With this disgusting Islamic act fit for animals, how will the Dems show their strength? Mohammad created a following of radical animals who haven't any sense of reality. I think that the Republicans have presented a stronger front against such vile creatures. What do you think?

Not all who follow Mohammad are "radical animals". One cannot lump them all into the same category as those who committed this act of violence. There are radical extremists on all sides, in every direction. We cannot assume that all Christians are "vile creatures" because some of them bomb clinics where abortions might be performed.


As for the strengths of Dems vs. Repubs with regard to this type of situation, they are both flawed. So what if the Republicans can beat their chest harder and louder - that doesn't make them right. We've sent billions to Pakistan/Musharraf, only to turn on him later when a "better" option comes along. We supported the Taliban, too, remember.
Violence only begets more violence. Only when we change our methods, to promote global well-fare through peaceful actions rather than global warfare through violent actions, will we show true strength.

I think you're full of it. Alot of good your precious republicans in the White House did to prevent this horrible tragedy. :bad:

What you or I think is irrelevent. Here is the record:

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
- all captured and in jail

After the Somalia diaster where twenty-one American Rangers and Delta force were killed and dozens more wounded, where thousands of Somalie's died while warlords stole U.N. food; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
- at least 500 Somalis killed- Aidid killed within a year.

After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
- Saudis beheaded them

After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
- Saudis beheaded them

After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.
- Suspects arrested and in jail

On Jan. 26th, the CIA confirmed to the new Bush administration that bin Laden and Al Qaeda were responsible for the attack on the U.S.S. Cole which killed 17 American sailors.
- No arrests despite War on terrorism

On September 11th, 2001 almost 3,000 people were killed at the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Bush promised Osama Bin Laden would be killed or captured.
- Bin Laden still free.

On or about Jan. 20th, 2001, as the Clinton administration transitioned to the Bush, NSC chief Sandy Berger briefed Condi Rice extensively on the terrorism threat posed by bin Laden, telling her she would be spending more time on this threat than she ever imagined. At the Dept. of Defense, William Cohen was performing the same courtesy for Don Rumsfeld, again with a sharp reminder of the terrorist threat in the form of a hand-written letter to Rumsfeld containing the phone numbers of people in the Pentagon Rumsfeld needed to speak to directly on the subject.

The response of the Bush administration was to cease Predator drone surveillance flights to track bin Laden, reassign the cruise-missile equipped submarine stationed in the Indian Ocean with the specific mission of targeting bin Laden, reassign the AC-130 gunships on scramble alert that could be on top of bin Laden after a six hour flight, suspend the special forces operations targeting bin Laden already based in Uzbekistan for the purpose (a treaty that was crafted and signed by Bill Clinton).

In May, June and July, the sole remaining Clinton appointee, CIA Director Tenet, was frantic with concern over incoming intelligence indicating a huge terrorist attack on American soil. Vice-President Dick Cheney was head of a new counter-terrorism task force, yet held no meetings. Attorney General John Ashcroft refused FBI requests for hundreds of new agents to be assigned to counter-terrorism; his concerns were drugs and pornography, yet in late July he stopped flying commercial airliners due to a "threat assessment." The general threat assessment was considered to be the most severe in decades according to CIA's Tenet; members of the Senate Intelligence Committee were briefed on the situation on July 5th.

Also in July, an Arizona FBI agent wrote the 'Phoenix Memo,' expressing concern about possible Al Qaeda members taking flying lessons in this country towards the end of terrorist attacks. One of the two FBI officials to see it before the attacks was New York counter-terrorism chief John O'Neill; contemporaneous with the timing of this memo was O'Neill's remarks to the authors of 'Bin Laden: The Hidden Truth,' wherein O'Neill expressed his outrage with the Bush administration's thwarting of counter-terrorist efforts in the interests of protecting its Saudi sponsors. John O'Neill would soon quit the FBI in disgust, only to die at his new job as chief of security at the WTC.

The Hart Rudman committee came up with anti-terror plan and it was approved by President Clinton and Congress in 2000. It dealt with all terror scenarios, from combat in the mid east resulting in the bombing of the Fed Ex Headquarters to a small pox attack on OK city. It even included airplanes as weapons, no surprise since a right wing wacko tried to kill Clinton the same way. GWB took office in 2001 and he had the findings of the committee and the green light to implement the plan. He did not. Instead he had Dick Cheney review the plan and refused to discuss it with Congress.

I think I'll choose not to respond to this blatant religious and racial bigotry.

Great response, Wayne. I actually was thinking the same thing, to ignore racism, but just couldn't resist telling it like it is when it comes to republicans as complete failures.

You could make a better argument against the texts or doctrine of Islam without resorting to such a condescending dismissal of it. For instance there are many inconsistencies in the Koran, and there are the added elements of brutality and revenge in the Hadith and Jihadists texts. That much is at least understood by most scholars who have studied Islam.

And then you could contrast it with medieval Christianity and the brutality of the crusades or the hundreds of years that Jews, heretics and witches were tortured to death. The remnants of this not ending until the mid 19th century...

Or you could contrast the teachings of Islam with Hebraic and Christian texts from which it is sourced...but I think you get the picture that none of these religious heritages remain unblemished.

There is a wonderful book by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, called Infidel that you might want to take a look at...you can probably find a synopsis of it online. At any rate she is a Muslim woman who no longer aheres to her faith, and that puts her in deep jeopardy much as the author of the Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie. There are very few people from that faith who are able to speak out as to the injustices of it...unfortunately many of them cannot speak as freely as you can or they have to hide their identities....but regardless, there are some Muslim or Arab Islamists who are non-believers.


As to the Republicans...They are the very ones who have opened this Pandora's box in the Middle East...they are for the most part the most culpable, of expanding, creating and exacerbating a situation or peoples who might react by using terroristic tactics, and I'd hazard a guess that it is probably based on attitudes which might be similar to your own.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a right wing con artist. She was kicked out of the Dutch parliament and almost lost her citizenship when her lies about her background were publically exposed. She is now working for the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute as a pro-war mouthpiece. Don't trust anything this woman has to say.

Folks thank you for your replies they are logical and sincere. Its easy to get hot headed when we see such stupidity in the world. I know that its not all Muslims who are radicals, I know that the followers of any religion can pick and choose the tenets in which to follow. The problems of violent Jihad portrayed by the radical Islamics is seen hourly. Why is it that we do not hear from the main stream Muslims to actively and publicly denounce this backwards 7th century mentality.

As far as the policing effort of the Clinton years, sure some terrorists where captured. Just capturing some of these animals will not do the trick. We have to re-educate an entire generation of young Muslim children that are being raised to kill us. How else better to do it than create freedom, infrastructure, educational opportunities and security. In Iraq and Afghanistan the majority of the countries are peaceful, women are going to work and school. How else could this of happened without displacing the dictator regimes that were there?

Muslims do NOT hate us.

They and every real person in the world love each other and everyone wants the same thing

Peace and their own little part of society.

Bush hates.
Bush kills.

The only terrorist out there stares out at the Bush family while they shave each morning from their mirror. Those are the terrorists.

Bush created a boogeyman to scare people. That thing in the closet.
That monster under the bed.
A 6 foot 11 giant living in the cave plotting to destroy the world

Wake Up.

There is no boogey man.

It is the entire Bush family cabal.

They must be impeached and not allowed to return.

Then the world can go back to what it was before the Bushfamily invaded us.

Remember not 9-11
Remember 12-12-2000

Remember the good old days of the late 1970s. When people of the world were starting to come together in peace and love thanks in no small effort to JImmy Carter (who is about the only person along with Al who has not lied to us.)

Hey Dad...What James has said is basically the truth...BU$H has NOT yet come even close to finding Bin-Laden because he doesn't want to do so...you see they want to hang Osama over your head like the 'bogeyman' in 2008...just like they DID in 2004...in the hopes that you will hide under the bed and vote GOP out of fear...It's time we QUIT hiding under that 'bed' and hope we are going to vote for somebody to protect our lives for us...BU$H & the GOP are the ones that turned this 'police action' into a 'war'....THEY are the ones who MADE criminal 'terrorists' into Moslem 'martyrs' in the world of Islam...THEY 'legitimized' the extremists among their peers... :(

Democrats want to fix the "economy" and "healthcare" for everybody in this nation...because you take care of your 'own' FIRST and then look out for the rest of the world...a STRONG nation comes from a STRONG population...and a STRONG nation can OVERCOME anything! :clap:

Dad...let me ask you this...BU$H just 'pocket vetoed' a Defense Bill that included a PAY RAISE for service personnel...WHY?...because there was a 'provision' in the bill that said anyone hurt by Hussein can sue the Iraqi Government...remember those downed pilots in Desert Storm?...well Iraq doesn't want to be sued by them for damages done to them by Saddam Hussein...First WHY does IRAQ have ANY sayso in US Policy?...Secondly, BU$H pumped Billions into Iraq we will never see back...and NOW is worried about $30 Billion dollars Iraq has in US Banks and Investments...that they may take it out...MONEY WE GAVE THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE!...Sound fair to you? :?:

Thnx James, I am aware of her political position, I was speaking of her primarily though in terms of her experience with Islam. That perhaps is the important distinction. I don't have to approve of her politics to recognize what she says about Islamic doctrine to be true. It is upheld by academic study in that area. And I say that for the same reason that I can read and appreciate the literary style of, say, Christopher Hitchens, and as well, not agree with his own position on the Iraq occupation or his view of Middle East situations.

But the difference with Hitchens is that Ali says the her personal experiences gives weight to her writings about Islam. But she has lied about her personal experiences. It's a matter of credibilty and she has none.

To her credit, I do think she has explained her lies.. I am, however, just as wary as you as to her connections with the AEI. It's possible they might have thought her a valuable "ally." There is an article she did relative to her book that explains what she did (including the lies) in order to be allowed to stay in Holland called "Why I became an Infidel" or words to that effect which is included in Hitchens' book The Portable Atheist. Incidentally, Hitchens supports her security in the US. Most likely do to his own sentiments with regard to Islamic fundamentalism.


here is a recent article:

December 7, 2007
Op-Ed Contributor
Islam’s Silent Moderates

By AYAAN HIRSI ALI

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with 100 stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. (Koran 24:2)


IN the last few weeks, in three widely publicized episodes, we have seen Islamic justice enacted in ways that should make Muslim moderates rise up in horror.

A 20-year-old woman from Qatif, Saudi Arabia, reported that she had been abducted by several men and repeatedly raped. But judges found the victim herself to be guilty. Her crime is called “mingling”: when she was abducted, she was in a car with a man not related to her by blood or marriage, and in Saudi Arabia, that is illegal. Last month, she was sentenced to six months in prison and 200 lashes with a bamboo cane.

Two hundred lashes are enough to kill a strong man. Women usually receive no more than 30 lashes at a time, which means that for seven weeks the “girl from Qatif,” as she’s usually described in news articles, will dread her next session with Islamic justice. When she is released, her life will certainly never return to normal: already there have been reports that her brother has tried to kill her because her “crime” has tarnished her family’s honor.

We also saw Islamic justice in action in Sudan, when a 54-year-old British teacher named Gillian Gibbons was sentenced to 15 days in jail before the government pardoned her this week; she could have faced 40 lashes. When she began a reading project with her class involving a teddy bear, Ms. Gibbons suggested the children choose a name for it. They chose Muhammad; she let them do it. This was deemed to be blasphemy.

Then there’s Taslima Nasreen, the 45-year-old Bangladeshi writer who bravely defends women’s rights in the Muslim world. Forced to flee Bangladesh, she has been living in India. But Muslim groups there want her expelled, and one has offered 500,000 rupees for her head. In August she was assaulted by Muslim militants in Hyderabad, and in recent weeks she has had to leave Calcutta and then Rajasthan. Taslima Nasreen’s visa expires next year, and she fears she will not be allowed to live in India again.

It is often said that Islam has been “hijacked” by a small extremist group of radical fundamentalists. The vast majority of Muslims are said to be moderates.

But where are the moderates? Where are the Muslim voices raised over the terrible injustice of incidents like these? How many Muslims are willing to stand up and say, in the case of the girl from Qatif, that this manner of justice is appalling, brutal and bigoted — and that no matter who said it was the right thing to do, and how long ago it was said, this should no longer be done?

Usually, Muslim groups like the Organization of the Islamic Conference are quick to defend any affront to the image of Islam. The organization, which represents 57 Muslim states, sent four ambassadors to the leader of my political party in the Netherlands asking him to expel me from Parliament after I gave a newspaper interview in 2003 noting that by Western standards some of the Prophet Muhammad’s behavior would be unconscionable. A few years later, Muslim ambassadors to Denmark protested the cartoons of Muhammad and demanded that their perpetrators be prosecuted.

But while the incidents in Saudi Arabia, Sudan and India have done more to damage the image of Islamic justice than a dozen cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, the organizations that lined up to protest the hideous Danish offense to Islam are quiet now.

I wish there were more Islamic moderates. For example, I would welcome some guidance from that famous Muslim theologian of moderation, Tariq Ramadan. But when there is true suffering, real cruelty in the name of Islam, we hear, first, denial from all these organizations that are so concerned about Islam’s image. We hear that violence is not in the Koran, that Islam means peace, that this is a hijacking by extremists and a smear campaign and so on. But the evidence mounts up.

Islamic justice is a proud institution, one to which more than a billion people subscribe, at least in theory, and in the heart of the Islamic world it is the law of the land. But take a look at the verse above: more compelling even than the order to flog adulterers is the command that the believer show no compassion. It is this order to choose Allah above his sense of conscience and compassion that imprisons the Muslim in a mindset that is archaic and extreme.

If moderate Muslims believe there should be no compassion shown to the girl from Qatif, then what exactly makes them so moderate?

When a “moderate” Muslim’s sense of compassion and conscience collides with matters prescribed by Allah, he should choose compassion. Unless that happens much more widely, a moderate Islam will remain wishful thinking.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/opinion/07ali.html

But she still lied and these are the lies we know about. To me she has no credibility. Add to that she a mouthpiece for the AEI stirring up prejudice against Muslims to justify their war agenda.

She lied about her name, age etc in order to get asylum and citizenship....after being elected to the parliament some considered her lack of candidness as fraudulent in light of her position, and sought her ouster. Given her status as someone who was "escaping" her background and Islamic ties in Somalia, I can't say that I'd be that harsh in my judgment of her. Technically of course, there was an ethical breach on her part. So, I can agree with you in that respect. However, we simply don't know her motivation for doing so...

We also don't know if she's a pawn of pro-war sympathizers or if she is acting of her own accord. I do not agree with those who foster this pro-war stance, but I also understand her feminist activity towards helping other Muslim women who face the same restrictive lifestyle or primitive and brutal practices upon them such as the genital mutilation that she suffered.

It's never all black and white James.

Like I said those are only the lies that have been uncovered so far. I've seen her speak and she does her best to stir up anti-muslim prejudices. She is also a strong advocate for the Iraq war as well as military action against Iran. She is not being used by the right, she is one of them. She is a neocon and Bush supporter and she can't be trusted.

Here's the rub...EVERY 4 FRIGGIN YEARS some TERRORIST ACT happens ON CUE...so the GOP(GUARDIANS OF PERPETUATION) can basically SCARE the US Public into voting for somebody who LOVES WAR & DEATH...and EVERY 4 YEARS the people of THIS nation rush out and vote REPUBLICAN...THEN THEY WONDER WHY THINGS DON'T CHANGE!...

It's like Obama said, only he was pointing a finger at a Fellow Democrat when he and ALL of us should be pointing a FINGER at the GOP and ALL those REGISTERED VOTERS IN IRAQ & PAKISTAN!...(That's sarcasm...of COURSE THERE ARE NO VOTERS THERE!)...BUT WE ACT LIKE THERE ARE! :mad:

IT'S LIKE WE LET OUR PRESIDENT GET PICKED BY AL-QAEDA EVERY STINKIN ELECTION CYCLE! :mad:

If Al-CIA-dah actually existed and were terrorists

WHY would they want to help Bush?
When in theory, the democrats will stop wars, get out, and isn't that what
Mr.Bin-laden (not that he himself actually exists ) wants in the first place?
Us to get out.

That is how you know terrorists are only in the Bush/Clinton cabal.

Stop hiding from blame. WE are all to blame.

Everyone currently in office is to blame, as they let the cycle go on

And once new people are in office, they want to stay in office- so they resort to same tactics they might have argued against

ALL of us are to blame. Each and every person

Because no one did enough to stop it.

We are ALL Americans. We are not democrat Americans or Republican Americans.
We are one.
We shine together. We die together. We accept awards we accept blame.
We=ALL=US=USA

The only terrorists are in the Bush/Clintonrecycled familyinc. mirrors

Clay, Give it a rest before you fall off of that two story high soapbox...God! :rolleyes:

I'm NOT saying 'terrorists' literally PICK our officials...I'm saying isn't it CONVENIENT that these Jihadists ALWAYS start trouble during an ELECTION YEAR? :?:

And DON'T feed me that BS about me being to blame for it...You sound like BU$H...I NEVER told anyone to Invade Iraq...I NEVER said it was a GOOD idea for the Pretzel to take a VACATION in August 2001...I NEVER insisted Benazir Bhutto go back to Pakistan...BU$H did!...I'll be d*mned if I am going to take the 'blame' for it...The Right Wing Echo Chamber has been saying THAT for years!...It's OUR fault!...NO IT IS NOT! IT IS BU$H'S FAULT!...By the way, I brought a LADDER to get off of my soap box...DID you? :?: