Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Obama’s Muslim outreach
For his first formal television interview since taking office, President Barack Obama didn’t choose to go on CBS, NBC, Fox News, or even MSNBC. Instead he chose Al-Arabiya, a Dubai-based, Arabic satellite news channel.
Although most of the interview, which aired today, concentrated on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Obama touched on his Muslim background and relatives, something that was off-limits during his presidential campaign. He added that one of his main tasks as president was to communicate to Muslims “that the Americans are not your enemy.”
Hady Amr, director of the Brookings Doha Center in Qatar, said, “President Obama has made it absolutely clear . . . that a central priority will be repairing America’s relations with the Muslim world. If that’s his objective, I’d say he’s been hitting home run after home run.”
President Bush also was interviewed several times by Al-Arabiya while he was in office.
Was this a good move by Obama, or does this raise even more questions about how he plans to deal with the war on terror?
back to top106 Comments to “Obama’s Muslim outreach”
“terrori?”
What is that?
Report comment to moderator
“…was to communicate to Muslims “that the Americans are not your enemy.”
I think a more correct phrasing would be to say that Muslims are not our enemy. Unless, of course they just want to be, which, of course many of them want to be, and that makes US their enemy.
Report comment to moderator
A typo. …
Report comment to moderator
Well, of course he’s a secret Muslim. He’s probably just working out a good schedule for handing the keys to the White House over to Osama bin Laden.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
Whew! Good thing they didn’t ask him what newspapers and magazine he reads. That would’ve stumped him for sure, and possibly caused a jihad.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, they believe Bush wore Prada…
Report comment to moderator
#1 MIM – “Terrori” is Latin for multiple terrorists. It’s not a type, unless Micky was going for the singular…
Report comment to moderator
This administration will win wide acceptance for its disproportionate appeasement philosophy.
Report comment to moderator
What can we do to bring intolerant muslims around to our way of pluralistic live-and-let-live thinking?
What can we do to bring Americans around to accepting/acquiescing rad-fundy Islam and its intolerance for all we hold dear?
Too many folks are diverting neuorons to answering the second question while we oughta be answering the first.
Karen Hughes, call your office!
(Who will be the Karen Hughes of the Obama presidency?)
Report comment to moderator
Nothing has changed with Obamas election. He still plans on surrendering to Islamofascists whenever and where ever he can.
Muslims aren’t supposed to kill other Muslims unless they get a Fatwa to do so. Obama calls them Executive Orders.
Report comment to moderator
Well, Obama’s objective is clear. His first phone call was to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah, a terrorist organization. His first television interview was on Al-Arabiya TV. He now has no problem stressing his own Muslim upbringing now, which he and his supporters went out of their way to deny before.
But I don’t fault him for giving it the old college try. Obama at least recognizes one thing. The Islamic world is the greatest threat to world peace in the 21st century. Reaching out the olive branch is a good move. It will work precisely as well as Bush’s failed attempt, but hey I support and legitimate attempt to negotiate with barbarians.
The problem is that the people who want to kill us don’t care about group hugs. Noble heart, empty head.
Report comment to moderator
“He added that one of his main tasks as president was to communicate to Muslims ‘that the Americans are not your enemy.’”
This is exactly what President Bush told the Muslim world over and over, every bit as clearly as President Obama is trying to say it now. Nothing new here whatsoever.
Report comment to moderator
SAWGUNNER: The fatal flaw in #10 is your premise that Muslims are “intolerant” for all that we hold dear.
I believe the CIA and military interrogators who have questioned 10’s of thousands of our captives in Iraq and Afghanistan might disagree. The Muslim who is inalterably opposed to our freedom and way of life is exceedingly rare.
Most humans love or hate others for what they do, not for who they are. Arabs, too.
Report comment to moderator
From the Paul Schremm article: “Obama said the U.S. had made mistakes in the past but ‘that the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago, there’s no reason why we can’t restore that.’”
The implication here is exactly wrong. President Obama implies that the USA was the one at fault for the alleged breakdown in our (vague) relationship with the entire Muslim world. Nonsense.
And the only “reason” it may be hard to “restore” this dreamy alleged nice relationship we had with the Muslim world (in Obama’s mind) 20 or 30 years ago, is that many in the Muslim world may NOT desire any type of reasonable relationship with us until we commit national suicide.
Report comment to moderator
#14, Scroop Moth wrote; “The fatal flaw in #10 is your premise that Muslims are ‘intolerant’ for all that we hold dear.”
I took Sawgunner’s remark as applying to a qualified group he called “intolerant Muslims” and a religion he described as “rad-fundy Isalm.” I won’t claim to speak for Sawgunner but I will say that I also think that “intolerant Muslims” may well be very, well, “intolerant.” But that is not a description of all Muslims.
Perhaps it is better to say that the Koran is highly intolerant and not all Muslims follow the Koran perfectly (which is a good thing for us).
Report comment to moderator
#15 is hysterical. The US faces as much danger of being driven to “national suicide” by the Muslim world as we faced from the “smoking gun in the shape of a mushroom cloud.”
Here’s the view of someone who knows the enemy, having conducted more that 300 interrogations of “terrorists” and supervised more than 1000 more.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802242.html
Sawgunner and Joel Mark are the people who hate whom we are as Americans.
Report comment to moderator
…respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago…
Well, off the top of my head: The Achille Lauro hijacking was in 1985. Pan Am 103 was in 1988. The Iranian hostage drama began in 1979.
Yup. Things were pretty rosey between us and them 20 or 30 years ago.
Report comment to moderator
From the Paul Schremm article: “President Obama has made it absolutely clear … that a central priority will be repairing America’s relations with the Muslim world…”
How nice. But his central priority is the security of the American people. If having good relations helps that, then fine. But the central priority is NOT having nice relations. It is the ongoing security of the American people.
Report comment to moderator
#17,
Scroop, I did not say that the US faces a danger of being driven to “national suicide” by the Muslim world. I said that some Muslims will never be happy with us until we do.
Read. Think.
Report comment to moderator
Xion: The Islamic world is the greatest threat to world peace in the 21st century.
“The Islamic World”? That’s a pretty broad brush. And a brief review of military aggression over the last 20 years or so suggests that you are very wrong.
JoelMark: Perhaps it is better to say that the Koran is highly intolerant…
And your bible advocates tolerance of other religions???? I am the Lord thy God and thou shalt have no other gods before me has some exceptions?? And Jesus really didn’t care if his worshippers were married to people or had children of another faith?
(I won’t get into a list of atrocities advocated by either book if you won’t).
Report comment to moderator
“The implication here is exactly wrong. President Obama implies that the USA was the one at fault for the alleged breakdown in our (vague) relationship with the entire Muslim world.”
I hate to break with you on this subject, as I’m sure that radical Muslims would probably declare jihad on us anyway…
I think that Iran, at least, has a pretty good reason for breaking the “relationship” with us. I read an article in the Smithsonian recently that gave a pretty good rundown of the events in Iran that led to their anti-American sentiments. We are not entirely at fault, but a great deal of the problems we face from that nation can be directly attributed to our actions there. We deposed a pro-American ruler for bogus reasons by insurrection, and put an oppressive dictator in power. All dissent fled to the only safe haven – the mosque, and seemingly permanently welded together dissent, religion, and anti-American sentiment in one fell swoop.
Report comment to moderator
Xion caught some important points in Obama’s outreach, but missed when the subject turned to “group hugs.” That doesn’t seem to be what’s going on here (and the Predator strikes over the weekend certainly delivered that with a boom), if for no other reason than there are such different parties involved.
Fwiw, Al-Arabiya is regarded as a voice of cultural reform in the Mideast (per Chris Isham). Unless you’re going to jump in with “all arabs/iranians are terrorists” meme, picking a broad channel like this makes a lot of sense to counter the jihadist propaganda.
Report comment to moderator
The greatest threat to peace and stability in the world is religious fundamentalism, be it Islam, Christianity, or any other religion.
Obama and others are right to reach out and encourage the moderates, no matter how small their numbers may be.
Report comment to moderator
#24 Anlir
“The greatest threat to peace and stability in the world is religious fundamentalism, be it Islam, Christianity, or any other religion.”
Just last Sunday there was a group attack over at the WalMart. A group of crazed people jumped out of a mini van and beat everyone who came out the doors. People had bloody noses and cracked skulls. The injured claimed that people kept beating them profusely about the heads and shoulders with heavy black books.
Police followed the van back to a church parking lot where 17 people were arrested for Assault and Drunk and Disorderly Conduct. 8 King James Version bibles, 4 NIVs and 2 pocket New Testaments with Proverbs were confiscated.
This is the third time people have been attacked in as many weeks. Chief Wiggams has promised to end this reign of terror.
Report comment to moderator
#22 “We deposed a pro-American ruler for bogus reasons by insurrection, and put an oppressive dictator in power”
Thank you MIM. Iran is a nation everyone loves to hate. Few people know or want to know our role in destabilizing Iran years ago. My husbands father was a supporter of Mosaddeq.
Report comment to moderator
#21,
There is a huge difference between the violence called for in the Koran and the violence described in the Bible. There are countless calls to violence in the Koran that are open-ended and NOT specific to a time and place in history. Thus, the reader can feel called to such violence themselves in their own time and context.
In the Bible, however, descriptions of violence are almost always (if not totally always) limited to specific and particular times and places and peoples (historical descriptions). The reader is thus not left with the reasonable option of feeling called to commit violence today based on those passages. Only a poor reading of the biblical text would cause such an impression.
I believe other religions besides Christianity are incorrect and should not be followed. I believe there is indeed only one God. But I respect the liberty of all men and women to make that choice for themselves. And I can still respect them as fellow human beings.
Report comment to moderator
I said that some Muslims will never be happy with us until we do.
Well, so what? “Some” Evangelicals won’t be happy until Jesus comes back to make them princes in His world-wide theocracy.
My point stands. Regardless of what “some Muslims” may think, the US faces as much danger of being forced to some sort of national suicide as we faced from Bush’s specter of “a smoking gun in the shape of a mushroom cloud.”
Whatever Obama said, people the world over must have heard the universal language of the crowd, the host of golden daffodils on the credenza.
Report comment to moderator
#22, MIM, you may have misunderstood my post. I am not one who blames the USA for the Muslim world being mad and violent toward us. Is that what you were thinking? I’[m not sure.
As for your Iran comments, all history is a mixed bag and justifications for anger can be made by all parties all over the map as they choose their reasons. That’s an endless blame game. But we are talking about the Muslim world and at a big-picture level, I think that the USA is NOT responsible for what the jihadists do to us but we may share some responsibility for some various grievances in some places. But what else is new? That can be said of all great powers.
Report comment to moderator
#28, I was just explaining how you misunderstood my point. I simply never hinted at the point that the US actually faces a danger of being forced to some sort of national suicide. So you seem to be arguing with a point I never even made in the first place.
Report comment to moderator
Killing people in the name of your religion (Muslim or Christian) may have a long and storied past, but it doesn’t make it any less insane. People always try to justify why their religion should be given a “free pass” in the matter, but not the other religion. It’s all craziness.
Report comment to moderator
” we may share some responsibility for some various grievances in some places. But what else is new? That can be said of all great powers.”
I’ll bet that’s what King George was thinking just before the Boston tea party. But hey, nothing lasts forever, right?
Report comment to moderator
From the cited article in #15
Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. The large majority of suicide bombings in Iraq are still carried out by these foreigners. They are also involved in most of the attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. It’s no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me — unless you don’t count American soldiers as Americans.
a good read.
Report comment to moderator
What can we do to bring intolerant muslims around to our way of pluralistic live-and-let-live thinking?
Its a matter of perspective, many don’t feel the US is very tolerant or pluralistic.
Report comment to moderator
No one is saying all Arabs or Muslims are terrorists. That is ridiculous. However, you will hear precious few speak out against it. On the other hand Christians will condemn those who profess Christianity and do evil.
And can we stick to the present threats please? The Israelites were a threat to the Canaanites 3500 years ago. There are no Canaanites today. This moral equivalency game completely ignores the realities of the world today.
Islamic fundamentalists have carried out 12,650 terrorist attacks since 9/11/2001. Does anyone care? The people who carried out these attacks are following a specific ideology that was written in a book.
This book was written by a religious fanatic who made his living committing highway robbery, murder and terror. He committed genocide to the Jews. He beheaded 900 of them in front of their families. Anybody care? He commanded his followers to chop of the body parts of infidels. These beheadings still occur today. You can watch them on the Internet. Anyone interested?
Some people read this book and do not kill, just as some people watch horror movies and do not kill. However, this is no movie. Where you can hear this ideology of hate? Where can you hear plotting to overthrow America? Where can you hear calls to murder Jews? Well, walk right down to your local mosque and listen to what they are saying. Look on YouTube. It’s no secret.
The West has no idea what they are dealing with. Islam is a threat to everything the West espouses. Religious tolerance is a threat, because who can tolerate a religion that preaches murder? Islam is a threat to liberty, since freedom in the Islamic world only means freedom from occupation, not individual liberty. Islam is a threat to women and essentially everything liberals believe in. Yet many are content to trash a religion that says love your enemies and defend one that says to slowly torture them to death.
Report comment to moderator
#18
The Pan Am bombing was a retaliation for the US bombing of Libya which itself was a retaliation for the bombing of a West Berlin bar killing two US servicemen. and on the blood trail goes.
1982 to 1984, the US occupied parts of Beruit.
1990 1991 Gulf War
Because of strong and unwavering US support, Israel is seen as the US proxy for the region and thus Israel activities are viewed as US activities.
As MIM points out; Iran has some justifiable grievances with the US. The reign of the Ayatollahs can be seen as blow back. Mossadegh, the prime minister in the early 50s, nationalized the oil industry and the US with British support overthrew his gov’t and encouraged the Shah to assume dictatorial rule.
Its a blood fued — who fired the first shot is debatable. Ironically, the US state dept and other agencies wavered between a pro-Arab and pro-Israeli policy in the 50s but after siding with Israel and Arab despots, they lost credibility with the Arab street and the resulting populist uprisings.
Report comment to moderator
#35
read some of the website you linked. The list of terrorist attacks includes everything short of neighborhood shouting match. In many cases, the cause of the dispute or action may not have been Islam but business rivalry, family honor, political feuds and family/tribal rivalry in which the perpetrators happen to be Muslim. There are genuine terror attacks but adding every incident they can find involving a Muslim discredits the list.
Report comment to moderator
HRW says, “Its a matter of perspective, many don’t feel the US is very tolerant or pluralistic.” Oh well. People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Name one other country with even half the tolerance and pluralism America has.
Report comment to moderator
but we may share some responsibility for some various grievances in some places. But what else is new? That can be said of all great powers.
that’s quite the amoral cop out.
Report comment to moderator
#38
look north
Report comment to moderator
If you agree with my point, that the US can’t be pushed by “some” in the Muslim world to commit suicide, why don’t you just say so?
Unfortunately, Bush wounded us by fighting that specter in a place where it didn’t exist (Iraq), while neglecting it in a place where it did (the mountains of Afghanistan).
In #17, I offer a reference to evidence that your “some in the Muslim world” are very rare — even among the captives the US picked up on the battlefield. I’m not misinterpreting you, I’m contradicting you. I think your point is unimportant. “Some in the Muslim world” are neither an existential threat to the US nor a bar to a rational, mutually beneficial relationship based on self-interest. The US and the Muslim world can coexist in peace.
Why not explain your points and answer questions, instead of complaining every time you blog that you’re misunderstood? I’m more interested in making my own points than in analyzing and interpreting yours. Nobody here clutches the mantel of John Updike, and none of us deserves to have anything we write read twice.
Report comment to moderator
and on a more serious note, the Netherlands has a long tradition of tolerance giving refuge to both sides of the English civil war, Spanish Jews, French Huguenots, German Catholics, Protestants and Mennonites, atheists and agnostics from all over. And that’s just the 17th century.
Report comment to moderator
#41 is addressed to Joel Mark.
Report comment to moderator
HRW,
Last I heard Canada wasn’t very diverse. I may have heard wrong. So yes, I thought of Canada and discarded the thought.
Report comment to moderator
It’s silly to bring up ancient history. Let’s talk about now.
Compare the Christian Church of today with Islamic fundamentalists today. Don’t compare the Medieval Church to Islam today.
——————————————
Canada has very strict “hate speech” laws. Don’t say that they are a tolerant nation.
Report comment to moderator
I should think that everyone, including our elected leaders need to take a second look at the various sects of Islam. It is true that the vast majority of Muslims do not adhere to the doctrines of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. However, a large majority of the countries in the 10-40 window, do not have the natural resources they can use as a means to export a radical philosophy such as Saudi Arabia. Just in case you want to get some valuable incite into fundamental Islam, You might want to read this by a former Muslim:
http://islam-watch.org/Ibrahim.Lone/Wahhabism-Foundations-and-Dangers.htm
Report comment to moderator
Xion wrote: “Obama at least recognizes one thing. The Islamic world is the greatest threat to world peace in the 21st century.”
I don’t know that leftys see the threat at all. They seem to think it is a law enforcement problem.
The “spectre” exists throughout the Islamic world, and to deny that is to deny the core of the problem.
If the US isn’t “pluralistic,” I don’t know a place that is. This is where people have come for two centuries to get away from their own. Heck, they even leave Canada to come here, certainly for the best and latest health care.
Report comment to moderator
The reason this topic is so hard to discuss is that some Americans find it inconceivable that America might ever be wrong about anything, and so Muslim anger, they conclude, is inexplicable. Or it’s because they’re evil or “hate our freedoms” or some other such rationalization.
While other Americans believe our foreign relations with Muslim nations haven’t always been wisely conducted, or fair, and perceive that in some cases we’ve thrown our weight around and expected people to just accept it because we are America. And then, in the words of Bill Cosby, we have the nerve to look surprised when they lash out at us.
When those two sides enter into dialogue, it usually goes like this.
Statement: “One element of our defense against terrorism has to be to reform some of our behaviors, so that we are not unnecessarily provoking anger.”
Response: “America-hater! Appeaser! You leftys always blame America first! You don’t understand the threat!”
Where can you go in conversation from there?
Report comment to moderator
I left living in Saudi Arabia in 1986 becsue it was too dangerous for Americans to live there – the safest place in Islam then.
We supported Israel in the Yom Kippur War to keep Islamofascists from overing the country and killing every Jewish man, woman an child. By doing so we instantly became evil satan number two in the Islamic world.
How can you possibly convince socialists who love their Isalmofascist brothers more than they like aborting their own children?
Report comment to moderator
#37 Hrw There are genuine terror attacks but adding every incident they can find involving a Muslim discredits the list.
I don’t think you actually looked at the list HRW. It lists 12656 deadly Islamic attacks. That means that in every incident, it involved (a) a Muslim and (b) murder.
Now you may quibble about whether each murder is “terror”, but is that an excuse to dismiss the matter? If I told you there were going to be 12656 deadly Islamic attacks in your area over the next few years would you say, “No big deal, because some of those murders aren’t really terror.”
Report comment to moderator
#48 SteveG “The reason this topic is so hard to discuss is that some Americans find it inconceivable that America might ever be wrong about anything, and so Muslim anger, they conclude, is inexplicable. Or it’s because they’re evil or “hate our freedoms” or some other such rationalization.”
No one says Muslims are inherently evil. It is their religion that is evil. What would you call a religious order of millions who wanted to implement Mein Kampf? Well, the Quran is far worse. It is an ideology of hate that commands its followers to subjugate the world. Islam means subjugation. I doubt they can accomplish that, but they will kill a lot of people trying.
““One element of our defense against terrorism has to be to reform some of our behaviors, so that we are not unnecessarily provoking anger.”
That’s fine. Go for it. No one is saying we shouldn’t be nice to Muslims. But that cannot be our entire strategy to deal with an ideology of hate which aims to conquer the world. Apparently it isn’t. Obama plans to send the Marines (including my son) to Afghanistan to pick poppies. Oh, that’s going to make a lot of Muslims happy.
When you say, “our foreign relations with Muslim nations haven’t always been wisely conducted, or fair”, what are you really saying? Aren’t you really saying that America is to blame for the hatred against her?
Muslim hatred is very easy to explain. Islam commands Muslims to hate Jews. Jews live in Israel. Muslims hate Israel. America is an ally of Israel. End of story.
Hatred of Jews in Germany was mostly secret. In the Muslim world it is shouted from the minarets and taught in schools. It is in schoolbooks and in literature and in the paper every day. It is in political speeches and part of Islamic foreign policy.
And liberals say they hate us because we weren’t always nice to them. That is a complete and total disregard for reality.
I have videos of summer camps right here in America where kids are being taught to hate and kill Jews. Mosques right in my town and in yours are preaching against America and praying for its eventual overthrow.
No one opposes being nice. What I oppose is the “head in the sand” mentality and complete ignorance of the hostile intentions of Islamists. Pretending the threat will go away if we just play nice will not make it go away.
Our motto should be “wise as serpents, harmless as doves”. Instead, the liberal motto is “harmless as doves and ignorant as rocks”.
Report comment to moderator
Actually Xion, my opinion is that the reasons are complex and multi-factorial, and involve our foreign policy, their religion’s teachings and the fanaticism of some followers, and number of other things.
My point in #48 is not about what is to blame, it is about the polarized “sides” in our own debate about it. Any suggestion that America might have some responsibility to bear is met by a small but very loud contingent hurling the invective I mentioned.
On the other hand, I agree that to lay the blame at our door and suggest it’s all due to our bad foreign policy is naive and ignorant and absolves the extremists far too easily.
The truth, as it usually is, is much more complicated. But until we are able to talk about our side of it without being branded disloyal traitors, we’re going to have a hard time analyzing.
Report comment to moderator
#41, Scroop, please, please, please stop trying to put words in my mouth.
I never said that “the US can’t be pushed by ’some’ in the Muslim world to commit suicide.” I just said that some in the Muslim world will not like us until we do commit suicide. I didn’t say we were committing suicide or that it could not happen.
Please read my comments before you comment on them, Scroop.
Report comment to moderator
In the Muslim world it is far more likely and common the active homosexuals are murdered or executed and girls cannot even go to school and many cannot even show their faces in public. The Christian world, in all its diversity, is thoroughly and significantly different. The reasons are clear to those who have eyes to see.
Report comment to moderator
#52 I agree with that Steve. As I have said many times, if there is a legitimate beef with Israel or America, then that should be addressed legally or as a matter of policy.
Injustice is done and civilized countries have ways of dealing with injustice. Even then, those justice systems are imperfect (very often actually). In America and Israel there are free elections which allow the people to change the policy. Obama is the result of this democratic freedom and I applaud it. I even support his efforts to extend an olive branch. Three cheers for that!
However, there is no dialog whatsoever about the actual problem, namely an ideology which says murder is OK. That is due to the Western embracing of religious tolerance. I applaud religious tolerance and freedom of speech and religion (as you know). However, few people notice that the West’s ideals are now being challenged.
Religious tolerance is fine until someone’s religion commands them to lie, cheat, steal, torture, murder and commit terrorism until the world is subjugated. But no one wants to talk about. Denial is easier.
My goal is to see the West begin to discuss this new challenge. Yet, there is complete and utter silence on the issue. And for the most part liberals are not even willing to acknowledge that we have a problem. They keep saying WE are the problem.
It is that gross ignorance which I oppose. The West is in a kind of religious dark ages where they have no idea what is happening. I am glad though, that you are at least willing to dip your toe in the water and acknowledge that something is going on.
Report comment to moderator
The Muslims have to adapt, to change, their “sincerely held beliefs” (i.e., murder and revenge solves every problem) in order to live in the “civilized” world. On ideology, it’s them or us — and that is not a Islam/Christian difference. It is a Islam/Western Rule of Law difference. The leftys have to decide which law they want to live under. I prefer ours. When they say “WE are the problem, we are. We don’t want to adopt sharia law, it’s that simple.
But I know the leftys want to compromise on that. So tell me, which part of sharia law do you want to live under, and be specific.
Report comment to moderator
Here’s the change Ahmadinejad wants from us:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,484105,00.html
Report comment to moderator
Awesome link NJL!
Here is the change Ahmadinejad wants:
1. The US must give up support for Israel.
2. The US must apologize for ‘crimes’ committed against Iran, namely criticizing and trying to block their nuclear program.
And here is why:
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-37688220090127
Report comment to moderator
I don’t make the news, Xion, just report it. “Enjoyed” your link as well. It is hard for me to remember that this man is so well-educated.
Report comment to moderator
Re: #51
It is their religion that is evil.
That statement is one of the main reasons there are religious wars. If you label a religion as “evil”, you open the door for all manner of atrocities, killing, and wars.
Christianity says Islam is evil.
A pox on both their houses.
Islam says Christianity is evil.
Report comment to moderator
Christianity does not say Islam is “evil.” It says that Jesus is the Way and no one comes to the Father except through Christ.
A pox on atheists, agnostics who speak about things they don’t understand and about which they have no knowledge.
Report comment to moderator
“partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago”
What partnership was that? The Arab oil embargo?
Oh, but I forgot, he was a teenager then, and like many young liberals, he doesn’t think anything happened in the world before he turned 18.
He might as well just replace that American flag pin he wears with a white surrender flag right now.
Excreble that he would do this interview before one with an American netwok. Just excreble. He’s obviously all about building a personality cult rather than trying to lead this country properly.
Report comment to moderator
“The reason this topic is so hard to discuss is that some Americans find it inconceivable that America might ever be wrong about anything,”
No. The problem is that so many find it inconceivable that America might be right about anything. Jihadists deliberately target civilians, hack people’s heads off and display them on the web. Our European allies lock suspected terrorists up incommunicado, and the whole world castigates America for not recognizing that enemy terrorists captured on the battlefield trying to kill American soldiers, (or Iraqi civilians) weren’t given their Miranda warnings in the presence of an attorney before being handcuffed. Where are the people marching, the editorializing, the Hollywood stars demanding that jihadists treat their victims with compassion as humans worthy of dignity?
Scroop, the self-serving, self-righteous ranting of your Wapo article’s writer is exposed when he asserts that Abu Graib was the single most important reason foreign terrorists came to Iraq in the first place. That is insanely wrong enough to destroy any credibility he might have hoped for. I have no doubt that he served his country admirably. He also seems incredible naive about the belief that being kind to captured teerrorists will get them to tell you everything. All interrogators try to establish some level of rapport, but they need to be alert to deception and feigned cooperation. The overwhelming testimony of his fellow interrogators is that the terrorists are trained in resistance and knowledgable about the Army field manual for interrogations. Many became voluble only when they learned that their interrogators had other resources at their disposal.
They’re have been inexcusable lapses and abuse. We know about them because they have been identified and prosecuted by our own mililtary and government. America has nothing to apologize to the Muslim world for. It will accomplish nothing.
Report comment to moderator
Re: #61
Better speak to Xion about the statement that Islam is “evil” then.
Perhaps I should amend my statement:
If the followers of a religion label another religion as “evil” they open up the door to all manner of atrocities, killing, and wars.
Christians say Islam is evil.
Muslims say Christianity is evil.
A pox on all of them.
Report comment to moderator
Good Post at #63, Ken. Thanks.
Report comment to moderator
So, according to the news report in the link provided by NJLawyer, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad demands that the U.S. apologize for ‘crimes’ committed against Iran.
Sounds a bit like Congressman John Conyers. One difference between these two (among other differences) is that we taxpayers have to pay Conyer’s salary. And Conyers narrows the charges down to President Bush personally.
Seriously, Iran has been guilty of providing most of the IED bombs that have butchered most of our boys in Iraq. They sent in and trained the murderous insurgents in Iraq too in order to create havoc and kill innocents and thwart our rebuilding mission. Iran has murdered more innocent US citizens than, perhaps, any other nation on earth in recent decades.
Report comment to moderator
#41, Scroop, please, please, please stop trying to put words in my mouth.
I never said that “the US can’t be pushed by ’some’ in the Muslim world to commit suicide.”
That’s a nakedly false accusation, JOEL MARK.
At #41, I claim the words are mine, emphatically. Look at the post again. It doesn’t put words into your mouth.
You are extraordinarily anxious about what I might put in your mouth, Joel! Relax, my point’s better than yours. You should be grateful, as yours is so inconsequential.
JOEL, please, please, please stop committing abominable outrages against the sacred Ninth on a Christian blog!
Report comment to moderator
KEN: the self-serving, self-righteous ranting of your Wapo article’s writer is exposed when he asserts that Abu Graib was the single most important reason foreign terrorists came to Iraq in the first place. That is insanely wrong enough to destroy any credibility he might have hoped for.
Give him a break, KEN, he’s a US military officer talking about his experience. Of course he’s self-serving and self-righteous. So what?
Do you have evidence that the man is “insanely wrong” or are you just saying that because I posted the link? If you have no doubt the man served admirably, his interpretation and analysis of the meaning of that service deserves the honor of an empirical reply.
Report comment to moderator
#64 Anlir, Christians don’t call Islam evil. I do!
What would you call a religion that teaches its followers to lie, cheat, steal, murder, hack off peoples hands, feet, heads and commit terror against all people who don’t believe as they do is evil.
Please tell us. What would you call it?
Your position is that saying such things causes religious wars. On the contrary it is people who advocate religious war that cause religious war. So then if those who preach religious war and cause religious wars attack us again, please be sure to tell them how wonderful they are.
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl and NJL
Diversity is generally more pronounced in urban areas. As the least urban nation in the western world, diversity in America is confined mostly to urban centers on the coasts and the rust belt. Canada follows the same pattern but its a far more urban country, a vast empty country with a few major urban centers. Toronto has often been called the most diverse city on the planet, but NYC and London also have a claim to that title.
Kyle A
The chilling effect of hate laws is vastly overrated. Much of the excess so quickly pounced on by conservative media rarely makes it to court or a tribunal.
Report comment to moderator
Xion
It lists 12656 deadly Islamic attacks. That means that in every incident, it involved (a) a Muslim and (b) murder.
Hence the problem, your list doesn’t adequetaly distinguish between murder and terror. Terror is politically motivated criminal acts designed for a greater effect than the simple act. Its not a quibble when a group pads its list they destroy their credibility.
Report comment to moderator
Xion
have videos of summer camps right here in America where kids are being taught to hate and kill Jews. Mosques right in my town and in yours are preaching against America and praying for its eventual overthrow.
Did you see Jesus Camp???
Report comment to moderator
56 NJL
On ideology, it’s them or us — and that is not a Islam/Christian difference. It is a Islam/Western Rule of Law difference. The leftys have to decide which law they want to live under. I prefer ours.
I agree in the sense that the rule of law is the more superior system (I don’t buy the clash of civilizations). However, there is a civil law tradition in some Muslim countries — not all Muslim countries govern according sharia. And we need to promote the rule of law. For us to advocate for the superiority of the rule of law, we must consistently adhere to it and not just when its convenient. Thus Gitmo was counterproductive.
Report comment to moderator
#57 & 58
Ahmadinejad is speaking to an Iranian audience for domestic consumption. He needs to be re-elected and people generally don’t like him hence the scapegoat.
Report comment to moderator
#63
Ken
Our European allies lock suspected terrorists up incommunicado,
The British used to do that to the IRA and have since learned that it only added to the grievance list and motivated volunteers.
and the whole world castigates America for not recognizing that enemy terrorists captured on the battlefield trying to kill American soldiers, (or Iraqi civilians) weren’t given their Miranda warnings in the presence of an attorney before being handcuffed.
No, its the refusal to follow the rule of law that annoys the civilized world. Instead of Gitmo, use POW camps or employ the local criminal courts both in Afghanistan and Iraq. By employ tactics in Abu Gharib and Gitmo, the US added to the grievance list and motivated volunteers.
Report comment to moderator
HRW #71 “Hence the problem, your list doesn’t adequetaly distinguish between murder and terror.”
Oh, I guess everything is fine then. Never mind. There is no threat whatsoever.
#72 “Did you see Jesus Camp?”
Yes I did. It was charismatic craziness, but they preached neither hate nor violence.
But once again, I guess Islamic camps in the United States that teach children how to murder Jews will be no threat whatsoever when they grow up. Never mind. Just put your head back in the sand. There is nothing to worry about.
Report comment to moderator
#74 Ahmadinejad is speaking to an Iranian audience for domestic consumption.
Oh, I guess that makes it perfectly acceptable. As long as a maniacal dictator only tells his own people he plans to commit genocide and wipe another country off the map, then it is no big deal.
Report comment to moderator
Re: #69
I could have sworn Xion was a Christian, but apparently I was quite mistaken. My apologies.
I don’t know why conservative Christians think that using incendiary language toward Muslims and their faith is without consequence. It is but one small step from incendiary language to someone firing the first shot. When it comes to their religion people will fight to the death for it.
Has the world not seen enough bloodshed and wars between these two faiths? The extremist followers of both religions seem to be itching for another fight. It’s up to the rational people of the world to keep a lid on it.
Report comment to moderator
#76
If you intend to communicate the seriousness of the situation, padding statistics doesn’t help. There’s enough terrorism out there not to resort to data manipulation.
Jesus Camp did have children worshiping a cut out of George Bush and proclaiming war on God’s enemies.
On the same whack job level, Christian Identity and similar groups have camps teaching children very similar ideas as Saudi-approved and funded clerics in America.
#77
Discussing context is important in order to evaluate a speech. He’s a nut job who doesn’t like Israel but his public speeches do not reveal his diplomatic position.
Report comment to moderator
It is only a matter of time before the people who keep promising to commit massive atrocities actually do. It will probably start with Iran launching a nuclear attack against Israel in the next few years. They don’t really care about the Palestinians who would also be killed.
There is nothing secret about it. You can read about it in Arabic newspapers. You can watch daily speeches promising this on YouTube. Liberals here smugly dismiss this with moral equivalency. All that is required with liberal logic is to find a single nut job who uses a Bible and all is well. Threat averted!
When it all hits the fan, what will the liberals here say? The chickens have come home to roost. Islam is a religion of peace and the Jews had it coming. Christians are no better.
Report comment to moderator
P.S. Everything stated in #79 is false. There was no padding of statistics. They are there in plain sight to read. Jesus Camp was talking about a spiritual war (which all Christians ascribe to), not physically training children to kill.
And Mahmoud Ahmadinejad means exactly what he says. I have listened to hundreds of speeches by Islamic leaders over the last century. Every war there was preceded by years of speeches explaining exactly what they planned to do. Yet liberals in every case were in complete denial.
And when the war finally occurred, Israel was always blamed. When America was attacked, then America was blamed. It seems impossible for a liberal to ever acknowledge that the instigator of violence is ever culpable.
Over 1.5 million Armenian Christians were annihilated in a genocide during WWI. No one cared. Many of Hitler’s top men observed and learned mass extinction from from the Turks. In Obersalzberg in 1939 Hitler said, “who after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians.”
In WWI, Mufti Amin Al Husseini, the uncle of Yasser Arafat was a member of Hitler’s Waffen SS. Adolf Eichman explained at
the Nurnberg trial, that the Mufti was on of the initiators of the extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. He was one of Eichmann’s best friend and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures.
Yasser Arafat carried on this goal of Jewish genocide, which is espoused by nearly every Islamic state. Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt are all actively participating in attacks on Israel. Syria and Iran assist in killing Americans in Iraq. Every battle against Israel in the 20th century was preached openly as a goal to exterminate the Jews.
In Islam, historic worldly events on a political level are an affirmation of faith. The fulfillment of religion for Muslims is the dominance of Muslims over non-believers. Israel’s victories are an extreme affront to Islamic domination. Extermination of Israel is seen as finding Allah’s favor.
To say that it is just a big bluff is to completely ignore both Islamic and 20th century Middle Easter history. This is part of an orchestrated religious campaign that has defined Islamic culture for over a century.
But that’s alright. When it all goes up in smoke you will blame Israel and America and everything will be OK.
Report comment to moderator
I have listened to hundreds of speeches by Islamic leaders over the last century.
Good Lord, XION, there really is an Ancient Mariner!
Report comment to moderator
XiON: He now has no problem stressing his own Muslim upbringing now, which he and his supporters went out of their way to deny before.
Please supply the quote to back that up.
Report comment to moderator
LLAMA: Nothing has changed with Obamas election. He still plans on surrendering to Islamofascists whenever and where ever he can.
The first new combat brigade is deploying in Afghanistan now. Obama is moving swiftly to take command of a mess — and win.
Obama has spoken to the Muslim world in a way that threatens to out-organize the terrorists and undercut their influence.
Even Sen LIEBERMAN is willing to take your bets against Obama, LLAMA. He says, “The combination of Dick Holbrooke and David Petraeus working under Bob Gates and Hillary Clinton is not something I would bet against. This is a remarkably talented team.”
I don’t mean to be unkind or hurt your feelings, buddy. Come in from the cold.
Report comment to moderator
Scroop Moth: I don’t mean to be unkind or hurt your feelings, buddy.
Llama has never demonstrated any ability to change his mind about anything, no matter how manifestly obvious it becomes that he’s wrong.
He’s a one-note song.
Report comment to moderator
It will probably start with Iran launching a nuclear attack against Israel in the next few years.
They are years away from the bomb and may not even get there.
According to the US National Intelligience estimate; We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program; ….
• We assess with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons.
• We judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years.
• We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop
nuclear weapons.
• Tehran’s decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005.
http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf
Report comment to moderator
Liberals here smugly dismiss this with moral equivalency. All that is required with liberal logic is to find a single nut job who uses a Bible and all is well. Threat averted
I’m not drawing moral equivalency nor am I equating a similar level of threat from the extreme Islam and Christian communities. However, I beleive hyperbole does not help alert people to the correct level of danger nor does it lead a proper response. It resembles a cry wold strategy that people will eventually ignore. Secondly I draw attention to fanatics in both communities to demonstrate that any religion can be distorted for violent ends.
In the present case of Islam, the threat is higher due to the financing available through Wahhabist Saudi Arabia and its oil wealth. Negate the oil wealth and the Wahhabist clerics will be reduced to crazed voices in the desert much like the radical Christian and Mormon communities in the American West. A change in world energy consumption is needed.
Report comment to moderator
#86 Ok HRW. I’ll take that bet. Is Iran lying or not? Let’s see what happens in the next few years. If I am wrong everything will be fine. If you are wrong, thousands of people will be smoking corpses. Which is the more prudent position to take?
Report comment to moderator
#83 Scroop. In the past, I have provided ample evidence that Obama denied his Muslim childhood. I provided numerous links to the fact that he admitted this in early editions of his book and then edited them out later. I showed his continuous denial of the fact.
Yet now, after the election, he admits it freely. I don’t feel like digging it all up again. Use google and you’ll see for yourself. I don’t care that he was raised a Muslim. It is meaningless. But his duplicity is self evident.
I am happy actually that after the campaign he has started telling the truth again. That is at least something.
Report comment to moderator
Adolf Eichman explained at
the Nurnberg trial, that the Mufti was on of the initiators of the extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan.
Eichmann was not at Nuremberg. He escaped to Argentina where he was captured by the Mossad and brought to trial in Jerusalem. He used the excuse, “I was following orders” and stressed the Fuhrer principal, not the Mufti.
According to Wikipedia which cites the Mufti’s diary and other pertinent sources;
One of Adolf Eichmann’s deputies, Dieter Wisliceny, stated after the war that he[the Mufti] had actively encouraged the extermination of European Jews, and that he had had an elaborate meeting with Eichmann at his office, during which Eichmann gave him an intensive look at the current state of the “Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe” by the Third Reich. This testimony was denied by Eichmann at his 1961 trial in Jerusalem. Eichmann stated that he had only been introduced to the Mufti during an official reception, along with all other department heads. In the final judgement, the Jerusalem court stated: “In the light of this partial admission by the Accused, we accept as correct Wisliceny’s statement about this conversation between the Mufti and the Accused. In our view it is not important whether this conversation took place in the Accused’s office or elsewhere. On the other hand, we cannot determine decisive findings with regard to the Accused on the basis of the notes appearing in the Mufti’s diary which were submitted to us.”[115].[116]
Hannah Arendt, who attended the complete Eichmann trial, concluded in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil that, “The trial revealed only that all rumours about Eichmann’s connection with Haj Amin el Husseini, the former Mufti of Jerusalem, were unfounded.”[117] Rafael Medoff concludes that “actually there is no evidence that the Mufti’s presence was a factor at all; the Wisliceny hearsay is not merely uncorroborated, but conflicts with everything else that is known about the origins of the Final Solution.”[118] Bernard Lewis also called Wisliceny’s testimony into doubt: “There is no independent documentary confirmation of Wisliceny’s statements, and it seems unlikely that the Nazis needed any such additional encouragement from the outside.”[119]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler%27s_Mufti#The_Holocaust
Report comment to moderator
n Islam, historic worldly events on a political level are an affirmation of faith. The fulfillment of religion for Muslims is the dominance of Muslims over non-believers. Israel’s victories are an extreme affront to Islamic domination. Extermination of Israel is seen as finding Allah’s favor.
Islam is a political and social religion which doesn’t understand the Western separation, however, only strict adherents of Shia Islam see historic events as an affirmation of faith. They have a similar end of times theme as some Christians.
The existence of the Israeli is an affront to Arab nationalism. As the the majority of Jews in Israel are European as opposed to Middle Eastern in origin, Arab nationalist view Israel as a neo-colonial state. The PLO – Fatah organization was nationalist in origin not Islamic and in fact had Christian Palestinians in its leadership. Originally the use of Islamic language was more a motivating tool for the masses in the same line Christianity was employed by Europeans to encourage the lower classes to support the elite’s wars. Due to the incompetence of Fatah, Islamic organization have used this propaganda to assume real power (Hamas). It remains to see how this plays out.
Report comment to moderator
Is Iran lying or not?
Actually its the US National Intelligence Estimate wrong or not? That’s my source. Now you may distrust your own gov’t or call your own military/intelligence network incompetent but this is the same group that was quite sure there were no WMDs in Iraq. Too bad the US gov’t didn’t listen; they could’ve avoided a needless war. Hopefully they will listen this time and avoid an other war.
Report comment to moderator
#87 Hrw “A change in world energy consumption is needed.”
OK. So all we need to do is to inflate our tires a little more and use fluorescent lights and the thousands of sermons in mosques in America and around the world to maim and murder will go silent.
Good plan! You must be wearing your thinking cap!
Report comment to moderator
Eichmann was not at Nuremberg
Correct. It was Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny who implicated Eichmann at the Nuremberg trial. The fact that Arafat’s unclue Amin Al Husseini was a member of the Waffen SS and was a close friend of Eichmann is apparently meaningless. You prefer to accept speculation that the diary is false rather than face the reality that genocide of the Jews is a long standing and prevalent agenda.
What Ahmadinejad is preaching is the same deep rooted genocide that has been preached and carried out for over a century. But all of the thousands of attacks so far mean nothing to you. Future attacks mean nothing. If Israel were vaporized you’d probably yawn and go have lunch.
Report comment to moderator
Which diary are you referring to? The Mufti’s diary confirms that the Final Solution was a Nazi idea not his. No other diary is mentioned in my excerpt. He advocated the elimination and suppression of a Jewish state whereas Hitler et al promised to send Eintzgruppen to massacre Jews.
I’m surprised that you disagree with Bernard Lewis.
#93
No, eliminate a dependence on oil and the Saudis can’t fund the mosques that they have built world wide. The Saudis build the mosques and pay for the clerics throughout Europe and North America.
I’m curious do you have any programs or proposals beyond hyperbole?
Report comment to moderator
xION No wonder you won’t Google your claims. Google can’t help you.
At #12 you say that Obama now says he was brought up as a Muslim. He doesn’t, because he was not “raised a Muslim,” as you say at #89. If you want to report that Obama has now made that admission, you need to put it in quotes.
Here’s why you won’t supply the quote:
I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries.
The quote doesn’t say what you claim it does. Aren’t I helpful?
I’m also the one who reported on this blog that Obama deleted a reference to his contacts with Islam in the current edition of “Dreams”, so you may have gotten your information about that from me. The original version of the book didn’t say he had a Muslim childhood or was raised a muslim, as you contend. Further, the deletion of the reference to the Muslims he encountered wasn’t a denial, as you believe, it was just silence about an issue that you, JOEL MARK, and other wingnuts have distorted and blown up into something that no longer fits into the guy’s own narrative. He was trying to ignoring you, he wasn’t denying anything.
You say you’re tired of this unimportant issue, but it’s not that unimportant if you need to save face! Every time I push back, you go underground with it and await the eternal spring of another Muslim thread.
Report comment to moderator
Oh brother. Give it a rest. Here is a quote from his own web site!!
When Obama attended 4th grade in 1971 at the Sekolah Dasar Nasional Menteng school, Muslim children spent two hours a week studying Islam, and Christian children spent those two hours learning about the Christian religion.
I could care less about this except to note that now all of a sudden Obama has no problem mentioning his Muslim background. His first act in office was to announce it to the entire Muslim world. Obama freely admits it, yet his loyal disciples still deny it.
Fine! Duplicitous, but fine!
Report comment to moderator
#95 HRW “I’m curious do you have any programs or proposals beyond hyperbole?”
I’m not sure what the subject is any more.
- If you mean halt our dependence on foreign oil, my program is to immediately increase domestic energy production of all forms, green and otherwise.
- If you mean what to do about Islam, my program is to simply be open and honest about it. There should be television interviews with influential imams asking them to explain the violence. Excerpts from sermons in local mosques calling for violence and overthrow of countries should be explained as well. There should be documentaries showing what Saudi and Syrian and Iranian children are learning in school. etc.
It is the complete moratorium to any open discussion of Islam and what Muslims are planning that I object to.
In Boston a huge mosque is being built by Saudi Arabia. The land was given to them by Mayor Menino for 10% of its market value. The other 90% comes out of taxpayers pockets on the condition that it be available to local black Muslims and to the public.
None of the original conditions of the contract have been met. There is no area available to the public as originally agreed to. They aren’t paying their bills. Local peaceful Muslims are being snubbed in favor of Wahhabi radicals.
The Boston news is completely silent about all of this. Why? Because any criticism of Muslims and there is an immediate law suit. This places a gag order on speaking about it for the duration of the trial. All dissent is effectively censored. Then a year or more later the case is mysteriously dropped.
Radical Saudi Arabian mosques are springing up all over America following this same formula. And the news media is absolutely silent.
Report comment to moderator
Charles Krauthammer said it weel in an op-ed, January 30, 2009.
“Obama wants to pursue new ties with Muslim nations, drawing on his own identity and associations. Good. But when his self-inflation as redeemer of U.S.-Muslim relations leads him to suggest that pre-Obama America was disrespectful or insensitive or uncaring of Muslims, he is engaging not just in fiction but in gratuitous disparagement of the country he is now privileged to lead.” Charles Krauthammer
Report comment to moderator
A MUST read: “Outreach, Yes. Apology, No: We’ve Never Been Islam’s Enemy” By Charles Krauthammer, January 30, 2009.
Link:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer013009.php3
Report comment to moderator
As far as I can tell, what Obama is saying now about the Muslim aspects of his personal history is exactly the same things he was saying during the campaign.
What’s changed is the response of the hysterical wingnut faction of the right.
When Obama was campaigning, it was no secret that he’d lived some of his young years in Muslim countries and has Muslim relatives. Those on the right insisted he was trying to cover up or downplay his vast, deep ties to Islam.
Now that Obama is president, it is still no secret that he’d lived some of his young years in Muslim countries and has Muslim relatives. But now the same people who convinced themselves that he was covering it up before think this is some sudden turnabout.
Report comment to moderator
Xion: Your quote (#97) fails to support your charcterization, “Muslim upbringing” (#12) and “raised a Muslim” (#89). That reference only says that Obama had some childhood contacts with Muslims.
If Obama has lied about this, it’s important. However, I must put the duplicity on you for magnifying the significance of brief childhood experiences in order to assert that Obama was “raised a Muslim,” and then twisting Obama’s editorial deletion into a “denial” (see #96).
We know that Obama’s mother removed him from the school that had lots of Muslim students, and his grandparents then sent him to a Christian-heritage school with lots of Christian students. You can’t “raise” a boy as Muslim by removing him from the Muslim influences to which he was exposed for about one year, and then placing him among Christians for most of his schooling.
To provide a religious “upbringing,” you have to confirm influences, not remove them.
I attended a predominantly Roman Catholic school briefly in the 4th grade. I learned the words to the Rosary and have enduring memories of the experience, but it wasn’t a “Catholic upbringing” nor was I “raised” as a Catholic.
I know you are trying to avoid responsibility for your persistent use of inaccurately chosen words. Will you now cease and desist your claims that Obama had a “Muslim upbringing” and was “raised a Muslim?”
Report comment to moderator
I told you I didn’t want to do this Scroop, but you won’t let up. However, to appease you I’ll stop saying Muslim upbringing, since that could refer to an indeterminate number of years. Instead I will say Muslim Heritage, since that is factual and accurate given his Muslim father and his being registered as a Muslim at the local school. It is also consistent with what he is now saying. Happy?
You guys keep denying that there was an all out blitz against anyone who said anything about Obama’s “Muslim heritage”. They pounced on anyone who mentioned his middle name as “fear mongering”. His staff even removed two hijabi [veiled] Muslim women from the stands. Obama’s 2004 edition of his book removed Muslim references. Yet you guys continually deny that there was any effort whatsoever to hide his Muslim heritage.
Here is one of the stories in which Obama’s chief spokesman Robert Gibbs said,
“To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago,”
The article goes on to point out a litany of facts to the contrary that he was registered as a Muslim in the school, studied the Koran two hours a day and prayed in a local mosque. As the article point out, during this period he could have gone to church with his mother, but went to the mosque instead. He learned to chant the prayers with a perfect accent.
Here on Obama’s web site it states categorically, “Barack Obama Is Not and Has Never Been a Muslim. Obama never prayed in a mosque. He has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ.”
Of course, that portion of Obama’s web site is in direct contradiction to the link provided just above on the same page. Maybe his web site revision department is a little behind in trying to change over to the new Muslim Heritage Theme Obama is promoting.
So stop continuing to deny what Obama freely admits! Get over it already!
Report comment to moderator
Xion, you should know better than to believe the liberal Los Angeles Times.
(I guess the MSM becomes trustworthy when it’s convenient for you.)
Report comment to moderator
You are so determined to apply an essentialist label to Obama’s upbringing which is misleading. People use such labels to pejorate Obama’s identity.
“Muslim heritage” is just as bad a choice of words as “Muslim upbringing” and “raised as a Muslim.” “Heritage” refers to inheritance, cultural tradition, and ancestry. But you can’t define any of these components of Obama’s heritage as “Muslim.” Obama’s heritage was both more than, as well as less than, “Muslim.” He enjoyed exposure to Muslim culture, but his heritage is clearly multi-cultural.
There’s a particular problem with saying in America that someone has a “Muslim heritage,” because, in our usage, “Muslim” has the sense of exclusion, which is at odds with Obama’s upbringing.
So here’s my proposal. Let’s just say that Obama has a “multicultural background with grade-school exposure to Catholic, Muslim, and Protestant religions.”
In the LATimes article, it’s two hours a week, not two a day. That was for little more than a year, at the end of third grade and during the fourth. The fact that Obama’s secular stepfather registered Obama as a “Muslim” didn’t make him one or give him an inheritance of Muslim belief. On the contrary, it illustrates how Obama “crisscrossed the religious divide,” “had an early exposure to Islam”, and a “connection,” and learned “about” Islam. As far as prayers, I don’t think any of your or my fourth grade friends could tell you 40 years later whether or not we prayed when we played at the churchhouse. Even if he “acted out” the prayers at the “occasional” visits (once? twice? thrice?) to the mosque, the childhood friends claim that Obama’s activity was meant for play.
I’ve never denied anything Obama says in his own words. Show me my secret sin, if it exists, XION. Please use quotation marks. Obama admits exposure to Islam but never describes it as defining of his religious heritage. We shouldn’t either, if he doesn’t.
Report comment to moderator
The Boston news is completely silent about all of this. Why? Because any criticism of Muslims and there is an immediate law suit. This places a gag order on speaking about it for the duration of the trial. All dissent is effectively censored. Then a year or more later the case is mysteriously dropped.
SLAPP lawsuits are a bane on free speech everywhere. Corporations have lobbied to prevent effective anit-SLAPP legislation. Here is an example where capitalism and American interests conflict.
Radical Saudi Arabian mosques are springing up all over America following this same formula. And the news media is absolutely silent.
As you may have read, I have stated several times that Saudi funded mosques and clerics in Europe and North America are the root of the problem. Unfortunately, American energy policy places money in the hands of the Saudi family.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!