• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama condemns those who seek to 'hijack religion'

Heya Steel. :2wave:.....:naughty


Historians Weigh in on Obama's Comparison of ISIS Militants to Medieval Christian Crusaders.....

Meanwhile, historians have been quick to discourage a link between ISIS and the Crusaders, who fought to reclaim holy lands in the Middle East nearly 900 years ago.

“I don’t think the president knows very much about the crusades,” Thomas Madden, a historian at the University of St. Louis, told ABC News. “He seems to be casting them as an example of a distortion of Christianity and trying to compare that to what he sees as a distortion of Islam in the actions of ISIS,” Madden said. “The initial goal of the Crusades was to give back lands to Christians that been conquered, due to Muslim conquests.”

Thomas Asbridge, a historian at the University of London, said in a statement to ABC News, “It is true to say, that by modern standards, atrocities were committed by crusaders, as they were by their Muslim opponents, it is however, far less certain that, by medieval standards, crusading violence could be categorized as distinctly extreme in all instances.” Asbridge said he doesn’t have a problem with the president reminding the world that the Christian Church “advocated violence, and at times even encouraged its adherents to engage in warfare” but to suggest a causal link between ISIS and the distant medieval phenomenon of the Crusades is “grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of historical evidence.”.....snip~

https://gma.yahoo.com/historians-we...s-militants-medieval-christian-233947247.html



Here's the quote that says it...

Asbridge said he doesn’t have a problem with the president reminding the world that the Christian Church “advocated violence, and at times even encouraged its adherents to engage in warfare” but to suggest a causal link between ISIS and the distant medieval phenomenon of the Crusades is “grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of historical evidence.”

“is grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of historical evidence.”

"you can keep your plan...."

"affordable care..."

Obama IS grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of everything

At least ow we can be sure that if his lips are moving something is being manipulated and misrepresented.....like only 35 permanent jobs, I inherited this mess, it was a spontaneous demonstration, I killed Osama.........
 
Please substantiate that absolutely absurd opinion.

No where in ten years have I seen that even remotely suggested by anyone who would be even close to knowing.

I say it's another invention of Pretzel Logic inc.

Oh for crying out loud Fear, I know you know better than that!

The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq has increased the number of terrorist groups worldwide and "made the overall terrorism problem worse," a U.S. intelligence official said in a secret study.

The assessment of the war's impact on terrorism came in a National Intelligence Estimate that represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government, CBS News learned Sunday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-iraq-war-made-terror-worse/

Published: September 25, 2006
WASHINGTON, Sept. 24 — Democratic lawmakers, responding to an intelligence report that found that the Iraq war has invigorated Islamic radicalism and worsened the global terrorist threat, said the assessment by American spy agencies demonstrated that the Bush administration needed to devise a new strategy for its handling of the war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/world/middleeast/25terror.html


AND THIS IS OLD NEWS
 
Last edited:
The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq has increased the number of terrorist groups worldwide and "made the overall terrorism problem worse," a U.S. intelligence official said in a secret study.
A "secret study", huh? And how secret is it if you're quoting it on a internet forum?

You can keep your plan.
 
Hi MMC!!!

The bottom line is this, the U.S. government cannot be out fighting wars and claiming we are doing it in the name of God. Neither can the U.S. government go out and kill people because of their religious beliefs. That is dangerous. We need to focus our attention on what individuals and groups do that we find offensive, not religious ideology.

BTW, I didn't know that you fought in Vietnam. WOW!!!!!



Well, that is true and you are Right none of Our Top Brass should be spouting off like that unless on the Battlefield.(Then anything said will be said)

But we also cannot run from any Religion if it seeks to dominate and rule over All others.

Yeah Steel, I volunteered at 16 and my mother signed the papers and I was in like Flint.....I know, its the Rap music. Keeps me in my youth. :2razz:
 
A "secret study", huh? And how secret is it if you're quoting it on a internet forum?

You can keep your plan.

The study was conducted secretly due to the classified information that was viewed in compiling it. But we all know you didn't read it because it's just further evidence of the failure of US policy in the region, something that twists your nickers about your knees and you just can't stand it. It was a National Intelligence Estimate, but Canadians may not understand how those work in America.
 
Last edited:
Please substantiate that absolutely absurd opinion.

No where in ten years have I seen that even remotely suggested by anyone who would be even close to knowing.

I say it's another invention of Pretzel Logic inc.

Yes. If there had been no fear of terrorist activities prior to 2003, why in the hell had there been numerous U.N. resolutions to deal with Saddam? Why do we have transcripts of eloquent speeches from both Democrats and Republicans in Congress stressing the necessity of dealing with Saddam in the Congressional Record? Why did we maintain 13 years of sanctions and no-fly zones in the wake of Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and almost certain invasion of Saudi Arabia had we not intervened in Desert Storm/Desert Shield in 1990? And how much longer should we have kept those sanctions and no fly zones in place considering that they were greatly enriching Saddam who had every reason to continue them, but because he didn't use the Food for Oil monies to help the people, the sanctions were creating terrible hardships for them including an estimated 50,000 deaths, a great many of those children, suffering from malnutrition and lack of medical treatment.

And remember that 9/11 happened before the invasion of Iraq. Did Bush's invasion of Iraq cause that? Or any of dozens of terrorist acts committed on America or Americans long before the Bush administration? Here's a pretty good list that hits the major attacks but leaves out hundreds of less major incidents and does not include the hundreds of events that occurred against other than Americans: Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans

Who is to say that the invasion of Iraq created terrorists or terrorism or that it would not have escalated to this point had we not invaded first Afghanistan and then Iraq? That is as absurd as blaming Clinton for Timothy McVeigh's bombing at Oklahoma city.

But the fact remains that all terrorism is not committed by Muslims. But the vast majority of terrorist acts in the world today is done in the name of Islam/Allah/Mohammed under interpretations of the Qu'ran and Hadith that require all faithful Muslims to bring the whole world under the authority of Allah.

And if our President does not wake up to and acknowledge that, he becomes part of the problem.
 
Some people on this planet have always been and will always be out of touch with what has happened and what is going on right now.

That will have zero effect on reality. :roll:

Cmon SN. :2wave: That's no way to talk about our liberal and progressive brethren they got to be good for something. :2razz:
 
Here's the quote that says it...



“is grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of historical evidence.”

"you can keep your plan...."

"affordable care..."

Obama IS grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of everything

At least ow we can be sure that if his lips are moving something is being manipulated and misrepresented.....like only 35 permanent jobs, I inherited this mess, it was a spontaneous demonstration, I killed Osama.........


Oh you mean AQ isn't on the run.....that it is a shadow effect of itself, huh? :lol:
 
Some people on this planet have always been and will always be out of touch with what has happened and what is going on right now. That will have zero effect on reality.
Are you referring to Barrack Obama here? Do you feel he was out of touch when he made those remarks?
 
Some people on this planet have always been and will always be out of touch with what has happened and what is going on right now.

That will have zero effect on reality. :roll:




"Better days are coming."
~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.

Terrorism has existed since long before the United States ever existed, I haven't seen anybody suggest otherwise. What has been pointed out by many of us here, and documented in our own national intelligence estimates, as well as congressional inquiries, reports coming out of the UN and independent reports from other countries is the FACT that terrorism, and radical Islamists took a sharp increase post Iraq invasion in 2003, and not only did Obama not arrest the situation, policies he has implemented have exacerbated the problem. Neither party has been competent in the Middle East. But we can't ever get that addressed because far too many people prefer the occupation of finger pointing the opposing party and letting their own off the hook, so................until somebody who thinks like Ron Paul (on foreign policy generally and the ME specifically) has control of our foreign policy, then we can expect continued military interventions and other interferences that perpetuate the growing threat.
 
The study was conducted secretly due to the classified information that was viewed in compiling it. But we all know you didn't read it because it just further evidence of the failure of US policy in the region, something that twists your nickers about your knees and you just can't stand it. It was a National Intelligence Estimate, but Canadians may not understand how those work in America.
So this 'classified secret study' is for American eyes only? And it was also a secret "National Intelligence Estimate"?

You seems to have access to secrets that few others know about. Are you affiliated with Edward Snowden at all?
 
Yes. If there had been no fear of terrorist activities prior to 2003, why in the hell had there been numerous U.N. resolutions to deal with Saddam? Why do we have transcripts of eloquent speeches from both Democrats and Republicans in Congress stressing the necessity of dealing with Saddam in the Congressional Record? Why did we maintain 13 years of sanctions and no-fly zones in the wake of Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and almost certain invasion of Saudi Arabia had we not intervened in Desert Storm/Desert Shield in 1990? And how much longer should we have kept those sanctions and no fly zones in place considering that they were greatly enriching Saddam who had every reason to continue them, but because he didn't use the Food for Oil monies to help the people, the sanctions were creating terrible hardships for them including an estimated 50,000 deaths, a great many of those children, suffering from malnutrition and lack of medical treatment.

And remember that 9/11 happened before the invasion of Iraq. Did Bush's invasion of Iraq cause that? Or any of dozens of terrorist acts committed on America or Americans long before the Bush administration? Here's a pretty good list that hits the major attacks but leaves out hundreds of less major incidents and does not include the hundreds of events that occurred against other than Americans: Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans

Who is to say that the invasion of Iraq created terrorists or terrorism or that it would not have escalated to this point had we not invaded first Afghanistan and then Iraq? That is as absurd as blaming Clinton for Timothy McVeigh's bombing at Oklahoma city.

But the fact remains that all terrorism is not committed by Muslims. But the vast majority of terrorist acts in the world today is done in the name of Islam/Allah/Mohammed under interpretations of the Qu'ran and Hadith that require all faithful Muslims to bring the whole world under the authority of Allah.

And if our President does not wake up to and acknowledge that, he becomes part of the problem.



Again I ask of the Obama blatherers to supply a list of Democrat senators and congressmen who voted "no" on the invasion of Iraq and be clear on how Obama voted.

Classic now that he is clearly losing the war, the debate must be shifted to history, an invasion ten years ago, Reagan and, I expect soon, some blame heaped at Eisenhower just as soon as they figure out where to find some bloggers who know who that is.

The president has justified the enemy. He has consistently tried to undermine and lessen the atrocities of his not-Muslim, not terrorists from a "spontaneous demonstration, to a fake and unnecessary war in Libya that has de-stabilized the country, to a mess in Iraq when he had inherited a controlled situation [enough he could meet the time table, allowed a war to rage in Syria for five years before mentioning red lines, and now minimizes the horror of being burned alive by a disingenuous reference to events of 1,000 years ago.

You know, they used to call that treason.
 
Well, that is true and you are Right none of Our Top Brass should be spouting off like that unless on the Battlefield.(Then anything said will be said)

But we also cannot run from any Religion if it seeks to dominate and rule over All others.

Yeah Steel, I volunteered at 16 and my mother signed the papers and I was in like Flint.....I know, its the Rap music. Keeps me in my youth. :2razz:

Yeah the rap music kinda threw me!! That is so cool!!!!! :cool:

The thing is this MMC, when we start getting into matters of religion, we are going beyond the mundane plane into matters that are beyond empirical sense perception. Now it is indeed possible to do that, but it is very difficult, and it simply cannot be done without the help of someone who is divine like Jesus. Because we are not on the level of Jesus such that we can directly perceive that which is indeed divine, we need to focus on what we can do. As a nation, we can elect leaders to determine what is in our interests as a nation and declare what we will do if we think that someone or a group is in violation of those interests. Real religion is not about dominating others. Real religion is about doing the will of God, no matter what. That is what made Abraham so great, and as a result God was so pleased that he has blessed his children. It is so that all of us, no matter who we are, will learn the lesson that if we are willing to do the will of God, God will take care of us and bless our efforts. Jesus took it a step further. His relationship with God, his Father, was so intense that he would do anything to please God. Even to the point of tolerating being tortured and killed for the sake of others. That is pure love of God. Therefore Jesus taught that the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart. It is not about dominating others, because everything is subject to the will of God, therefore Jesus taught that the will of God is done not only in heaven, but in the Earth as well. Where is the room for dominating others? Any rate, kind of went a bit long on that, but my point is we need to stick with where we are at. The U.S. does not need to be getting into wars on religious grounds. We should stick to what we perceive to be in our interests.
 
Last edited:
Cmon SN. :2wave: That's no way to talk about our liberal and progressive brethren they got to be good for something. :2razz:

Kindling? ;)
 
Terrorism has existed since long before the United States ever existed, I haven't seen anybody suggest otherwise. What has been pointed out by many of us here, and documented in our own national intelligence estimates, as well as congressional inquiries,
reports coming out of the UN and independent reports from other countries is the FACT that terrorism, and radical Islamists took a sharp increase post Iraq invasion in 2003,
and not only did Obama not arrest the situation, policies he has implemented have exacerbated the problem. Neither party has been competent in the Middle East. But we can't ever get that addressed because far too many people prefer the occupation of finger pointing the opposing party and letting their own off the hook, so................until somebody who thinks like Ron Paul (on foreign policy generally and the ME specifically) has control of our foreign policy, then we can expect continued military interventions and other interferences that perpetuate the growing threat.



A lot of these terrorists are relatives, friends and fellow tribesmen of the many thousands of the people who were killed for no good reason as a result of Bush's un-necessary war in Iraq.

Those people are looking for some payback.

It's kind of like the Hatfields and McCoys on a world-wide scale.

It's going to take a long time to kill all of those people.




"What goes around, comes around."
 
Last edited:
Terrorism has existed since long before the United States ever existed, I haven't seen anybody suggest otherwise. What has been pointed out by many of us here, and documented in our own national intelligence estimates, as well as congressional inquiries, reports coming out of the UN and independent reports from other countries is the FACT that terrorism, and radical Islamists took a sharp increase post Iraq invasion in 2003, and not only did Obama not arrest the situation, policies he has implemented have exacerbated the problem. Neither party has been competent in the Middle East. But we can't ever get that addressed because far too many people prefer the occupation of finger pointing the opposing party and letting their own off the hook, so................until somebody who thinks like Ron Paul (on foreign policy generally and the ME specifically) has control of our foreign policy, then we can expect continued military interventions and other interferences that perpetuate the growing threat.

Yes terrorism is increasing, but is it BECAUSE of the Iraq war? There is plenty of evidence that Islamic terrorism is on the increase just about everywhere, much of which has no correlation in any way to the Iraqi invasion.

For instance the Chechen terrorists were increasing terrorist activities around the turn of the century but well before the Iraqi invasion:
Chechen Terrorism (Russia, Chechnya, Separatist) - Council on Foreign Relations

And yes, the Chechens are Muslim with ties to al Qaida.

So again the President's reluctance to identify terrorism with Islam and the Left's determination to blame George Bush for most of it remains problematic if we all want to be real about what is happening.
 
tumblr_nie7f4LPd11qinrtgo1_500.jpg

They were all required to be Democrats, too. The pro-slavery, pro-segregation, pro-lynching, pro-Jim Crow party.
 
Yes. If there had been no fear of terrorist activities prior to 2003, why in the hell had there been numerous U.N. resolutions to deal with Saddam? Why do we have transcripts of eloquent speeches from both Democrats and Republicans in Congress stressing the necessity of dealing with Saddam in the Congressional Record? Why did we maintain 13 years of sanctions and no-fly zones in the wake of Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and almost certain invasion of Saudi Arabia had we not intervened in Desert Storm/Desert Shield in 1990? And how much longer should we have kept those sanctions and no fly zones in place considering that they were greatly enriching Saddam who had every reason to continue them, but because he didn't use the Food for Oil monies to help the people, the sanctions were creating terrible hardships for them including an estimated 50,000 deaths, a great many of those children, suffering from malnutrition and lack of medical treatment.

And remember that 9/11 happened before the invasion of Iraq. Did Bush's invasion of Iraq cause that? Or any of dozens of terrorist acts committed on America or Americans long before the Bush administration? Here's a pretty good list that hits the major attacks but leaves out hundreds of less major incidents and does not include the hundreds of events that occurred against other than Americans: Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans

Who is to say that the invasion of Iraq created terrorists or terrorism or that it would not have escalated to this point had we not invaded first Afghanistan and then Iraq? That is as absurd as blaming Clinton for Timothy McVeigh's bombing at Oklahoma city.

But the fact remains that all terrorism is not committed by Muslims. But the vast majority of terrorist acts in the world today is done in the name of Islam/Allah/Mohammed under interpretations of the Qu'ran and Hadith that require all faithful Muslims to bring the whole world under the authority of Allah.

And if our President does not wake up to and acknowledge that, he becomes part of the problem.



Heya AO.
hat.gif
To Late!!!!!
rulez.gif
 
When you figure that part out, on how terrorism has increased under BO and expanded and with more groups and AQ themselves growing in Strength fourfold,

. . .exactly what dumbya was warned would happen as a result of his 2003 military ejaculation. . .

Months before the invasion of Iraq, U.S. intelligence agencies predicted that it would be likely to spark violent sectarian divides and provide al-Qaeda with new opportunities in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a report released yesterday by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Analysts' Warnings of Iraq Chaos Detailed

then you might have just caught up with current events.

Current events consist of right wingers bitching about Obama failing to clean up the aforementioned mess caused by his predecessor, and the failure of these same kooks to get their bodies to the ME to help clean up the mess.
 
. . .exactly what dumbya was warned would happen as a result of his 2003 military ejaculation. . .





Current events consist of right wingers bitching about Obama failing to clean up the aforementioned mess caused by his predecessor, and the failure of these same kooks to get their bodies to the ME to help clean up the mess.


Try again.....Libya and Syria belongs to BO Peep and his Lost sheeps' fertile grazing ground and the Notion that they could think properly.

Then there is BO telling the entire planet. AQ is on the run a mere former shadow of themselves.

Ansar al Sharia also grew and spread from Yemen to Libya. All under BO and his terms.
 
Please substantiate that absolutely absurd opinion.

No where in ten years have I seen that even remotely suggested by anyone who would be even close to knowing.

Yes, in Limbaugh Land, where right wingers live, there was no one even close to knowing.

We're talking about the real world. . .

Experts Warn of High Risk for American Invasion of Iraq - NYTimes.com

I say it's another invention of Pretzel Logic inc.

rush has been handing out pretzels to his flock for years.
 
Then there is BO telling the entire planet. AQ is on the run a mere former shadow of themselves.

Ansar al Sharia also grew and spread from Yemen to Libya. All under BO and his terms.

Makes no difference what someone says--explain again, after being asked 100x times, why O should be blamed for dumbya's screwup that caused the aforementioned mess.
 
"Jesus Saves........Gretzky scores on rebound!"

I've never thought of the Klan as being a religious organization or doing what it does for religious reasons. I've always viewed them as racists. The blacks they hate are Christians as well. Same with ISIS. The people they are brutalizing and killing are mostly muslims. ISIS is after power and control through conquest and they go about it in a fashion that one day will lead to their demise. I think the Klan is mostly "demised" as well isn't it?

The reason to worry about ISIS is not that they hijacked a religion. Who cares if someone hijacks a religion? The reason to worry about them is that they are brutal and they are attempting to take over the world or a portion of it. To make matters worse they are successful so far. They aren't like the Klan. They are like the Spanish Conquistadores or Alexander the Great or Adolph Hitler. They are bloody conquerors. If you want them to stop conquering, you will have to kill them. Pointing out that they are hijacking a religions isn't going to do the job.
 
Back
Top Bottom