Posted on 07/23/2005 6:13:24 PM PDT by 4.1O dana super trac pak
Congressman John D. Dingell (MI-15), the Dean of the House of Representatives, condemned the recent comments made by Representative Tom Tancredo (CO-06) as “ignorant” and “inexcusable” for a Member of Congress. During a recent interview on Tampa radio station WFLA-AM, Mr. Tancredo said that the US might “take out (Muslim) holy sites” in response to another terrorist attack on the US. When asked if he meant Mecca, Congressman Tancredo responded “yeah.”
Said Dingell, “First of all, suggesting the bombing of a holy site of any religion is simply inexcusable for an elected official in the United States Congress and an anathema to the millions of people of faith across our nation. To even suggest an attack on Mecca shows Congressman Tancredo has no understanding of the true nature of Islam and the peaceful Muslims living in the Arab world. The holy sites of all religions – Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism and all others – are the most sacred and hallowed places for their respective followers and to suggest that any one of these sites be bombed is clearly an attack on that religion and its followers. Mr. Tancredo’s reprehensible attack on Islam is ignorant and offensive.
“We must stand united and strong against terrorism, but these are exactly the kind of careless comments that Muslim extremists feed off of and use to recruit new terrorists. To suggest that we hold an entire religion responsible for the actions of a minority of religious extremists - in effect declare a holy war against Islam - is outrageous and plays right into the hands of those very radicals. There is no better motivation to get someone to fight an apparent enemy than to threaten what they love most and are willing to defend at any cost – whether it is their family, homeland, or their holy land. I only hope that his statement won’t be used on extremist websites as justification for a ‘holy war’ against the United States and our allies.
“America was founded by people who believed strongly both in God and in the free expression of religion; that solid foundation remains and is part of what makes us the greatest nation in the world. Mr. Tancredo’s comments --while he has the absolute right to make such remarks-- are contradictory to freedom and the values of this nation. I call on the Republican Leadership in Congress and the President to condemn these comments and make clear that this is an action that the United States would never lower itself to.”
You talking about the ones on fr, or dingell and his cohorts?
Well, I've seen plenty of taxi stands in NYC where the Muslim drivers are "whipping out the prayer rug", somehow I don't find them all that threatening.
You could call this "cultural jihad" and be correct.
sort of reminds me of queer nation/act-up stunts that remind us that they're here, they're queer, and they're in our face.
This is true. And I don't believe Mecca needs to be bombed, btw. But let me point a big difference here. Muhammad is the key to Islam. In reality, he invented Islam. He is to Islam what the Apostle Paul is to Christianity. The difference, among many others, is that Paul lived what he preached. Muhammad, however made allowances whenever he deviated from the text he claimed was inspired by God. Muhammad was nothing more than a terrorist. This is an undeniable fact of history. Islam at its core is a violent religion and its tradition has been such. That does not mean many have failed to recognize this and still interpret Islam by their own relative, subjective realm.
I don't think Tancredo's comments were very smart either."
Why not? We're talking nuking American cities.
Comparting St. Peters or the Vatican to Mecca exposes your total ignorance of Islam. Catholics do not base their entire faith upon praying to a magical black stone in the center of St. Peters. 2 of the 5 pillars of Islam demand prayer directly to that black stone. If that black stone is gone, the religion is gone.Through most of the world, effectively they pray towards Mecca. The faith itself would easily adjust to replacing the Kabaa with the "martyr city". They'd also be far more radical and anti-western.
Indeed, it wouldn't suprise me in the least if upon getting ahold of a nuke, AQ used it in Mecca, after making a spectacular strike on the US. It would very much serve their purposes.
-Eric
Dingell and his cohorts.
Muslims should understand, our freedom is our article of
faith, we will NOT be enslaved even if it means the end
of billions.
That simple.
Yes they were muslims who purposely desecrated the church, used pages from bibles for tp and committed a few rapes for good measure. Allowed free passage to Italy after their fun and games as I remember it.
Thank you for posting the link.
Dems would perform homosexual oral sex on an Islamist before they would lift a hand in anger or defense of country!
Do you think this would end such an irrational religion? These followers do not base their beliefs on nice things like reality, logic, and human kindness; they base their religion on relative subjective reasoning and what they can get for themselves. What would stop these people from finding a way to make such destruction of their religious shrine into a prophetic sign that America is actually Satan's legions after all, and Bin Ladin was right all along?!
Is this the DINGELL of Dingell/Norwood that al gore so confidently asked about during the debates? Ha,ha.ha.ha,
Thanks for asking for my reasons and not just assuming I'm a wimp on the terrorism issue. Too much of that going aruond these days. Anyway, my problem isn't the nuking per se -- its that this response seems designed more to make us feel better than to actually accomplish anyway. It's the type of feelgood solution to a problem that's usually the province of liberals. What exactly do we expect to accomplish by threatening to bomb Mecca, or even actually bombing it? What is the predicted result of that?
Suppose we find that the group responsible was provided a stolen soviet suitcase nuke by a group sheltered by Iran. Can you explain to me why bombing Mecca would be the appropriate response when the responsible party is the government of Iran? Wouldn't it make more sense to threaten to bomb the capital of any country that supported or sheltered the terrorist group responsible?
Heck, you'd be better off bombing some random Arab capital rather than Mecca, because there'd be at least a small chance you'd get the people responsible.
I'm not squeemish about responding very hard. I just want to make sure our response is smart, not just hard.
He might be partly correct, but he should also make reference to the Constitution. Mecca lies outside the territorial boundaries of the US and therefore outside the Constitution's legal domain, but there are citizens of the US who might question whether the spirit of the First Amendment might not be important in this question.
I'd rather you didn't ..lol...I'm relaxed.
You'd think that if Dingell had any brains at all, he'd know enough not to interfere when Tancredo is making a fool of himself. But the reality is that Dingell is playing up to his base. Maybe it's his base that has no brains at all.
What exactly do we expect to accomplish by threatening to bomb Mecca?"
First, Tancredo did not threaten to bomb Mecca. He was asked a "what if" question and he gave an answer in kind.
Second. 99& 9/10 of terrorism going on in the world is by muslims.
Many muslim terrorists would love to nuke an American city.
Mecca is their holiest city.
They know they can't destroy America in one fell swoop.
If they nuke an American city, they can expect retaliation.
If they truly believe that if they nuke an American city, we WILL nuke Mecca, they will never nuke an American city.
I met Cong. Dingell at a Congressional Delegation visit to the U.S. Embassy in Buenos Aires a few years ago. He's not a bad guy, really. Just has a lot of terrorists/supporters in his district.
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.