Posted on 07/20/2005 3:27:23 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
KUWAIT CITY - Muslims from Indonesia to the Middle East on Wednesday labeled as aggressive and irresponsible a U.S. congressman's suggestion that the United States could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim attackers targeted America in a nuclear strike.
Some demanded an apology. Many said the comments fuel Islamic extremism and leave Muslims feeling Americans equate terrorists with all of Islam.
"American mentality imagines that a religion is attacking another religion, and here lies the danger," said Syrian political analyst Ahmed al-Haj Ali. He called it "frightening" to "retaliate against the birthplace of Islam for individual criminal acts or acts committed by groups that are condemned by Islam."
Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican, was asked on a radio talk show Friday how the United States should respond if terrorists struck several of its cities with nuclear weapons.
"Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.
When host Pat Campbell of WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. asked if he meant "bombing Mecca," the congressman responded: "Yeah."
Mecca and Medina, in Saudi Arabia, are Islam's holiest cities. All able-bodied Muslims are required to make a pilgrimage there at least once in their lives. Mecca is the birthplace of Islam's prophet Muhammad and home to the Kaaba, Islam's most sacred site, which Muslims around the world face when they perform daily prayers.
"I find it strange that such a comment comes from someone who represents a civilized people," said Hamed al-Abdullah, a Kuwait University political science teacher. The comment should be rejected by civic societies, the Congress and President Bush, he said.
U.S. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli called the congressman's statement "insulting and offensive." He said Americans "respect the dignity and sanctity of other religions."
In Egypt, the liberal al-Ghad Party condemned Tancredo's comments and demanded "an official apology to all Muslim nations, who love peace and reject arrogance and violence."
"It's aggressive and it is exceeding all limits and doesn't serve anything but extremism and terrorism," al-Ghad said in statement published in its mouthpiece newspaper by the same name.
Tancredo has refused to apologize, telling The Associated Press his comments had been taken out of context. He said he never said he wanted to bomb Mecca or Medina and added that it would be better to think of ways to prevent a terrorist attack, noting that he didn't want to "inflame this issue."
But some Muslims still felt Tancredo's remarks reflected a broader American opinion. "America is trying to market the idea of striking at Mecca in order to fight fundamentalism. This is crazy talk devoid of logic," said Sheik Hisham Hassani, a Syrian expert on fundamentalist groups. He accused Washington of sowing "sectarian discord that always begins with such utterances."
The leader of Indonesia's most influential group of Islamic clerics criticized the remarks as "irresponsible" and called on Americans to protest them. "How can an American congressman say something like that?" said Amidhan, who goes by one name. "It just reflects his inability as a politician."
"Does he understand anything about human rights? At least when the United States attacks Iraq, Muslims blame the government not the American people," Amidhan said.
Al-Abdullah, the Kuwaiti political scientist, put some blame on the way the question was put to the congressman. "These imaginary 'what if' questions are endless," he said.
I U N D E R S T A N D T H A T C O M P L E T E L Y.
But you don't pour gasoline on the fire as tancredo did.
Don't pour gasoline, just nuke em!
Ahh...Frontpagemag is the first thing I saw on that page...I LOVE Horowitz, if they put their stamp on it, I can trust it.
Thanks!!
" A lame response from a lame brain."
Im glad you think that of me. If my brain is so lame, perhaps you could answer my "lame" questions:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1447104/posts?page=178#178
Telling your enemy what the consequences of their actions will be, is not propaganda, but sound war strategy. It's called deterence. It also makes these idiots question the validity of islam. If islam is the one true faith, certainly allah would never allow the infidels to destroy its most sacred site. Yet on the other hand, I'll bet nearly every one of these civilization haters know there's not a darn thing allah, or they, could do to stop Mecca's destruction, if WE choose to destroy it.
Giving the terrorists propaganda points is the number one job of the MSM and the democrats. It's not like Tom flushed a koran down the toilet or put underwear on somesones head. Those are real reasons to protest and shout "death to America". Telling them the consequences of their own stupidity and threatening to kill them is just Standard Operation Procedure for the terrorists. The so-called moderate muslims need to pick a side and attempt to flush their own swamps before our hand is forced.
Now a lame setup, the main fact remains that the Israeli loathing buchanans run tancredo's PAC.
It is obvious that you are ignoring the fact that they don't need Tancredo's statements to want to anihilate us.
Does a Liberal Democrat need a reason to lie and act indignant?
No, it is their nature.
(Oh, W, please don't get the Liberals upset with us or they might oppose your SCOTUS nomination...)
Islamofascists want to kill or convert us all. They don't need Tancredo's statements at all.
"But President Bush is dead serious about stopping terrorism,"
I appreciate what you've said, and wish it were true, but if president bush were *fully* committed, he would have shut the border down as well. A good offense is nothing without a good defense...and the borders are our soft underbelly:
"Memo list possible border terror plot (TEXAS)"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1444792/posts
"FBI bulletin outlines possible terrorist plot at Texas border"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1444987/posts
Then tell me why the US didn't destroy Japan's holiest city, Kyoto, in World War II, or behead the Emperor.
tancredo's remarks inflamed the masses and just made the jobs of troops now in the mideast that much tougher, and all due to his self-centered quest for the spotlight.
"telling clinton to stay away from interns."
i'd rather him hang out with interns than the chinese commies (your friends)
You crack me up dane. Put down the crack pipe for a sec and answer my questions:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1447104/posts?page=178#178
Problem with your excuse is that Tancredo does not speak for the U.S. government. He has no clue as to U.S. policy on such matters and his spew is nothing but propaganda for the terrorists.
All Tancredo is spouting is his usual, hate filled, rhetoric. Somehow I have a feeling Tancredo would never have said to nuke the Vatican if most terrorists were Catholics instead of Arab and/or Muslim.
Well hopefully the walls are padded so you don't hurt yourself.
That's not true, but since when do you and Hillary care?
they also do not get our government--1 president.1 VP 50 senators,385?? congressmen,judges,mayors etc
1 guy can express his opinion thats america
"All Tancredo is spouting is his usual, hate filled, rhetoric."
Hey guys, check this guy out!!!
So show us where responding to a nuclear attack by terrorists is "hate filled"?
BTW, I "love" your tagline...it's an indicator of your intellectual level--putting tancredo on the same level with mckinney shows your low IQ.
Tancredo also introduced a resolution to boycott the Olympics in China, and I'm saddened to see that issue will not receive serious attention because of his error.
For what it's worth, my congressman is a buffoon too - he's a Dem.
"I have a feeling Tancredo would never have said to nuke the Vatican if most terrorists were Catholics instead of Arab and/or Muslim."
Are you a mind reader...?
Maybe we should all have a hand at mind reading.
Oh come on, look at that bill last week that was defeated in the senate, 60 senators voted against increasing border controls. You think these guys are going to pass any bill from the house that's worth a damn?
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.