Fancy silverware and plates c'mon.
Traditionaly the celebrants squat down in a filthy hovel wearing feces splattered nightshirts and flipflops with pure hate pounding in their heads and eat with their dirt covered fingers.
Posted on 10/29/2003 5:21:37 AM PST by JesseHousman
WASHINGTON (AFP) - George W. Bush hosted a Ramadan dinner with US Islamic leaders, as the White House was besieged with demands to fire an army general whom made comments some say makes the US-led war on terror out to be a war on Islam.
General William Boykin's comments surfaced two weeks ago, in which he likened the US battle against terror to a battle between Christiandom and the Muslim world, placing the Bush administration in an uncomfortable position.
While the Pentagon (news - web sites) has opened its own investigation, it has also said that it does not expect to ask Boykin to resign. He continued to serve as a undersecretary of defense for intelligence, in charge of tracking down Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) among others.
Bush invited Muslim leaders to an Iftar, the evening feast that breaks the dawn-to-dusk fast Muslims observe during the month of Ramadan. He organized the first White House Iftar after bin Laden and al-Qaeda launched the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.
"America is a land of many faiths and we honor, and welcome and value the Muslim faith," Bush said in opening remarks before the meal.
At a mid-day press conference earlier Tuesday, Bush said that the controversial Boykin "doesn't reflect my point of view or the view of this administration."
"Our war is not against the Muslim faith."
"Americans think terrorists are evil people who have hijacked a great religion," Bush said, responding to a reporter's question.
Such statements, however, did not quell the Boykin controversy.
"The obvious response to the Boykin case is to say that because he is now under-secretary of defense for intelligence, he should be relieved of his post," The Washington Post said in an editorial Tuesday.
Boykin made his questionable speeches while wearing his military uniform before conservative Christian groups whom Bush will woo as part of his 2004 reelection campaign.
"It is highly likely that Bush himself, a genuinely devout Christian by all accounts, agrees with at least some, perhaps much, of what Boykin said," the Post speculated.
The US president had just returned from a tour of Asia, which included a three-hour stopover in Indonesia, which has the world's largest Muslim population. He also met with several leaders of Muslim countries at the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC (news - web sites)) forum.
"Muslims are completely wrong to think that the US is engaged in a war against Islam," New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said.
"But that misperception flourishes in part because the domestic political strategy of the Bush administration -- no longer able to claim the Iraq (news - web sites) war was a triumph, and with little but red ink to show for its economic plans -- looks more and more like a crusade."
"He organized the first White House Iftar after bin Laden and al-Qaeda launched the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington."
Interesting incentive for those other "different" religions who don't yet have a dinner at the White House.
Fancy silverware and plates c'mon.
Traditionaly the celebrants squat down in a filthy hovel wearing feces splattered nightshirts and flipflops with pure hate pounding in their heads and eat with their dirt covered fingers.
I have just signed into law, legislation that would outlaw Mecca for ever. We begin bombing in 5 minutes."
Within an hour or so after the 9/11 mass murders in NYC the US should have bombed Saudi oilfields into oblivion. Recognizing and punishing our hateful enemies is the best defence possible. Everything else is just political correctness gone crazy.
Your comment:
Holding all Muslims accountable for the acts of a distorted sect is every bit as ignorant as hloding All Pro Life people responsible for Clinic Bombers and murderers. is a very poor example of what we're talking about here. Some time American do-gooder, PC advocates are going to have to come to grips with the fact that this is indeed a holy war.
Read Spanish history. Muslims make very cruel conquerors and slave owners.
JMO, but he is turning off truthandlife, who gets all hot and bothered that Bush sits down to talk some muslim clerics and not blame all of muslims for the actions of the radical muslims.
I guess to you after World War II all Lutheran Germans were nazis and all Japanese Shinto's were kamikazies.
President Bush simply can not say that the war on terror is Christianity vs. Islam. He simply can't. One, it isn't wholely true. It's the entire world vs. Islam. And if you look closely at what Bush, Blair, and other world leaders have said, you don't need to nit-pick through the words: the war on terror IS against Islam. To specifically call out a religion would not only isolate the United States, but many of our allies as well. As much as we hate it, myself included, there is no way the President of the United States- no matter who it is, will ever specifically say a war is against a religion. Let the actions speak louder than the words.
BTW, as the leader of the free world, do you really think President Bush would ever say what you want him to say? Realistically? I'd bet a dime to donuts that privately, Bush the *man* can't stand Islam. But you'll never hear Bush the *President* say it.
To me, when the President says militant Islam, it is still Islam. And you can bet that's why most Moslems can't stand Bush now. Because they know that he is targeting their religion, whether he's targeting them as peaceful followers or not. Detante is a clever game of what is said and what isn't said. And to me, what isn't said is far more powerful than stating the obvious.
This has been my dream for a long time.
A legitimate and conservative 3rd party would syphon votes and forever dilute the power of these two parties.
A legitimate and conservative 3rd party would syphon votes and forever dilute the power of these two parties
Oh you mean like 0.03% Pat or 0.01% Howard.
Actually, that could be said of every NON Western "Civilzation"....Are then Hutus of Rwanda muslims? Was Genghis Khan?????? Are the madmen of the Congo?
Secondly, how do you know the traits you are ascribing are more Muslim, than Arab? There is a Difference...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.