Imam Rauf "US has more blood on hands than al Qaida" (Palestinians, Mossad)

[SourD]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

Such altruism most folks around the world would prefer to do without.

No they wouldn't rather do without. Who do they all come crying to when the ***** hits the fan? Pakistan ring a bell?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Memphis1979

Smart bombs aren't always smart. In fact, they still do a lot of killing of innocent people.

And contrast Abudl with the Michigan Christian militia group that was collecting firearms and explosives in a bid to overthrow the government.

One sad localized group. Doesn't look like much of a threat worldwide, does it? Apples to oranges. Nice try, but no cigar.

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by TomDot

How many of those were directly and purposefully killed by Coalition forces in the name of Christianity.
Last I heard the market bombings that were typically taking out 50 to 100 people a pop were Muslim on Muslim.

You could say that these killiings would not have taken place without our invasion but you would also have to be aware that Saddam's regime was responsible for anywhere from 300,000 to 500,000 Iraqi deaths himself. Those numbers do not include the Iranians who perished in the Iran/Iraq War.

I don't think you can on the one hand defend deaths at the hands of Coalition forces that were effected for political control of a nation, and yet condemn the deaths at the hands of Saddam that were effected to maintain political control of a nation. The Iran/Iraq War wasn't a religious war.

And I think that the deaths incurred during the Crusades, and during the Inquisition were about as specifically in the name of Christianity as it gets.

[chielgirl]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

When has the US ever intentionally sent soldiers into bus stations with bombs on their chests or hijacked airplanes to specifically target civilians?

And besides, our Constitution doesn't tell us we should kill non-Americans. His holy book tells him to kill non-muslims.

Let's see, we've napalmed entire villages; Mai Lai Massacre; Abu Graib; School of the Americas, etc.

Originally Posted by TomDot

How many of those were directly and purposefully killed by Coalition forces in the name of Christianity.
Last I heard the market bombings that were typically taking out 50 to 100 people a pop were Muslim on Muslim.

You could say that these killiings would not have taken place without our invasion but you would also have to be aware that Saddam's regime was responsible for anywhere from 300,000 to 500,000 Iraqi deaths himself. Those numbers do not include the Iranians who perished in the Iran/Iraq War.

You're justifying deaths that wouldn't have occurred had we not attacked a sovereign nation? Really?
Bush said that god told him to attack Iraq. He made it a holy war.
George Bush: 'God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq' | World news | The Guardian
USATODAY.com - Strain of Iraq war showing on Bush, those who know him say (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-01-bush-cover_x.htm - broken link)

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Never said we don't have any blood on our hands. We don't carry the proportionate amount. We are a giving nation and even go in to rebuild and help places we have fought against.

Not our place.
You're right, we should be carrying more blood for our actions as a country. We've become bullies in the world.
We destroy a country and they rebuild it?
Gee, that's cost effective and not in any remote way, our place.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Hahahahahahaha!

So, okay, is Islam a religious or political entity?

In several theocracies, it's both.
Interesting how Iraq was secular, not religious and now we've filled it with religious whackaloons.

So, you want to turn the US into a theocracy? Is that your focus?

Originally Posted by Calvinist

I'm just amazed at the rebellious, snarky attitude by you folks. Try going to live in a muslim country and you'll really feel persecuted. You've got the freedom to do the things you do because of Christianity.

Poor persecuted christers. Not.
Xianity gives me no freedom. What an absolutely silly and unsupported comment.

[TomDot]

Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA

You need a hand moving those goalposts? Rauf said - and I think the numbers carry it out - that the US has a repsonsibility for the the death of more Muslims than al-Queda has for non-Muslims. Nobody except you mentioned "purposefully", nor "in the name of Christianity", nor any other qualifier you'd like to throw in there to arrive at your preferred result.

Don't you think intent should be a part of the equation? These people seem the think we are out to destroy Islam. Is that how you feel?

[Eleanora1]

It's very tacky.

I grow a bit weary of this tactic.

Islamic leaders and many Muslims apparently believe they have the right to level massive criticism at Americans as individuals and Americans as a whole. Meanwhile any sort of criticism of the Islamic world -- a world where women are largely second class citizens, the rights of religious minorities non-existent and theocracy the order of the day -- is labeled Islamphobia.

The double standard gets more than a bit ridiculous.

Rauf feels perfectly comfortable tearing American society to shreds as essentially evil and immoral but apparently believes his own community exempt from the slightest hint of similar examination.

[aveojohn]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

Hold on Hoss.

You seem to think that U.S. involvement in the middle east didn't start until Sept 12, 2001.

I know history, please don't put words in my mouth.

[Memphis1979]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

One sad localized group. Doesn't look like much of a threat worldwide, does it? Apples to oranges. Nice try, but no cigar.

I'm sure someone said the same thing about Al Qaeda at one point in time.

[TomDot]

[quote]

Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge

I don't think you can on the one hand defend deaths at the hands of Coalition forces that were effected for political control of a nation, and yet condemn the deaths at the hands of Saddam that were effected to maintain political control of a nation. The Iran/Iraq War wasn't a religious war.

I feel he needed to be taken out, that's all I was saying.

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Eleanora1

It's very tacky.

I grow a bit weary of this tactic.

Islamic leaders and many Muslims apparently believe they have the right to level massive criticism at Americans as individuals and Americans as a whole. Meanwhile any sort of criticism of the Islamic world -- a world where women are largely second class citizens, the rights of religious minorities non-existent and theocracy the order of the day -- is labeled Islamphobia.

The double standard gets more than a bit ridiculous.

Rauf feels perfectly comfortable tearing American society to shreds as essentially evil and immoral but apparently believes his own community exempt from the slightest hint of similar examination.

This tactic:

Conservative and anti-Muslim leaders apparently believe they have the right to level massive criticism at Muslims as individuals and as a whole. Meanwhile, any sort of criticism of American diplomatic policy--policy that has resulted in the deaths of millions of Muslims, policy that has resulted in authoritarian regimes being imposed on countries that were embracing democratic values--is labeled as terrorism.

The double standard gets more than a bit ridiculous.

Rauf doesn't tear up American society at all. He makes speeches about how Muslims can live at peace in a country where tolerance and religious freedom exists, how American laws are in accord with the tenets of Muslim belief.