Barack Hussein Obama: US "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world"

[sacase]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/06/03/barack_hussein_obama_us_one_of_the_largest_muslim_ countries_in_the_world


It is important to note that "if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world".
So says President Barack Obama. Or I should say: Barack Hussein Obama.

That's right: Barack Hussein Obama. Say it proud. Say it out loud. The middle moniker that dared not speak its name during the election campaign is now front and centre of the US president's attempt to woo the Muslim world, the theme of his visits to Riyadh on Wednesday and Cairo on Thursday.

Petrified of the potential political fallout of being branded a Muslim, Candidate Obama - a practicing Christian (http://www.newsweek.com/id/145971) - never used the name "Hussein" and its use was frowned upon as a forbidden code for the nutty accusation that he was some kind of Islamic Manchurian candidate.
No more. To say Barack Hussein Obama - BHO for short - now appears to be the height of political correctness.

As I argue in this analysis (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5430415/Analysis-realism-is-essential-to-Obamas-policy.html) for the Telegraph dead tree edition, Obama is seeking to return to a Middle East policy based on realism - buttressed by the bona fides of his own multi-cultural (including Muslim) background.

In Strasbourg two months ago (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5101244/President-Barack-Obama-America-has-been-arrogant-and-dismissive-towards-Europe.html), the president tried out his full name. Days later in Ankara (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5115044/Barack-Obama-in-Turkey-US-will-never-be-at-war-with-Islam.html), he was introduced to the Turkish parliament by his full name.

As ABC's Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller astutely outline here (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/abc-news-jake-tapper-and-sunlen-miller-report-the-other-day-we-heard-a-comment-from-a-white-house-aide-that-neverwould-have.html), the Obama administration is embracing the new president's inner Muslim, as it were, with deputy national security adviser that Obama had "experienced Islam on three continents...growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim Americans [are] a key part of Illinois and Chicago".
So that's once, twice, three times a Muslim?

Just in case the Arab world hasn't yet got this message of inbuilt tolerance, Mr Obama himself has gone a step further. In an interview with France's Canal Plus (http://www. /the_press_office/Transcript-of-the-Interview-of-the-President-by-Laura-Haim-Canal-Plus-6-1-09/) released on Tuesday evening, he suggested that the United States might be a Muslim country.
Obama said he wanted to "create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians".
So far, so blah - President George W. Bush often expressed much the same sentiments.

But then, as is his habit , Obama turned the concept around. "Now, the flip side is I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam.

"And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples."
Obama said in Turkey (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/06/obama-us-not-a-christian_n_183772.html) that Americans "do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation". John McCain was criticised in 2007 (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/01/mccain.christian.nation/index.html) for saying the US was "a Christian nation", later amending this (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/mccain_in_michigan_we_are_jude.html) to "a Judeo-Christian valued nation".

Of course, the concept of separation of church and state, which derived from the First Amendment to the Constitution, means that the US is not officially a Christian nation or a nation of any other particular religion. Which means, I suppose, that the US is as much a Muslim nation as a Christian one.

It's a bold - some might say audacious - turnaround by the president.

It's also a classically Obamaesque move.

During the 2008 campaign, he skillfully made himself, through his life story, the personification of change.
Now, implicitly contrasting himself with the born-again, evangelical Bush who pursued a pst-9/11 "crusade" (http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0919/p12s2-woeu.html) against terrorism, Obama is presenting himself to the Islamic world as the personification of a new, tolerant - and, yes, partly Muslim - America.

UPDATE: The excellent Don Surber crunches the numbers (http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2009/06/03/obamas-lie-of-the-day/#more-8668) and points out that Obama's claim is highly dubious. According to Surber, the US has an estimated three to eight million Muslims, less than one per cent of the world's total and less than at least 23 other countries.
The average claim for the US Muslim population is about six million. The precise figure is difficult to get because it's not included in US census data and many put the figure at much, much less (http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html#religions).

But even if we assume there are six million Muslims in the US, that makes it only the 34th biggest Muslim country (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/rel_isl_num_of_mus-religion-islam-number-of-muslim) in the world - behind Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria, China, Ethiopia, Algeria, Morocco, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Tanzania, Syria, Malaysia, Niger, Senegal, Ghana, Tunisia, Somalia, Guinea, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Burkina Faso and Tajikistan.

[JBond]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_harnden/blog/2009/06/03/barack_hussein_obama_us_one_of_the_largest_muslim_ countries_in_the_world


It is important to note that "if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world".
So says President Barack Obama. Or I should say: Barack Hussein Obama.

That's right: Barack Hussein Obama. Say it proud. Say it out loud. The middle moniker that dared not speak its name during the election campaign is now front and centre of the US president's attempt to woo the Muslim world, the theme of his visits to Riyadh on Wednesday and Cairo on Thursday.



Is he a racist now because he uses his full name when meeting with world leaders? I was told I was racist when I referred to him by his name his muslim father, that kicked him to the curb, gave him.

[firehawk350]

Is he a racist now because he uses his full name when meeting with world leaders? I was told I was racist when I referred to him by his name his muslim father, that kicked him to the curb, gave him.
BHO needs to get his facts right.

[JBond]

BHO needs to get his facts right.

In many areas. That is something we can agree on.

[vta]

Yes, with a smashing 0.6% demographic, he may be right... :rolleyes:

He really needs to stop pandering to others and let them know we can have civil relationships, despite our differences.

Unbelievable, what passes for intellect these days.

[theogt]

It's one thing to take an entire sentence out of context. It's another to take a clause out of a sentence.

[vta]

It's one thing to take an entire sentence out of context. It's another to take a clause out of a sentence.

Maybe so...
But in the context of his unnecessary pandering to archaic prejudices, it remains in the proper context of how out of his depth he most certainly is.

[theogt]

Maybe so...
But in the context of his unnecessary pandering to archaic prejudices, it remains in the proper context of how out of his depth he most certainly is.Oh, no. He's not using "with us or against us" language. He must hate America.

This is just political hackery.

[vta]

Oh, no. He's not using "with us or against us" language. He must hate America.

This is just political hackery.

As opposed to analytical hackery?
Here in lies a perfect example of what resides at the root of all conflicts; thinking it's either one way or the other, without acknowledging that there do exist other options; then wholly assuming your counterpart imbibes in this same poor habit.

Of course, this, despite what I'd written earlier about approaching the issue from a standpoint of civil discourse, regardless of our differences, instead of trying to appeal to prejudices, with offering limp similes that really don't exist.

[theogt]

As opposed to analytical hackery?
Here in lies a perfect example of what resides at the root of all conflicts; thinking it's either one way or the other, without acknowledging that there do exist other options; then wholly assuming your counterpart imbibes in this same poor habit.

Of course, this, despite what I'd written earlier about approaching the issue from a standpoint of civil discourse, regardless of our differences, instead of trying to appeal to prejudices, with offering limp similes that really don't exist.Says the guy who claims that the president is "out of his depth."

Methinks you're the one being the one taking the extremes here.

Oh, and layoff all the damn commas.

[vta]

Says the guy who claims that the president is "out of his depth."

Methinks you're the one being the one taking the extremes here.

Oh, and layoff all the damn commas.

I can't imagine what about my response can interpreted as extreme. It was appropriate to the suggestion you yourself offered.

[MetalHead]

Is Obama trying to tell us something?
Something some of us have long suspected?

[lewpac]

Is he a racist now because he uses his full name when meeting with world leaders? I was told I was racist when I referred to him by his name his muslim father, that kicked him to the curb, gave him.

That's not the point.

The point is political convenience and two-faced political debauchery.

It wasn't politically expedient during the campaign, and moreover IN THIS COUNTRY, to allow ANYONE to use his middle name. Because the Dali-Bama and his handlers knew that (here in a nation of majority Muslims;);)) any whisper of his name would hurt his chances of winning.

Now, when he want to pony-up to and schmooze with middle-East women-mutilators, and show them that America is REALLY more like them then not, it's no only acceptable to wheel out the name, but a necessary tactic to prove to them that HE'S NOT GEORGE W. BUSH!

Same with his dead-beat old man who split on the family. They did their best to lie and contort that his old man was a atheist........no religious affiliation. When in truth, this guy who skipped out on his Anglo mother was indeed a faithful, practicing and dyed-in-the-wool Muslim. Why would he agree to such a thing during the campaign (in a nation that's majority Muslim;);))???

Lastly (now follow me here), along these lines of "political expedience and convenience", this guy was born and raised by a white gal. HER PARENTS took over for whatever reason. Yet, the "Obama" movement was LARGELY about "first black" this, and "first black' that. It was interlaced and intertwined into every fabric of his candidacy. Yet, he's half Anglo. And one would assume that if the "other" half ran out on you, that you would at least TRY to identify with the parent and family that raised you, fed you, educated you, sheltered you, and gave you EVERYTHING in the world you needed to achieve!! If not, at least give them EQUAL time in your "compelling story"! Yeah, yeah, there was a blip or two about his grandma a time or two, but NOTHING approaching the "lineage" and background story we got shoved up our butts for two years.

Why is that? Because it was politically expedient to play the card he did in liberal America. Black folks are of course going to vote for him, and white folks are going to vote for him out of "white liberal guilt" and, to be cool and chic and "with it" at the right parties with the "swells" and "in crowd".

Very slick packaging.....................

[Jon88]

This is just stupid...

[sbark]

Is Obama trying to tell us something?
Something some of us have long suspected?

.........Obama is now the defacto "leader of the muslim world"......

Christopher Dickey, Newsweek-----, Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda, more and more are seen as has-beens in the Muslim world. (Thanks to GW Bush )

there is only one new leader who has raised the hopes of Muslims all over the world, who now expect so much of one man.............

.............wonder what they expect.......especially with Israel????????

[Jon88]

Let's pander to the most violent religion in the world and make apologies. You stupid moron.

[Bob Sacamano]

it reminds me of Patton's speech to a group of old, English ladies that it was one day that the US and Britain would rule the world

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Let's pander to the most violent religion in the world and make apologies. You stupid moron.

Christianity has probably killed more muslims and people than islam.

[lewpac]

Christianity has probably killed more muslims and people than islam.

Wrong..........of course.

Actually, atheism has killed more people, by the millions than any religion out there. Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc............agnostic/Marxist/socialist/Uber-Left/Labor/communist are accountable for probably a million times more murders combined than any religious prosecutions combined.

Secondly, people are SUPPOSED to evolve. Christians HAVE evolved. You don't see Catholic Priests or the Baptist Church or the Lutheran Church or Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson calling for beheading's in the 20th or 21st century!! You don't see Christians running around with a AR50 assault rifles, two different shoes, unmatching uniforms, a diaper on their head, yelling "death to ..................whatever".

Sorry, that lame attempt don't work anymore.

You wanna' bring up the 1400's to get Muslims out of the soup for their crimes in the 21st century? Good Luck!! Have at it.

[CowboyDan]

There are 195 countries in the world, we rank 34th in Muslim population. He's right. Deal.

It's not pandering, it's putting things into context for the rest of the world and for ignorant people in this country.

[CowboyDan]

Wrong..........of course.

Actually, atheism has killed more people, by the millions than any religion out there. Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc............agnostic/Marxist/socialist/Uber-Left/Labor/communist are accountable for probably a million times more murders combined than any religious prosecutions combined.

Stats please........don't forget to list your sources. By the way Atheists and agnostics are two different things. And what's wrong with Labor???

Secondly, people are SUPPOSED to evolve. Christians HAVE evolved.
You don't see Catholic Priests or the Baptist Church or the Lutheran Church or Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson calling for beheading's in the 20th or 21st century!!

See the thread on the Saudi Beheading in this forum, and don't forget to read up on the "evolved" pedefilia cover-up in the Catholic Church, or the Holy Crusade that W launched.

You don't see Christians running around with a AR50 assault rifles, two different shoes, unmatching uniforms, a diaper on their head, yelling "death to ..................whatever".

Stay Classy, Lewpac!

Sorry, that lame attempt don't work anymore.

You wanna' bring up the 1400's to get Muslims out of the soup for their crimes in the 21st century? Good Luck!! Have at it.

I know you're upset, but what your President is trying to do is keep you and your country safe, while making a case for finishing what we started in Afghanistan................remember Osama Bin Laden?? The real reason behind 9/11??

[bbgun]

There are 195 countries in the world, we rank 34th in Muslim population. He's right. Deal.

It's not pandering, it's putting things into context for the rest of the world and for ignorant people in this country.

Are you dense or just obstinate? There are literally dozens of countries with more Muslims than the U.S has. So Obama was incorrect to say "one of the largest," context or no context. Hell, we have three times as many Jews as Muslims in this country, but you'll never catch Obama bragging that the U.S. is one of the largest Jewish countries in the world. BTW, do you think Obama would ever describe America as a Judeo-Christian country? Yeah, me neither.

[Achozen]

Wrong..........of course.

Actually, atheism has killed more people, by the millions than any religion out there. Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc............agnostic/Marxist/socialist/Uber-Left/Labor/communist are accountable for probably a million times more murders combined than any religious prosecutions combined.

Secondly, people are SUPPOSED to evolve. Christians HAVE evolved. You don't see Catholic Priests or the Baptist Church or the Lutheran Church or Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson calling for beheading's in the 20th or 21st century!! You don't see Christians running around with a AR50 assault rifles, two different shoes, unmatching uniforms, a diaper on their head, yelling "death to ..................whatever".

Sorry, that lame attempt don't work anymore.

You wanna' bring up the 1400's to get Muslims out of the soup for their crimes in the 21st century? Good Luck!! Have at it.
ROFL, don't be silly. No one was killed "in the name of Atheism." Stalin just happened to kill people while being an Atheist.

Do you not know about the Crusades?

[ScipioCowboy]

Stats please........don't forget to list your sources. By the way Atheists and agnostics are two different things. And what's wrong with Labor???

Stalin's regime killed between 20 and 60 million; the exact number is subject to much debate, due in some part to renown Soviet secrecy.

Pol Pot was responsible for the death of between 1 million and 2 million people.

Around 40 million were killed under Mao Zedong.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm#Stalin
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7973463.stm

[CowboyDan]

Are you dense or just obstinate? There are literally dozens of countries with more Muslims than the U.S has. So Obama was incorrect to say "one of the largest," context or no context. Hell, we have three times as many Jews as Muslims in this country, but you'll never catch Obama bragging that the U.S. is one of the largest Jewish countries in the world. BTW, do you think Obama would ever describe America as a Judeo-Christian country? Yeah, me neither.

Almost 3 dozen, but there are 13 dozen with a smaller Muslim population. Basic 2nd grade math there slick, but I'm the dense one??

Answering your questions to me for me is very Hannity of you. My answer is this..........if we just came off an 8 year Presidential debacle that created extreme hatred in the world between Jews and non-Jews, or Judeo-Christians and non-Judeo-Christians, then definately. If you can't see what he's doing, then you are the dense one, friend.

[ScipioCowboy]

ROFL, don't be silly. No one was killed "in the name of Atheism." Stalin just happened to kill people while being an Atheist.

Do you not know about the Crusades?

Actually, Stalin incarcerated and murdered people because they were religious.

In fact, under Stalin's regime, the Russian Orthodox Church was almost completely wiped out.

The Crusades were responsible for the deaths of between 1 million and 5 million people. Stalin's regime by itself dwarfs these estimates with between 20 million and 60 million deaths.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Religion

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Actually, Stalin incarcerated and murdered people because they were religious.

In fact, under Stalin's regime, the Russian Orthodox Church was almost completely wiped out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Religion

part of that was started before him as Lenin subscribed to Marx' view that religion is the opiate of the masses.

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Wrong..........of course.

Actually, atheism has killed more people, by the millions than any religion out there. Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc............agnostic/Marxist/socialist/Uber-Left/Labor/communist are accountable for probably a million times more murders combined than any religious prosecutions combined.

Secondly, people are SUPPOSED to evolve. Christians HAVE evolved. You don't see Catholic Priests or the Baptist Church or the Lutheran Church or Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson calling for beheading's in the 20th or 21st century!! You don't see Christians running around with a AR50 assault rifles, two different shoes, unmatching uniforms, a diaper on their head, yelling "death to ..................whatever".

Sorry, that lame attempt don't work anymore.

You wanna' bring up the 1400's to get Muslims out of the soup for their crimes in the 21st century? Good Luck!! Have at it.

no but you heard Patty Robertson and Jerry Falwell saying that the WTC attacks were God's revenge on the US for its sinful ways.

Go back to the Inquisition where thousands were put to the stake just for not cowtowing to the Roman Catholic Church. Then of course there are the diseases brought to North America/South America, etc by those who wanted to colonize and bring religion to the savages. Hell many who supported US slavery did it saying the bible said white men were better (in all fairness though many fought slavery using the exact same bible).

Islam is no more violent a religion than Christianity.

[ScipioCowboy]

part of that was started before him as Lenin subscribed to Marx' view that religion is the opiate of the masses.

Absolutely.

I'm only making the point that people find reasons to oppress, incarcerate, and murder other people -- religion or no religion. It seems to be part of our nature.

[CowboyDan]

I'm working on my Christian Death Toll. This is what I've got so far, using your sources, and not including Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or the many plagues, famines, fiery serpents, Hitler, or the war in Iraq.

Killed by God in the Bible...... 2,391,421 (http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html), which, of course, greatly underestimates God's total death toll, since it only includes those killings for which specific numbers are given.

1,000,000 perished during the early Arian schism.
1,000,000 during the Carthaginian struggle.
7,000,000 during the Saracen slaughters in Spain.
5,000,000 perished during the eight Crusades.
2,000,000 of Saxons and Scandinavians lost their lives in opposing the introduction of the blessings of Christianity.
1,000,000 were destroyed in the Holy Wars against the Netherlands, Albigenses, Waldenses, and Huguenots.
30,000,000 Mexicans and Peruvians were slaughtered ere they could be convinced of the beauties of the Christian creed.
9,000,000 were burned for witchcraft.
Total, 56,000,000.Hitler's worth what, 9 mil more, not to mention the soldiers who lost their lives?

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Absolutely.

I'm only making the point that people find reasons to oppress, incarcerate, and murder other people -- religion or no religion. It seems to be part of our nature.

it's the ape/chimpanzee territorial instinct we have, pick on the weak, take their territory, their women and their belongings

deep down, man is still just an ape/chimpanzee

[ScipioCowboy]

it's the ape/chimpanzee territorial instinct we have, pick on the weak, take their territory, their women and their belongings

deep down, man is still just an ape/chimpanzee

It's quite possible that apes are less likely to kill their own kind than man.

What was that great line from Ripley in Aliens?

"Which species is worse? You don't see them [the Aliens] ******* each other over for a percentage.":D

[ScipioCowboy]

I'm working on my Christian Death Toll. This is what I've got so far, using your sources, and not including Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or the many plagues, famines, fiery serpents, Hitler, or the war in Iraq.

Killed by God in the Bible...... 2,391,421 (http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html), which, of course, greatly underestimates God's total death toll, since it only includes those killings for which specific numbers are given.
1,000,000 perished during the early Arian schism.
1,000,000 during the Carthaginian struggle.
7,000,000 during the Saracen slaughters in Spain.
5,000,000 perished during the eight Crusades.
2,000,000 of Saxons and Scandinavians lost their lives in opposing the introduction of the blessings of Christianity.
1,000,000 were destroyed in the Holy Wars against the Netherlands, Albigenses, Waldenses, and Huguenots.
30,000,000 Mexicans and Peruvians were slaughtered ere they could be convinced of the beauties of the Christian creed.
9,000,000 were burned for witchcraft.
Total, 56,000,000.So, starting at Biblical times and going all the way through modern times (a period of several thousand years), you calculated a death total of 56 million people -- quite possibly fewer people than were killed under Stalin's regime alone (a period of roughly 30 years).

I think you've made my point for me.


Hitler's worth what, 9 mil more, not to mention the soldiers who lost their lives?Hitler was religiously opportunistic. He used both anti-religious and religious rhetoric, depending on which served his purpose in the moment.

[lewpac]

Again, every Muslim defender and Obama supporter has nothing else but to bash religion with the 15th century "maybe, maybe not" stats.

In the mean time, while persecuting "religious" killings in an attempt to bring down Judea/Christian society, they conveniently forget the MOST RECENT RELIGIOUS slaughterhouse and most modern killers "in the name of God". That being Islamist.

Notice I didn't say the PC "Islamist extremists". The liberal PC term they use to get Islam out of the soup. The fact that NOT ONE MUSLIM OF NOTE came out and decried or condemned their actions over the last two decades............makes them all in league by omission. Until some one in the modern Muslim world condemns this "jihaad", I'm going to take the approach of PMSNBC. One Catholic preist goes wrong, the whole religion is to blame. One idiot kills a Dr. Tiller, and the whole religeous right is to blame. The Crusades? Christianity with blood on their hands forever.......

9/11??? All Muslims are to blame...................until further notice. You wanna' play that game? Then lets play it both ways. Every Muslim in the world has blood on their hands and will NEVER get off the hook for the sins and crimes of the past.

[Achozen]

ScipioCowboy,

Hitler thought he was doing God's work by killing the Jews.

[ScipioCowboy]

ScipioCowboy,

Hitler thought he was doing God's work by killing the Jews.

Like I said, religion was matter of political expediency for Hitler.

[CowboyDan]

Like I said, religion was matter of political expediency for Hitler.

As is the case for many humans.

And for your other comments, you said Stalin was responsible for 20-60 mil (that's a pretty large gap in that guestimate, but don't forget that he had better weapons to work with.). I'm just totalling them up like you asked. Obviously today there are people known as Islamic extremsists who claim religion as their reason for killing...............which is standard throughout history............but it doesn't take away from the fact that we are #34 out of 195.

Lewpac, you're painting with a very wide brush. And I'm not sure where you've been for the last 8 years, but tens of thousands of significant Islamic leaders have spoken out against terrorism and jihad.
See for yourself: http://facts-not-fear.blogspot.com/2007/05/muslim-condemnations-of-terrorism.html
http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
I can post as many as you'd like to read :rolleyes:


Is there a particular Muslim you are just dying to hear an apology from??

[daschoo]

Again, every Muslim defender and Obama supporter has nothing else but to bash religion with the 15th century "maybe, maybe not" stats.

In the mean time, while persecuting "religious" killings in an attempt to bring down Judea/Christian society, they conveniently forget the MOST RECENT RELIGIOUS slaughterhouse and most modern killers "in the name of God". That being Islamist.

Notice I didn't say the PC "Islamist extremists". The liberal PC term they use to get Islam out of the soup. The fact that NOT ONE MUSLIM OF NOTE came out and decried or condemned their actions over the last two decades............makes them all in league by omission. Until some one in the modern Muslim world condemns this "jihaad", I'm going to take the approach of PMSNBC. One Catholic preist goes wrong, the whole religion is to blame. One idiot kills a Dr. Tiller, and the whole religeous right is to blame. The Crusades? Christianity with blood on their hands forever.......

9/11??? All Muslims are to blame...................until further notice. You wanna' play that game? Then lets play it both ways. Every Muslim in the world has blood on their hands and will NEVER get off the hook for the sins and crimes of the past.

this is basically just racist nonsense, if you bother to check the normal muslims do condemn this jihaad. whether it be the ones you see being interviewed on the television after any attack condemning it and pointing out that these people only achieve heightened tensions between muslims and non-muslims who live side by side or whether it be high profile clerics who appear on shows like question time over here where i have never once seen any of them condemn it. i can't speak for muslims in america as i haven't seen how they respond but the muslims in this country certainly do condemn these attacks which makes your claim that not one single muslim has ever condemned it complete nonsense. and your last paragraph is quite frankly just narrow minded bile in my opinion.

[SuspectCorner]

The Accidental Tourist:


"Aye, Barry O'Bama here! I just stopped by on me way to the pub for a pint and a game of darts... has anybody seen me Rosary?...

What?... the UK/Ireland trip is next week?... So this ISN'T Dublin? ... Riyadh, eh?...

Salam, everyone! Barack Hussein Obama here. I just stopped by on my way to "Hajizadeh's" for the lamb kabab and then I'm off to the mosque."



know your customer... sizzle > steak

[daschoo]

i wouldn't advise you to infer dublin is in the uk if you ever visit the city :rolleyes:

but i have to say i agree with the point you're making

[SuspectCorner]

i wouldn't advise you to infer dublin is in the uk if you ever visit the city :rolleyes:

but i have to say i agree with the point you're making

Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to remember that if I ever make it out to the Emerald Isle and Dublin. I guess should have said Belfast. oops. Speaking of pint's - I appear to be over my limit.

[daschoo]

Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to remember that if I ever make it out to the Emerald Isle and Dublin. I guess should have said Belfast. oops. Speaking of pint's - I appear to be over my limit.

thats just not fair, i'm stuck in work and will be sat here for the next 9 and a half hours

[SuspectCorner]

thats just not fair, i'm stuck in work and will be sat here for the next 9 and a half hours

you suffer now - but in a few hours you'll be in the catbird's seat with me as the green one.

[SuspectCorner]

I just watched Obama's speech to Cairo "live" - it was extremely good. I suppose his multiracial/multicultural background provides him with a latitude previous Presidents won't have enjoyed with, for example, Middle Eastern audiences.

He's just a helluva speaker ladies and germs. He's early into his admin and I think this is the arena where he might have the most positive impact during his presidency. Foreign relations.

[numnuts23]

I just watched Obama's speech to Cairo "live" - it was extremely good. I suppose his multiracial/multicultural background provides him with a latitude previous Presidents won't have enjoyed with, for example, Middle Eastern audiences.

He's just a helluva speaker ladies and germs. He's early into his admin and I think this is the arena where he might have the most positive impact during his presidency. Foreign relations.

Suspect... I truly believe if MSNBC had a camera in the White House bathroom (which wouldn't surprise me if Kieth Oberman did), you would say that "Obama takes a poop with elgance and grace that few have ever seen, I think this is the arena where he could have the most positve impact during his presidency. How to do number 2, properly".

[DIAF]

barack apparently failed math in school. NPR fact checked that statement yesterday, and found that with the number of muslims in the US we'd rank 34th in the world in muslim population.

[SultanOfSix]

Absolutely.

I'm only making the point that people find reasons to oppress, incarcerate, and murder other people -- religion or no religion. It seems to be part of our nature.

No, it's not part of our nature.

It's part of people who forget their true nature. At least, from my perspective.

[SultanOfSix]

this is basically just racist nonsense, if you bother to check the normal muslims do condemn this jihaad.

Muslims do not condemn jihad. The majority have condemned the terrorist acts committed by Muslims across the world. Jihad will always be part of Islam. However, the majority opinion of Islamic scholars state that jihad is allowable in only in a few situations: if someone declares war against or is oppressing the Muslims either explicitly or implicitly and thus is primarily defensive, or a group is oppressing another people and thus jihad becomes offensive. Also, jihad is only applicable when the majority of Islamic scholars agree that it is one, for example, in the case of the Russian invasion of Afghanistan.

As for religion being the cause of the problems of the world, or a cause of death and destruction that is incomparable, or whatever likewise nonsense, hello?

Has anyone looked at the past two hundred years alone - the age of secular humanism - and how much death, destruction, bloodshed, violence, poverty, oppression, ways to kill people, etc. has been induced by it? Yes, as a whole, the world has become more materialistically advanced, but the ethics that religion and belief in God has instilled has seemingly lost its value, and led to a whole significant slew of other problems.

[daschoo]

Muslims do not condemn jihad. The majority have condemned the terrorist acts committed by Muslims across the world. Jihad will always be part of Islam. However, the majority opinion of Islamic scholars state that jihad is allowable in only in a few situations: if someone declares war against or is oppressing the Muslims either explicitly or implicitly and thus is primarily defensive, or a group is oppressing another people and thus jihad becomes offensive. Also, jihad is only applicable when the majority of Islamic scholars agree that it is one, for example, in the case of the Russian invasion of Afghanistan.

sorry, perhaps i should have put quotation marks around jihad in the same vane as lewpac when he stated "this jihaad" was universaly supported by muslims. if you read the rest of my post it would probably have been quite clear to you what i was getting at.

[firehawk350]

People kill people. Guns don't kill people and religion doesn't kill people. Regardless, this is political pandering at it's best.

[Bob Sacamano]

ScipioCowboy,

Hitler thought he was doing God's work by killing the Jews.

maybe so, but the man wasn't a practicing Christian