Bush Takes on Christian Right Over Anti-Islam Words

Reuters ^ | November 13, 2002 | Randall Mikkelsen

[Willie Green]

For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush on Wednesday took on the Christian right core of his political base, denouncing anti-Islamic remarks made by religious leaders including evangelist Pat Robertson.

Bush said such anti-Islamic comments were at odds with the views of most Americans.

"Some of the comments that have been uttered about Islam do not reflect the sentiments of my government or the sentiments of most Americans," Bush told reporters as he began a meeting with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

"By far, the vast majority of American citizens respect the Islamic people and the Muslim faith. After all, there are millions of peaceful-loving Muslim Americans," Bush said.

"Ours is a country based upon tolerance ... And we're not going to let the war on terror or terrorists cause us to change our values."

Bush did not identify conservative Christian leaders as his target, but White House officials said he was prompted by the anti-Islamic remarks of some of them, particularly religious broadcaster Pat Robertson, who reportedly said this week Muslims were "worse than the Nazis."

"He (Bush) wanted a clear statement," a senior White House official said.

Spokeswoman Angell Watts of Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network said she had no immediate comment.

A representative of a Muslim-American civil rights group, which had stepped up calls for Bush to repudiate such remarks, welcomed Bush's words.

"Obviously, we'd like to hear him repudiate these people by name, but we appreciate that he's moving in that direction," said Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

"It's encouraging to see that the president is finally addressing the issue of Islamophobia in America by addressing a specific attacks on Islam. This is a new stance, and it's one that we would encourage and support," Hooper said.

BID TO DISCOURAGE BACKLASH

Bush's efforts to discourage a backlash over the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, which were blamed on Islamic militant Osama bin Laden, have come increasingly into conflict with antipathy to Islam shown by some conservative Christians, a core of his support.

Robertson, a popular conservative commentator who sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1988, was criticized by CAIR and the American Jewish Committee for reportedly saying on his network Monday, "Adolf Hitler was bad, but what the Muslims want to do to the Jews is worse."

Jerry Falwell, a Baptist minister and leading voice of the Christian right, in an October television interview described the prophet Mohammad as a "terrorist."

Evangelist Franklin Graham, who gave the sermon at Bush's inaugural service in 2001, has also been criticized for comments on Islam. Asked about Bush's comments on Wednesday, Graham spokesman Mark DeMoss said Graham was traveling abroad.

"He has not added to any comment he's made on the subject in months, because he's getting tired of getting asked about it, and any time he answers about it he gives the impression he's crusading on this issue and he's not," DeMoss said.

[StopGlobalWhining]

"By far, the vast majority of American citizens respect the Islamic people and the Muslim faith. After all, there are millions of peaceful-loving Muslim Americans," Bush said.

I believe that statement to be true, but...

the 5% or so of radical Muslim extremists are committed to establish Islam as the single global religion, at any price. The 95% of peace-loving Muslims oppose the tactics of the terrorists, but will not denounce them. How many Imams or Muftis worldwide have you heard condemn the terrorist attacks of 9-11 and afterward?

Peace loving Muslims believe that Allah wants everyone to become Muslims, so although they oppose violence, they are willing to put up with it "temporarily", because once Islamic Law rules the globe, there will be no more conflict, only peaceful harmony. It is Allah's will.

The war in which we presently find ourselves is a religious war. It is Islam against all other religions and systems of life on earth. Until Americans and our elected govenmment representatives recognize that we are in a war for survival of our religions and our culture, we are doomed to lose.

[swarthyguy]

In the past year, the most popular name for newborn boys in the muslim world is......Osama.

[Finny]

Thanks, Rockitz, for a thoughtful and well-put theory.

Condemning communism or nazis as "evil" is one thing -- those are political movements. But to condemn a fairly ancient religion that has millions of followers around the world, and in particular one which is a conversion-of-choice for many Americans of African descent (I believe as a means of further segregating themselves from/protesting mainstream America and to emphasize their separate identity as "blacks"), would be a really, really stupid thing for ANY president of the United States to do.

Most of us here (I include myself) think that Islam is a false religion of violence and lust, a dangerous threat best judged by its fruit -- look at the state of misery and turmoil in Islamic nations today. It's within the perameters of preachers like Robertson and Graham to condemn such a religion on a national scale; Christianity in America has many followers of African descent, and they would not take offense. But if the President of the United States were to make the same declaration, Americans of African descent who have, and even many who have not, converted to Islam, would be called to arms!!! -- and as well, many Americans and the world would RIGHTLY be contemptuous of such a statement from a political leader. It is not a President's job to condemn religions, even when they are political theocracies as is Islam. So I think Bush is being smart, and I think Rockitz has a good view of how and why.

God bless Dubya with wisdom, popularity, and victory!

Finfreak

[DoughtyOne]

To: DoughtyOne

I must also say, that when you want your policies to be understood, you have to explain them in a clear, firm and completely understood manner.

How would an "in your face" approach work with some of the most antagonistic and defensive people groups on the planet? When you can answer that question, you
will understand why Bush is using this tact.

54 posted on 11/13/2002 7:15 PM PST by Rockitz

[Rockitz]

Why in God's name would anyone want to reach out to these vermin?

Because we value even misguided human life and remain hopeful that those human lives may be redirected toward the truth. Do you believe all 800 million Muslims understand their faith? I don't and neither does our president. As I said, he's trying to save them from themselves- a humanitarian of the highest degree.

[Torie]

What is your public policy prescription for American Muslims? What exactly is accomplished by saying Muslims are the functional equivalent of Nazis without qualification that is remotely constructive? Or are we just venting here? What rhetorical tone would you rather Bush take?

[DoughtyOne]

Sorry about that. My # 46 was supposed to be an response, but I evidently didn't copy the response. My old copy of your reply was pasted in instead. I redevelop my response later. Take care.

[IronJack]

What's your evidence for that?

What's my evidence for my statement that I don't trust them? Well, I know who I trust and who I don't, for starters ...

But if you mean why don't I trust them, I would say that I have less reason to trust them than to distrust them. Most of the atrocities committed in the last half a century against innocent citizens have been committed by Muslims under one terrorist banner or another. The Munich Olympics, the Marine bombings in Lebanon, the Lockerbie murders, the first Trade Center bombing, the Leon Klinghoffer murder, the Entebbe hijacking, the Bali bomb, the Cole, the Trade Center, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania. Who knows how many other atrocities can be laid at their door?

The common factor in all these horrors is Islam. And before you throw the equivalency argument at me, bear in mind that the skirmishes in Ireland for example, while between so-called Christian sects, are mostly political, not religious. And those consist largely of gangsters killing other gangsters, not madmen killing buildings full of secretaries and file clerks.

I don't trust American Muslims because I don't trust Muslims. While I would trust an American Muslim stockbroker over a Yemeni Muslim guerilla, it's only a matter of degree, not quality.

[Fred Mertz]

You need to stick your Pubbie talking points back where the sun don't shine.

In case you haven't noticed, there's a holy war going on right now.

[IronJack]

Because we value even misguided human life and remain hopeful that those human lives may be redirected toward the truth.

I don't value "misguided human life." I consider them garbage.

Do you believe all 800 million Muslims understand their faith?

The best defense you can offer is that they murder our countrymen out of IGNORANCE??!!!! Oh, well, that makes it all okay. Sorry for being so crass.

As I said, he's trying to save them from themselves- a humanitarian of the highest degree.

Actually, I'd sleep a whole lot better if he was devoting his energies into protecting ME from THEM. That is more in line with what he was hired to do. He's not supposed to play wet nurse to a gang of purblind goons and lost souls, especially where doing so exposes our country to cancer from within.

[Fred Mertz]

Williams [Muhammad] is not, nor is Malvo.

John Muhammad was born in Louisiana, since when is he not an American citizen?

[IronJack]

What is your public policy prescription for American Muslims? What exactly is accomplished by saying Muslims are the functional equivalent of Nazis without qualification that is remotely constructive? Or are we just venting here? What rhetorical tone would you rather Bush take?

Several questions, one answer, two possibilities: Bush actually believes the bugle oil about Islam being a relgion of peace. Or he's just spouting the appropriate PR oombalah to defuse his critics. If the former, his vision is at odds with reality and he needs a wakeup call before another jetliner hits another American building. If the latter, he needs to understand that schmoozing the towelheads has a cost as well as a benefit. One, it damages his credibility, since he's just going through the motions and mouthing platitudes nobody believes anyway. And two, he fails to demonstrate to the world that he recognizes that the enemy is not a person, but an idea. And the idea is inseparable from the Islamic faith.

[Dark Wing]

a sitting on the Jacksonians ping!

[Rockitz]

I'll have to ditto to Torie's post #66.

[nanny]

[Not true. Some Christians have, and do commit atrocities in the name of Christianity.]

OK - now the killing of abortion doctors is wrong even if it is only one, but compared to the murders done by the followers of Islam in that same time frame - I don't believe I would mention that.

Now the KKK?? (come on) and the Crusades - how many centuries ago was that? Is that be worst indictment of Christianity? That's a pretty good record, wouldn't you say - as compared to the 'other' religion.

This was wrong of President Bush - and he is saying to Christians what he has said to all Americans - 'Shut Up and TAke It".

The mid term election is over - he has no further need for the Christian right - of there is an election in '04 - but many things can happen in two years - just look at what has happened in the last two years.

[Torie]

Well I don't think squirting lighter fluid on religious tensions is in America's interest, even if we agree that Islam has some disturbing dysfunctional aspects. Most are well aware of them in any event, are well publicised by others, and don't need Bush to repeat them. What is needed is a skillful use of the carrot and stick, to nudge Islamic countries to change their educational systems, and nudge Islam into being a better fit for coping with pluralistic modernity, and to be less of an all encompassing closed system that subsumes other sources of connection and loyalty within the polis, and the world at large.

[GOPJ]

I respect the vast majority of people who are Muslim.

Radical Muslims, those who kill women for showing an ankle, or murder daughters for "shaming" a male family member, do not have my respect.

Muslim men who make women carry the burden of morality while keeping the "fourth wife slot" open for hookers do not have my respect.

Muslims who feel they can kill innocent unarmed Americans in the name of their faith do not have my respect.

Most Muslims resent the radical Muslims more than we can ever imagine. They are the victims of Mullahs, control freak clerics, the Saddams of the world and common crazy thugs. My heart goes out to them.

[Jason_b]

bump

[IronJack]

Uh huh. And how's that workin' out for ya? Making a lot of progress in that direction, are we? Maybe we can negotiate that tumor away or conciliate that aneurism.

Sure, gradually we may be able to woo the extremists back to reality. But extermination would be faster, and leave a lot less to chance.

[nightdriver]

"By far, the vast majority of American citizens respect the Islamic people and the Muslim faith. After all, there are millions of peaceful-loving Muslim Americans," Bush said.

Bush has to say things like that. He has to walk a fine line politically.

We, on the other hand, are perfectly free to call them fair game.