Another Blow to 9/11 “Truthers”
The Mad Surgeon, Ayman Az-Zawahiri, has stated once again that his group of madmen were behind the 9/11 attacks and claims that Iran is behind the widespread rumors of Israel being the actual culprit. They are all a bunch of creeps and maniacs…
Osama bin Laden’s chief deputy in an audiotape Tuesday accused Shiite Iran of trying to discredit the Sunni al-Qaida terror network by spreading the conspiracy theory that Israel was behind the Sept. 11 attacks.
The comments reflected al-Qaida’s No. 2 leader Ayman al-Zawahri’s increasing criticism of Iran. Al-Zawahri has accused Iran in recent messages of seeking to extend its power in the Middle East, particularly in Iraq and through its Hezbollah allies in Lebanon.
[...]
One of the questioners asked about the theory that has circulated in the Middle East and elsewhere that Israel was behind the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Al-Zawahri accused Hezbollah’s Al-Manar television of starting the rumor.
“The purpose of this lie is clear — (to suggest) that there are no heroes among the Sunnis who can hurt America as no else did in history. Iranian media snapped up this lie and repeated it,” he said.
Heroes?? This buttface is truly digusting and sick. UGH
“Iran’s aim here is also clear — to cover up its involvement with America in invading the homes of Muslims in Afghanistan and Iraq,” he said.
Iran cooperated with the United States in the 2001 U.S. assault on Afghanistan that toppled al-Qaida’s allies, the Taliban.
Answering questions about Iraq in Tuesday’s tape, al-Zawahri said the insurgent umbrella group led by al-Qaida, called the Islamic State of Iraq, is “the primary force opposing the Crusaders and challenging Iranian ambitions” in Iraq, he said, referring to the Americans.
[...]
In the latest tape, al-Zawahri was also asked if the terror group had further plans to attack Western countries that participated in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and subsequent war.
“My answer is: Yes! We think that any country that has joined aggression on Muslims must be deterred,” he replied.
I despise how these beasts put things in such absolute terms and speak as if they are speaking for all Muslims
In response to a question signed by the Japanese news agency Kyodo asking if Japan remains a target because it once had troops in Iraq, al-Zawahri said “Japan provided help under the banner of the crusader coalition … therefore it participated in the Crusader campaign against the lands of Islam.”
[...]
He predicted that global warming would “make the world more sympathetic to and understanding of the Muslims’ jihad against the aggressor America.”
I thought barabarians like this beast did not believe in a globe, much less “global warming”. I thought they wanted to make the world burn anyway? How much does that do for global warming?
Asked if there are any women in al-Qaida, the terror leader answered simply: “No.” In a follow-up answer, he said: “There are no women in al-Qaida jihadi group, but the women of the mujahedeen are playing a heroic role in taking care of their houses and sons.”
In several parts of Tuesday’s audio message, Al-Zawahri claimed that the Taliban took over 95 percent of Afghanistan and is sweeping Pakistan as well.
“The Crusaders and their agents in Pakistan and Afghanistan are starting to fall,” he said.
In another answer Tuesday, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country because in doing so they would “have permanent stay there under the laws of the infidels.”
Al-Qaida’s media arm, Al-Sahab, announced in December that al-Zawahri would take questions from the public posted on Islamic militant Web sites and would respond “as soon as possible.” Queries were submitted on the main Islamist Web site until the cutoff date of Jan. 16.
Filed under: The Culture of Denial and Pretense
Tariq, your views are noble, but as a convert it is clear that while you are Muslim your ideals are still drawn from your Western background. You are not typical
He’s more typical than you think. Put Tariq in a mosque next to someone like Zawahri and see which one gets chased out.
Tariq, I appreciate that you are concerned with this effort as well. However, I don’t believe Islam is a religion of collective guilt. I understand that you want people to know that this is not Islam. Still, there should be an adab with your approach in this regard. Again, as I’ve suggested before, I would like to see your views and thoughts on the conservative christians that bash Islam day-in -day-out relentlessly. I see no discourse in the Blogosphere on these folks. Ivy league graduates, well read, they have blogs, radio shows, magazines, etc. They don’t come off as “nutters” but more dangerously they seem very intellectual and open to discourse. All the while they are extremely irresponsible in making very sweeping statements to the tune of Clash of Civilaztions and (Terrorist) Islam as the biggest threat to civilization. I would consider them ideological terrorist quite honestly. They do have an agenda.
Why is there little response from you on this? I agree, yes, the brothers going to extremes are an issue. But of equal and more threatening concern are the conservatives that threathen us via public opinion, politics, policy and law. They have the ability to sway opinion and public discourse. Let America chase the boogeyman du jour. But at least, bro, say something about this issue that is and will affect Muslim here in the US in a more profound way.
Your discourse only gives them fuel to further vilify Muslims in the media (with sweeping statements and imagery). It also gives them fuel in trying to etch out who’s a moderate (non-practicing) and who’s a fundamentalist (practicing). They will never consider us moderate until we completely wither away at our deen like they have done theirs. So let’s have a fair and balanced approach and not forget the adab with our brothers. As our beloved Prophet (saw)mentioned, “help your brother whether he is oppressed or whether he is an oppressor…”. But let us also be balanced in our relations with the non-Muslim.
If we are to develop Islam in this country we have to make it clear who we are and what we are about. No! We are not terrorist but no we are not so weak that we will discard our hijabs, beards, prayer and love of Allah and the Prophet for the sake of politic, democracy, secularism, or modernity. We can peacefuly coexist and participate but based on our morals, values, ethics and principles.
…..and just plain crazy.
Abu Hunain
Thanks for your comments. You wrote:
I basically answered my reasoning for this here in the fifth question, but in a nutshell, conservative Christians do not claim to speak for Islam or Muslims as mad men like Zawahiri and OBL do. I also do not believe in collective guilt. That is why I am speaking out against the maniacs and letting people know that I am not with THEM.
Everyone has an agenda. There are Christians that are fighting the rapturist wing that are trying to bring about the end of the world by self fulfilling their prophesies. That is their battle. The battle with the extremist lunatic fringe is ours.
So can we, if we get involved in the system. No we are not as powerful as the Christian right, but there are plenty of forces - other than Muslims - that are opposed to them and their agenda. The difference between the right wing Christians and these maniacs is that this discussion can take place in the arena of ideas. One can disagree without having their head chopped off. I doubt very seriously that I would last 5 minutes disagreeing with Zawahiri
How is it that by pointing out extremists that we give them that power?
Who said anything about discarting our religion?
Tariq,
While I think it’s important for us to take a definative stance on these issues. I think it is also important to note that things don’t happen in a vacum complex solutions are required for complex problems.
Shahed,
I am not clear on your point. which are you saying would be thrown out?
abuhunain:
Are conservative christians shouting from the pulpit that christians should kill all non-christians? do they encourage their children to blow themselves up in shopping malls? how many videos we seen on CBN of beheadings?
it is no more “complex” than the fact that we are dealing with terrorist killers and the only way to stop them is to kill them first
Ross,
Kill them first…
Yes that’s been greatly effective over the last 8 years.
Wow why didn’t George Bush think of that?!?!?!?
These problems are complex they don’t exist in a vacum and they do require complex solutions.
That’s why Jimmy Carter went to negotiate with Hamas because he is a true statesman and understand all voices need to be heard in order to arrive at a solution.
And at the end of the day just as in anywar they will sit down with AQ and negotiate with them too. This is the eternal nature of conflict. You can’t kill an idea with a bullet.
Rasheed Moore:
“AQ” has actually killed far more Muslims. If Muslims will not negotiate with stateless terrorists, then how do you expect us to? Are we supposed to just sit here and let them blow us all up?
Certainly not. You think that perhaps following this hadith may be the reason Alqaeda is acting this way: “I have been commanded to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah…”
Okay let’s not get this twisted “AQ” is a reality that none of us like. I’m simply stating this is the nature of conflict like it or not it is a reality we will be dealing with for a while.
DP111,
Yes that is a hadith can you do me a favor look up the chain of narrorators as well as the commentary on that particular hadith.
Here is a link to help you out.
http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/archive/readArt.php?id=59047
your confirmation that it is a hadith is all I need. I don’t understand what point you are trying to make otherwise. why don’t YOU look up the commentary and tell me if it says that it is NOT a commandment for Muslims to conquer the non-Muslim world. Otherwise, it is explicit
To: Ross
Yes, the conservatives are screaming it from the pulpit and from the radio and from their tv networks and from their books, blogs and magazines. Consider that nothing has been said about Rod Parsley (the spiritual adviser to John McCain) in the media. Don’t you think that’s a bit twisted since they went to town on Obama/Wright?
Ofcourse they don’t have to encourage their children to blow-up malls with bombs. They just encourage them to join the Army, Navy or Marines. What don’t you all get about the de facto joint venture of Church and State that is steadily becoming more prevalent?
Tell me what’s the difference between a Marine or Army corp empowered by military and politics senselessly killing civilians and a terrorist bomber? The conservatives would argue that he’s dying protecting our freedom and democracy. I would argue they are protecting and growing the interest of a select group because surely it was demonstrated that it was not in the collective interest of the US to go into Iraq.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To: Tariq
I would expect equal opportunity enjoining of good and forbidding of wrongdoing. You speak on education, marriage, race and host of other issues which I appreciate and love. I have been coming to your blog for well over a year and find it to be beneficial. I just consider the sway towards bucking the terrorist while not turning ’some’ attention to the elements of ill right here on our soil a bit off balance.
In regards to fueling the issue, it is only that I fear that by playing the “I’m not a nutter” card and pointing the finger in the other direction. I really don’t see the benefit, in so much as it relates to making some distinction in the media. That is, in juxtaposition to what is happening on a larger scale to demonize Islam altogether. I think I understand your effort and goals I just don’t agree with the means.
Denounce terrorism in general but don’t take each occurence of media frenzy as an opportunity to speak-up. It’s kind of odd in context of everything else that’s out there. I don’t think terrorism is the number 1 threat to America or western civilization. I haven’t bought into that hype.
Also, just as you make a point of saying that terrorism is NOT Islam. I think you should have some concern with creating some distance on what the conservatives and others say Islam IS.
Perhaps you can’t relate to what I’m saying in regards to the subversive discourse that goes on with the conservatives. Aside from the Daniel Pipes and Michael Savages realize that you have others that appeal to a very broad demographic from 30-something Af-Am’s to Baby Boomers. I would recommend checking out the radio station at http://whkradio.townhall.com for a week or so. There is a consistent rhetoric against Islam that’s quite unapologetic even when being irresponsible. They call for all out war on Radical-Islam (really Islam altogether). Any organization that does not meet their criteria of being moderate (read: non-practicing/apologetic) they make a case for them being part of the Radical-Islam problem.
So, on one end sure you can say terrorism is not Islam but on the other side I would consider it balanced to say what Islam is in light of the conservative discourse. Especially considering that McCain has ties with these folks. What sort of policies will be put in place to ’snuff out the terrorist”. Just think, the effort of Kenny Gamble and the bros and sisters in Phili has been coined a “Muslim only enclave”. That is, a cell or area of threat against democracy and western civilization. Where will we stand as we try to build institutions that are for serving the community but reflect Islamic values? In this discourse bro they are defining who is really a good Muslim.
Again, I’ve seen little to no effort to address this in the blogosphere. It’s not something that will simply go away nor is it something that we can expect that ‘their folks’ to handle. We enjoin to good and forbid the evil whether it is for or against us and whether it is in our house or not. We can’t do it selectively.
and Allah (swt) knows best…
To: Tariq & Ross
Here are few links to articles that I’ve placed on our blog. I think there is sufficient information there to understand the sort of discourse that is going on with regards to Islam and Muslim. It happens across a variety of platforms within the media. It’s not relegated to bible-bangers or a specific group. But the Conservatives had stepped up to take a lead during this political season. So there voices are the most resounding for me at this time.
http://changeyourcondition.net/2008/04/04/a-few-questions-on-mccains-radical-christian-spiritual-adviser/
http://changeyourcondition.net/2008/04/03/66-of-americans-admit-to-prejudice-against-muslims/
http://changeyourcondition.net/2008/03/31/its-hard-to-stop-a-speeding-bullet/
“Tell me what’s the difference between a Marine or Army corp empowered by military and politics senselessly killing civilians and a terrorist bomber?”
First one must assume that it is US policy to ’senselessly kill civilians’ as a matter of course. That is patently untrue as to policy or tactics at strategic or tactical level.
Uniformed services are just that, uniformed. The enemy, friendlies, civilians can tell who they are at a glance and decide how to act/react around them.
Suicide bombers are nonuniformed, undeclared combatants that attempt to hide among the civilians to hit their targets.
US uniformed services are bound by law, tradition and legal orders to act in a prescribed manner and can/will be brought up on charges if they do not.
Suicide Bombers regularly target women, children, and non combatants in public places as a matter policy.
Suicide bombers (in waiting) AQ regularly kill captives while they video tape the murder to create terror, one of the Iraqi prior AQ now Govt. soldiers said that watching a fellow AQ slaughter an 8 year old (Shia) girl changed his heart.
A suicide bomber is a valid fighter if he/she only targets military targets. That, however, is generally not the case.
If you cannot see the dif from the suicide bombers, that are killing more of their own population than of our soldiers, and uniformed soldiers then you are not very bright or simply sympathetic to terrorism as a foil for your politics.
Abu,
I’m really not familiar with the Christian Rev. and the McCain issue but I’m sure it will air out. It was discussed on Fox News tonight but the relationship between McCain and he is not the same 20 year deal BO has with Wright.
Also, a Christian/Muslim making the same statements mean two dif things via the secular/nonsecular approach of the two vastly different religious approaches. If that were not the case then non Christian religions would be treated as they are in many Islamic countries.
What happened to all of the Christians/Jews in the ME? In the 1930’s 40% of Baghdad was Jewish/Christian. Similar stories in every ME country.
To: Patb
Thanks for giving an example of what I would see more of. It’s interesting, I made a generalization and you retorted with specifics. This is what I would like to see happen in this disourse amongst the conservatives (and others) in regards to Islam and Muslims.
To your point, obviously one can see the apparent differences. However, the results are the same. I don’t believe that every person in the military is a racist that gets their rocks off Abu Ghrayb style. But I don’t see much difference between those types backed by military facade and delusional suicide bombers. (I would like to make a special exception in the case of Palestinians. I think they are under severe circumstances and what we might see from someone growing up in those circumstances may be the result of deep mental issues. Allah knows best about their condition.)
In regards to Obama/Wright and McCain/Parsley don’t be so quick to dismiss it. The issue, as per the conservatives is “guilt by association” and “you are like the company you keep”. So even if the McCain/Parsley relationship is not as long and detailed as Obama/Wright, based on their rationale it should be an issue.
Just look at what they are doing with the Bill Arian (sp?) issue. Here it is Obama was 8 years old but he has to explain the nature of the relationship. He has to provide clarity as to what his involvment with him was.
As you demonstrated, the relationship between McCain/Parsley is being brushed off. Huh?!? Geraldine Ferraro has to step down from Hilary’s campaign based off her statement about Barack getting play because he was black. I would consider that childs play compared to very clear hatred the Parsley has displayed and documented in his book. He calls for Muslims to be wiped out! This gets downplayed? Little to no coverage? That doesn’t add up to me.
I’m not politicin’. I ‘m not in to that but what I see is something that I would consider equally - if not more dangerous with the conservative strands and their ilk and the relationship with politics and policy. Look! In the name of terrorism NYPD now has what are essentially military patrols with machine guns, armor and dogs roaming the NY subways. What’s next? Will I have to show my ID to enter the masjid? Will my leaders be picked for me? Will praying in public be considered a terrorist threat?
I have two examples of bigotry from the pulpit. One from a young Af-Am sister and one from a white co-worker where Islam/Muslims where demonized and called a threat and worse. If this sort of discourse goes unchallenged then it has consequences for Muslims and non-Muslims as well.
So while Tariq is pointing out that Muslims are not terrorist and they are nut-jobs etc. Within churches and media outlets besides the terrorists Islam in general and as a whole is being called a threat to Western Civilization.
I only ask that the brother shed some light on the issue in an equal manner as he sheds light on the terrorists. In the case of the conservatives and other it is seemingly; sophisticated, scholarly, pragmatic, analytical, rational and thoughtful discussion. So it ’sometimes’ more subtle than all out terrorist rhetoric. In other cases it is quite the same it just has political and monetary backing. So they call for ‘going after them’, ‘wiping them out’, ‘destroying the threat’ etc. But who is the threat? It’s every group from CAIR to ISNA to Universal Group (Kenny Gamble) to Iran to AQ. They have not defined who the enemy is exactly except “Radical-Islam”. They sweep who they want to under that title. So, in effect, all Muslims (and non-Muslims) should be concerned about this and the implications it will have on the society. At the very least as we blog about this and that. We can at least blog about something that will have a significant impact on our ability to practice and live as Muslims in this country.
That’s just my thinking. Tariq is my brother and as a brother I am simply giving sincere advice, Insha Allah. Muslims have little recourse to media, think tanks, opinion polls, policy groups and the like. We need to use what we have available to us to at least voice a concern, ask a question, invoke a discussion and call for justice. Amongst a host of other issues I think deserves a little play.
and Allah knows best
Following up on the Carter/Hamas point.
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/giraldi.php?articleid=12721
As-salaamu ‘Alaikum,
Excellent point Abu Hunain. Tariq has a deep hatred for the AQ types but you rightly point out that the line or distinction between all types of Muslims is largely not being made by those who hold open enmity towards Islam. It takes a lot of work and sophistication to deal with their many sided attacks. It takes constant vigilance, like that of the Jewish community that catches every mention of Jews in the media and is ready to comment upon it.
The label of radicalism is so easily thrown out there and bandied about and is used to stifle any Muslim activity or commentary. We are being slandered with impunity and I know it from personal experience. What complicates it even more is the bending over backwards so many Muslims engage in to clear themselves from anything or anyone that may seem supportive or sympathetic to anything related to any of the people or causes brought up by the Zawahiris and the like. Yet, can it be denied that many of those issues are indeed of importance to most Muslims?
For example, to hate the oppression of the Russians against the Chechens, to speak against it and even deem it worthy enough to fight against does not have to mean one supports a Beslan school type operation or advocate any random acts of terror within Russsia, but what does any Muslim who appears to be practicing the religion expect to be cast as if he or she does in fact speak out or write on that or any other “Islamic” issue?
If Tariq writes about issues related to the plight or needs of a segment of Blackamerican Muslims, does that make him a racist or Afrocentric or nationalist and uncaring of other Muslims’ issues? No. But don’t think that he will escape being labelled as such.
Islam is being portrayed as a threat to western civilization, but does that mean we have to do our utmost to conform to the worst of it or agree with it all to be accepted and not deemed threatening? We are being forced and pushed into silence and compliance, which is very dangerous not just for Islam and Muslims, but for all people.
AH,
War is war and some of the results of war on either side are the same.
In this political Machiavelian war the violence is primarily internal even the AQ supported effort. Competing tribal/religious elements seeking power in the old fashioned way for the old fashioned manner of weilding it.
Shia vs. Sunni- not simply because of the sect difference but because the Sunni Ticritis wielded such absolute power before and used it to quash any/all.
Initially the Sunni Iraqi’s allied with the AQ Sunni’s but that is changing as the violence of AQ is starting to ‘freak them out’.
Shia alliance with brother Iranian Shia even though there is an ethnic difference. The Mooky boys will accept arms/money/training from the ‘Persians’ as they need the assistance.
Kurds. We could go on about Kurdistan all day but most of those areas are quiet except in the areas bordering Turkey. The Turks fear a united Kurd front.
US/Allies. Have no choice but to assist the immature Iraqi Govt. fighting in all of these directions. If the internal Shia/Sunni primary issue would cool most other things would fall in place.
I don’t see the violence as the ’same thing’ just because it is violence.
McCain/Obama.
In a nutshell the difference between the two is this, one is known and the other is not known.
McCain has 20 plus years of national level service and is a known entity: how he votes or does not vote, who he aligns with politically etc. He has a huge track record that can be looked at… and as far as him supporting non whites/Christians (ref. the Rev.P) he is a proponent of immigration reform and was aligned with Democrats on the issue in a way that pissed off most conservatives. Hardly a hard line neocon.
Obama, on the other hand, is a junior senator from Illinois that was given a pass by the media during the majority of his Pres. campaign and now things have arrisen that make us wonder who he is. We don’t know except for his book and what he’s said on the trail.
Ayers and his wife/partner Dohrn were weathermen terrorists, charged, tried and in his case aqquited on a technicality that the FBI overstepped it’s surveilance. He admits to bombing and has said so repeatedly, he has said it recently and said he’s wished he’s bombed more.
Dohrn (wife partner) was also a terr and said at a rally about the Manson murders “”Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!” Can you believe that crap.
They had an opening political fund raiser at their home in 95 to kick off his senatorial run and he attended. He’s since sat on boards with him (Ayers) and had other professional get togethers.
I wouldn’t stand in the same room with the two jerks let alone allow my name to be affiliated with them.
Rev.Wright is another telling associate and no, I do not believe HIV/Aids was a white Govt. invention to infect the black population with disease. I just saw Mathews (staunch Dem) reviewing the Moyers/Wright upcoming interview and he couldn’t believe what Wright was saying. He called Rev. Wright Obama’s Iraq.
So, who is Obama, is he who he says he is or is he really glib/articulate and rhetorically able to say what he thinks folks want to hear? I don’t know, he has little legislation and nothing important to point too politically, so how am I to know?
I don’t think Tariq’s spotlight on terrorism makes a onesided argument as he is a Muslim and that should be counter point enough.
What many that look at these blogs regularly note is that when a Muslim highlights terrorism and unabashidly derides the Terrs use of Islam etc. he/she will always get a handful of comments by other Muslims that say, “now I don’t support Terrorism but….”
and give him a ‘you better get in step with the Umma’ line of let’s talk about this ourselves but not in fron of the non Muslims etc. I think you are kind of forcing pushing a kind of silence yourself even though that is a fear you have about Islam in this country.
I’m an optimist and do believe most Americans to be fair when armed with the facts. truth. Openess and frank talk, the light of day on these issues will ensure freedom and not speaking in whispers or behind closed doors.
I also don’t think Tariq is afraid of labels. Labels get stuck on but they peel off.
“What happened to all of the Christians/Jews in the ME? In the 1930’s 40% of Baghdad was Jewish/Christian. Similar stories in every ME country.”
Syria is experiencing a huge influx of Christians from Iraq, which is a no-brainer.
Many of them left in search for better opportunities patb. They have the resources and intellectual capital to do so.
“But now, in the aftermath of the American invasion, the Christians sense the rise of radical Islamic tendencies in both the ruling Shi’ite majority and the Sunni minority”.
“At the same time, since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the condition of the more than 1 million Christians in that country – Chaldeans, Syrian, Latin, and Armenian Catholics – has deteriorated. Churches in Iraq have burned, while scores of Christians have been killed. According to press reports, 200,000 Iraqi Christians have left for Syria – and perhaps as many have left the region”.
The Jews left many years ago due to the same conditions.
So much for the invasion, huh? The same invasion that many of the pro-war hawks advocated vehemently.
They are to blame for the exodus of Christians from Iraq, bar none.
Danial,
“They are to blame….” not really.
Actually it’s very similar to what happened in the former Yugoslavia when the Soviet/Communist regimes fell and left a power vacuum.
The absolute power of Saddam/Communism kept intercine issues at bay in these to very differnt places.
Once removed the simmering hostilities simply flaired.
The down side of freedom. The freedom to do the wrong thing given the chance.
I guess you could extrapolate that the invasion caused the issue. When Saddam was in power the Sunni’s were in charge, the Shia/Kurds toed the line or were killed…it is one manner of creating ‘peace’.
To: patb
Not to beat a dead horse. But here is a clip and example of what is being preached from the pulpit on Islam and Muslims.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_bcyqu52a4
ASA abuhunain,
You make some good points so why don’t you start denoucing the right-wing Christian crazies on your blog? Br. Tariq has taken it upon himself to speak out against the extreme frienge Muslims which is valid also.
In the past I myself have been critial of Br. Tariq (and others) for appearing to placate the right-wing Christian crazies by not calling them out.
As Br. Tariq has explained here and else where his dispute is against those who claim to act in the name of Islam so in fact he is defending Islam not trying to agree the Chriztian Lunatics whose history is built upon bigotry, murder and mayhem.
I even started a blog to do just that but then I decided it isnt even worth the effort, the fact is if we teach and actually live by Islamic principles the debate will be over. I have much better things to do then to be pointing out every sigle rabid mouth foaming bigoted Christian right wing nut.
If you and others want to defend Islam by pointing out the Christian crazies of which there are enough to talk about if one chooses. I would rather focus on build our communities.
But I’m warning you, if you decide to take up that mantel be prepared for a lot of work for example can you think of one single weapon of mass deststruction whose ideal wan’t drawn from Western background?
germ warfare? Death camps?! Nuclear bombs? posionous gas? what type of warrior decides to create a tactic where he can kill a large number of people without danger or injury to himself? cowardly-crazies who pick fights then send the children of the poor to fight.
patb
speaking of cowardly-crazies while Rev. Wright was serving six years on active duty, tricky Dick oil baron Cheney , who was born in the same year, received five deferments, four for being an undergraduate and graduate student and one for being a prospective father. Now when he’s old with know heart problems he’s a man’s man ready to fight LOL!!!
And slick willie Bill Clinton and ne’er-do-well George ibn George, both five years younger than Rev Wright used their student deferments to stay in college until 1968. Both then avoided going on active duty through family connections.
So if willingness to fight for America is some sort of litmus test of patriotism for Muslims as Hagee suggests, then how did these cowards ever get in office? Oh thats right they wear flag lapel pins proudly. LOL
While I’m on the suject on known cowards (wait some do think dropping bombs on third world villiages without air defenses is brave) wasn’t McCain known for his claim to fame for being one of the major opposition leaders to the MLK holiday? Didn’t he create finance reform yet leading the way with PAC money? Didn’t he denouce the Bush tax plan as stupidly irresponcible but now he backs it? Isn’t he the hundred years war man? No a thousand yrs!!! Who gleafully sings Bomb Iran.
I agree he is known but known for what?