Tom Tancredo wants to bomb Muslim Holy Sites

[Hacp]

Talk show host Pat Campbell (search) asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons. "Well, what if you said something like ? if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.

These statements are frankly stupid. Why would you bomb Mecca if terrorists bombed the US? I guess we'll need to keep track of bombings carried out by radical Catholics and start nuking the Vatican whenever they act. That will surely stopem.

 

[babylon5]

Are there even one Catholics extremist plan to bomb USA?

 

[jpeyton]

How exactly would bombing innocent civilians at a holy site damage terrorist networks?

BTW, Tancre-who-is-this-guy and why should we care? Terrorism is far down the list of our real priorities.

 

[Phokus]

Bombing the muslim holy sites would certainly decrease extremism.

What a twit.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Hacp
[L=Talk show host Pat Campbell (search) asked the Littleton Republican how the country I guess we'll need to keep track of bombings carried out by radical Catholics and start nuking the Vatican whenever they act. That will surely stopem.[/quote]

< sarcasm >

Is that where they're hiding their WMD's, or does he want to knock out their secret pedophile training camps? :roll:

< /sarcasm >

 

[LittleNemoNES]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

that's THE stupidest thing I've EVER heard. Tom HAS to have some serious mental impairment.

Bombing Mecca = end of civilization (WWFin)

 

[Jhhnn]

Tancredo is an embarassment to the state of Colorado and to the whole body politic, for that matter.

He is a useful barometer, however, to determine what the rightwing really thinks behind the carefully constructed facade...

 

[StageLeft]

I guess we'll need to keep track of bombings carried out by radical Catholics and start nuking the Vatican whenever they act.

Great comparison, because Catholics are bombing all over the world right now.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Tancredo is an embarassment to the state of Colorado and to the whole body politic, for that matter.

He is a useful barometer, however, to determine what the rightwing really thinks behind the carefully constructed facade...

:roll: Keep trying to tell yourselves that.

TC is a one note candidate. Immigration, Immigration, Immigration.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Tancredo is an embarassment to the state of Colorado and to the whole body politic, for that matter.

He is a useful barometer, however, to determine what the rightwing really thinks behind the carefully constructed facade...

:roll: Keep trying to tell yourselves that.

TC is a one note candidate. Immigration, Immigration, Immigration.

Well, the 4 term Republican congressman is without question off key on this note.

 

[Jhhnn]

Hey- maybe Tom's fundie base will get their undies in a bunch if the right spin is applied to his remarks, ala Rove&Co-

"Tancredo wants to nuke Jerusalem!"

It is, after all, one of Islam's holiest places...

 

[ProfJohn]

It?s not about bombing Mecca as much as it is about trying to create a deterrent to prevent the crazies from using a nuke on us.

The real question is whether setting off a nuke on Mecca would stop them from setting off a nuke on US soil.

 

[Lemon law]

The crowded 08 Presidential field has already formed up. And after some initial spin wheels fund raising, they are entering into what Cookie Roberts quite properly labels the silly season. God only knows how long it will last, but from now on and until the nominations are settled, all candidates will try to out do each other in a race to make total fools of themselves.

Get used to it folks, the stupidity is only starting. Its going to be an extended silly season this year because they are getting such an early start. And the reasoning to be rejected will be---its better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt. But the other point to make is that some candidates will make some early stupid statements and learn from it. Somewhat my hope for Obama. But I gotta really wonder if there is any hope for Tancredo's libido.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It?s not about bombing Mecca as much as it is about trying to create a deterrent to prevent the crazies from using a nuke on us.

The real question is whether setting off a nuke on Mecca would stop them from setting off a nuke on US soil.

<taps sarcasm meter> Is this thing working???

 

[Moonbeam]

The reaction of every person who is hurt again and again is to hurt back if they can.

If you are hurt by an Islamic Extremist as we all keep hearing about you think about hurting what they presumably hold dear. Naturally the holy sites of Islam would be one of the first things you would think about.

And if you are an idiot your thinking will stop there.

But if you think about what is happening and what we have already seen, we have seen these Islamic terrorists blow up their own sacred sites. That, in my opinion, is because these people are not religious really at all. They have taken some aspects of their religion as a justification for why they hate and why their brethren should too. But their actions show that they are non believers who kill innocent people contrary to every real religious law.

They would be only too happy if we were to destroy Islamic sites because we would create more and more hate. It is hate these folk love and are swimming in. Hate is their real God.

And so when you are hurt and strike back in anger against other new innocents you create the karma called endless cycles of violence and war. Our religion tells us what we have to do. We have to suffer the pain we are dealt and forgive. This is what we are commanded. Real religion is an escape from the endless madness we create on earth, but we will not listen. Our revenge will come back to our children and on and on and on. The real jihad, the real war, is with the hate we feel within ourselves.

But there is so much hate in the world is makes good politics. People will vote for revenge, even imaginary revenge.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: babylon5
Are there even one Catholics extremist plan to bomb USA?

Does it have to be USA? IRA? And they've definitely targeted plenty of civilians in the past twenty to thirty years.

The point is that bombing holy sites would be absolutely stupid because it would completely be non sequitar. I'm not trying to say "Cathloics have it too" as an excuse - but the point is to show how RIDICULOUS of a response that would be.

And only those who want a massive war that 99% of people on both sides don't want would push for this

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It?s not about bombing Mecca as much as it is about trying to create a deterrent to prevent the crazies from using a nuke on us.

The real question is whether setting off a nuke on Mecca would stop them from setting off a nuke on US soil.

No that would empower them - and just like the very good analogy that HACP made you wouldn't nuke the Vatican because of any catholic extremists.

Moonbeam : I love you If I was capable of bearing children, I'd ask to have your babies

 

[oiprocs]

Exodus 21:23-27, and I quote:

If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Tancredo wants justice I say! JUSTICE!

/sarcasm

 

[Nebor]

I wouldn't stop laughing for a solid hour if the US steered a bunker buster right into the Ka'bah.

It would be such a jab in the eye to the enemy, virtually destroying an entire pillar of their religion.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
How exactly would bombing innocent civilians at a holy site damage terrorist networks?

BTW, Tancre-who-is-this-guy and why should we care?

Terrorism is far down the list of our real priorities.

Fear of Terrists is the number one Republican brainwashing machine.

It worked like a champ up until Nov 2006, looks like they are stepping it up.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The real question is whether setting off a nuke on Mecca would stop them from setting off a nuke on US soil.

And the answer is no, but they can't play tit for tat as well because the US has more bombs. Just give me a heads up before the games start so I can emmigrate.

Sorry, Moonbeam you're not familiar with even some of the basic Muslim tenets, otherwise you'd not have written that post. Terrorists who bomb are quite accurately basing it upon teachings verbatim from Muhammad (except for the fact they didn't have bombs in the 6th or 7th century).

Does it have to be USA? IRA? And they've definitely targeted plenty of civilians in the past twenty to thirty years.

For the love, people, IRA did not bomb in Christ's name. They were not using the bible to back it up. They bombed in spite of their supposed religion, not because of it. Their motivations were not even ostensibly religious ones. That's like bringing up mcveigh to counter any time somebody says that "terrorists are all from the middle east", which is almost entirely accurate.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The real question is whether setting off a nuke on Mecca would stop them from setting off a nuke on US soil.

And the answer is no, but they can't play tit for tat as well because the US has more bombs. Just give me a heads up before the games start so I can emmigrate.

Sorry, Moonbeam you're not familiar with even some of the basic Muslim tenets, otherwise you'd not have written that post. Terrorists who bomb are quite accurately basing it upon teachings verbatim from Muhammad (except for the fact they didn't have bombs in the 6th or 7th century).

Does it have to be USA? IRA? And they've definitely targeted plenty of civilians in the past twenty to thirty years.

For the love, people, IRA did not bomb in Christ's name. They were not using the bible to back it up. They bombed in spite of their supposed religion, not because of it. Their motivations were not even ostensibly religious ones. That's like bringing up mcveigh to counter any time somebody says that "terrorists are all from the middle east", which is almost entirely accurate.

Don't look now, but that line of thinking is coming pretty close to turning us into terrorists. In fact, that's exactly what we would be. Whether or not such approaches are effective at ending MUSLIM terrorism really makes no difference, we'd become the very thing we were fighting against.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Nebor
I wouldn't stop laughing for a solid hour if the US steered a bunker buster right into the Ka'bah.

It would be such a jab in the eye to the enemy, virtually destroying an entire pillar of their religion.

Ah yes, nothing like turning every single Muslim on earth into a terrorist who wants revenge on the US. Are you some kind of moron?

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jpeyton
How exactly would bombing innocent civilians at a holy site damage terrorist networks?

BTW, Tancre-who-is-this-guy and why should we care?

Terrorism is far down the list of our real priorities.

Fear of Terrists is the number one Republican brainwashing machine.

It worked like a champ up until Nov 2006, looks like they are stepping it up.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here DM has put his finger on the problem.

The convention wisdom is an eye for an eye prevents violence because I won't smite thee if
I know I will get become the smited in return.

The problem comes when the terrorist strikes and then runs away. Suddenly we can't find the person who needs the smiting. So we smite not the perp but his kinfolk who we can find. As we blame all Muslims for the sins of a very very few. Which then pisses off the set of all Muslims and a very very few are then sufficiently radicalized enough to join the terrorists. Which also tells the terrorist their tactic is working so they are more likely to come back with more attacks.

And the point is the American people got attacked on 911, applied the conventional wisdom,
and suddenly five plus years later get these really disquieting results. We have more and not less terrorists, we have less and not more allies, we are hemorrhaging money and lives, we have lost many of our freedoms, have pissed of 1.4 billion people, and are stuck in a quagmire in Iraq. And all these failures are IMPOSSIBLE to avoid noticing.

But what we, the American people, find almost impossible, is to come back and revisit the logic chain that got us into this fine mess.

But good logic should predict results--And we should pick event sequences that lead to favorable results. And suddenly the things that were supposed to cause favorable results are producing unfavorable outcomes. Therefore something in the initial logic was flawed.

HMMMMM---but where? As you can see, I have certain guesses on where we went wrong.
And am left in somewhat despair because quite a few disagree while insisting that is not where the logic failed.

But clearly the logic failed somewhere. Until we can identify that somewhere, we are no where. But as we can see, the cognitive dissonance of being nowhere no longer produces the votes. Even if we are still nowhere on coming to grips with the logic.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jpeyton
How exactly would bombing innocent civilians at a holy site damage terrorist networks?

BTW, Tancre-who-is-this-guy and why should we care?

Terrorism is far down the list of our real priorities.

Fear of Terrists is the number one Republican brainwashing machine.

It worked like a champ up until Nov 2006, looks like they are stepping it up.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here DM has put his finger on the problem.

The convention wisdom is an eye for an eye prevents violence because I won't smite thee if
I know I will get become the smited in return.

The problem comes when the terrorist strikes and then runs away. Suddenly we can't find the person who needs the smiting. So we smite not the perp but his kinfolk who we can find. As we blame all Muslims for the sins of a very very few. Which then pisses off the set of all Muslims and a very very few are then sufficiently radicalized enough to join the terrorists. Which also tells the terrorist their tactic is working so they are more likely to come back with more attacks.

And the point is the American people got attacked on 911, applied the conventional wisdom,
and suddenly five plus years later get these really disquieting results. We have more and not less terrorists, we have less and not more allies, we are hemorrhaging money and lives, we have lost many of our freedoms, have pissed of 1.4 billion people, and are stuck in a quagmire in Iraq. And all these failures are IMPOSSIBLE to avoid noticing.

But what we, the American people, find almost impossible, is to come back and revisit the logic chain that got us into this fine mess.

But good logic should predict results--And we should pick event sequences that lead to favorable results. And suddenly the things that were supposed to cause favorable results are producing unfavorable outcomes. Therefore something in the initial logic was flawed.

HMMMMM---but where? As you can see, I have certain guesses on where we went wrong.
And am left in somewhat despair because quite a few disagree while insisting that is not where the logic failed.

But clearly the logic failed somewhere. Until we can identify that somewhere, we are no where. But as we can see, the cognitive dissonance of being nowhere no longer produces the votes. Even if we are still nowhere on coming to grips with the logic.

All very reasonable points, but reason is wasted here. Tancredo and a lot of other conservatives don't want a good solution, they are just bigoted idiots who want to kill Muslims. So much the better if it doesn't work and makes more Muslims into terrorists...they'll just be that much more justified.

 

[kedlav]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
How exactly would bombing innocent civilians at a holy site damage terrorist networks?

BTW, Tancre-who-is-this-guy and why should we care? Terrorism is far down the list of our real priorities.

Mayhaps because our *brilliant* citizens in CO elected him to Congress?