Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MJM59
[The main difference is their respective levels of zealotry and the amount of power that they hold over their followers. In this country, we are allowed to make up our own minds, and speak for ourselves. This freedom allows me to think for myself and I believe that for the most part Falwell and Robertson are full of it, so I pay little attention to their rhetoric. In the Middle East, their religious leaders are the all and end all. Speak up against them and your dead. They have the power to make people believe their interpretations of religious text and they use it to control their people into commiting these atrocities.]

Yes, there is much difference - but you state our freedoms allows us to think for ourselves and that is the very reason President Bush and Powell should have stayed silent on the issue. It has nothing to do with politics. If, in fact, they were afraid their, and I say their, friends the Muslims would have their feelings hurt, they should have explained to them that they were political and governmental leaders and not religious leaders. That what a religious leader speaks, they have the freedom to do so and political leaders should not get involved. It would have been truth. It would have been the correct thing to do. It also would have given a great civics lessons to all those people they now want to bring into this country so we can 'love' them, 'educate' them, etc.

After Powell's speech explaining how they were bringing more of these people into this country, I think I understand why President Bush was so quick to denouce the religious leaders. He has to keep them quiet if he is going to sell the American people on the most dangerous (in my opinion) idea of allowing more and more of those 'peaceful' people into this country.

Soon those of you who are in denial will realize that President Bush's agenda is not exactly putting America and Americans first. Why do you think this little announcement of importing Muslims wasn't made before the elections?

63 posted on 11/18/2002 5:09:23 PM PST by nanny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: nanny
bush and powell paid for by the enemy

"The level of anti-Muslim rhetoric from commentators, religious leaders, and now elected officials, is getting out of hand and is poisoning the minds of many ordinary Americans. Only a strong statement from President Bush will put these people on notice that anti-Muslim bigotry will not be accepted in our society," said CAIR Board Chairman Omar Ahmad.

http://www.shianews.com/hi/americas/news_id/0000338.php

It's official - America's over six million Muslims should vote for George W. Bush as the country's next president on November 7.

This endorsement was made October 23 by the American Muslim Political Coordinating Council Political Action Committee (AMPCC-PAC).

Not all support Bush One group representing a number of African-American Muslims, the Coalition for Good Government, did not support the endorsement of Bush. As well, a number of Muslim immigrants have expressed support for Gore and Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader in the upcoming election.

http://www.soundvision.com/info/politics/endorsement.asp

64 posted on 11/18/2002 5:11:52 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson