to the prophet in cartoons. I've not seen any sign of serious protest by groups of muslims about the insult to their faith in the well documented actions of extremists.

The debate over who in the west best serves the cause of the extremists those who want to reduce unnecessary contributions to radicalisation or those determined to bring conflict to a head. I'm of the view that it is the latter who best serve the interest of the extremists, clearly some others have a different view.

R0bert

The Christophobes always go for the relativism arguement. Usually when someone knows that their own world view is as perverted as Islam they need to attack the Christian worldview even though muslim terrorist run amuck throughout the western world. Their hatred of Christ because He does not condone their lifestyles leads to all sorts of irrational conclusions. The fundies among the secularist know that they to are a death cult like Islam. Look at the thousands of babies they offer up in the name of feminism. They are unable to swallow truth because it might mean they have to look at themselves.

Exactly the kind of rubbish one would expect from someone who contributes to the Spectator.
I much prefer the description/assessment that humankind altogether is in that is given on sites such as Tomgram, Counterpunch and Consortium News.
The new essay on Consortium by Robert Parry titled The Neocons the Anti-Realists sums up the situation quite succinctly. As does his essay the Mysterious Why of the Iraq War.
In the Anti-Realist essay Robert Parry refers to a truth-telling book by James Risen titled Pay Any Price: Greed Power and Endless War.
The eight words in that title give a precise description of the situation created by the neo-psychotics, who were of course assisted in their project of never-ending-war by our own lying rodent.

"Well, it's not that long ago that we Christians killed in the name of our God."

Acting on injunctions in which part of scripture, Rhrosty? As opposed to the Koran and other Muslim holy texts that specifically urge the murder of Jews and other infidels. Muslims have plenty of authority for violence if of a mind to draw on them. And what do you mean by "not that long ago"? Last week? Last year? Last century?

No JKJ, by pointing to what I define as 'enough', I establish that I am capable of determining what that is within the context of computer resources that you mentioned.

I don't know whether that's convenient or not, it's simply pragmatic from my POV.

How do you define 'enough'?

R0bert, I suggest there is a need to distinguish between motive and pretext.