• 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!

Nearly 1 in 5 Americans Thinks Obama Is Muslim, Survey Shows

Status
Not open for further replies.
LOL, your article clearly states that this is the highest estimate and that credible estimates go as low as 900,000.
Your own article states that credible estimates put the number as low as 900,000.
I'm pretty sure that the settlers in North America were more interested in getting away from religious persecution.

Well aside from the fact that not one of the three countries which you listed are in the Middle East, besides Kharzai we didn't do anything which could even be construed as installing them, and Musharaff actively worked against U.S. interests.

I never said the United States inserts puppet dictators in the Middle East, although we do. I said that one of the major reasons we are targeted by terrorist organizations was for installing puppet dictators in general. I was trying to keep my arguments to the Middle East region because that's what you wanted to argue about, but that region certainly doesn't contain the best examples. Historically, our puppet dictators have been installed in other parts of the world -- places like Honduras (Roberto Cordova) and Taiwan (Chiang Kai-shek), El Salvador (Cristiani), South Vietnam (Ngo Dinh Diem), and in Africa -- Liberia (Samuel Doe), Zaire (Mobuto Sese Seko) and Morocco (Hassan II). The Carter Administration inserted Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines. The CIA backed Efrain Rios Montt's campaign to oust the leadership in Guatemala. We inserted Noriega in Panama. We continued to support Ozal in Turkey despite the fact that he committed many of the same crimes we criticized Saddam Hussein for. For 20 years, we backed Pahlevi in Iran, with the CIA managing daily operations to support his tactics of torture and violent suppression. And remember Pinochet in Chile? Guess who led the effort to overthrow his predecessor? These are not all examples of dictators that the United States flat out "installed," but most of them are, and we financially supported every single one of them. And the President in Azerjiban is widely viewed as a product of American influence, although it's hard to say what is and isn't true there.

As to the population of Native Americans, perhaps you should read more carefully. The estimate of 900,000 was credible at the time -- 100 years ago. Since then, no attempt to discern the actual number has used such primitive methodology (they were estimates that were based on multiplying previously recorded estimates) and none have ever estimated the number to be so low. That's why I used the number 12 million, all of the most credibly studies hover around 12 million. It's funny that you "clarified" that 18 million is the highest estimate, since my post SAID that's the highest estimate. Either way, there's a more important number -- .8%. Native Americans used to comprise 100% of this country, now they are .8% of the nation's demographic. We took their land, brutally killed their men, women, and children, and subsequently destroyed major portions of their languages and cultural traditions, then we forced them to convert to Christianity.

I'm not sure why you would want to defend these actions. It removes any credibility you might otherwise retain.
 
in his defense, although i can't prove it.....i'll bet that most of the people who believe he is muslim are also racist. that ignorance goes hand in hand.

And irony raises its ugly head.
 
And irony raises its ugly head.

Might I suggest it's in your best interest to be more specific.

I wish you didn't have that user name. I actually love jambalaya, it's my specialty.
 
Some people also think he is a Kenyan citizen who stole the presidency.

And some even think he is a Communist Nazi terrorist, who eats babies. :mrgreen:

Are you trying to say Kenya is a muslim country? Do you have any proof?
 
Might I suggest it's in your best interest to be more specific.

I wish you didn't have that user name. I actually love jambalaya, it's my specialty.

I took the name because it is also one of my specialties. I can make a helluva gumbo too. Surely you are not saying my opinions are distasteful (pun intended).

We have a thread showing the ignorance of one in five people who think Obama is Muslim with an accompanying ignorant comment that those ignorant people were probably religious fundamentalist and after we pointed out how ignorant that statement was we have someone ignorantly saying it was racists mostly calling him a Muslim. Maybe I am not using ironic properly but calling people ingorant to think Obama is Muslim and then saying something in the same thread that bascially displays the same type of ignorace in an almost identical way is what?
 
Last edited:
I took the name because it is also one of my specialties. I can make a helluva gumbo too. Surely you are not saying my opinions are distasteful (pun intended).

Totally OT: PM me your recipe? Mine is completely bastardized, what with me being in the north and figuring it out myself and all. Please?
 
Totally OT: PM me your recipe? Mine is completely bastardized, what with me being in the north and figuring it out myself and all. Please?

Jambalaya has many variations so your bastardization could be as good as any other. The dish was made for experimentation. I've tried a number of different recipes and methods. With one I make a roux, with others I don't. I have a red jambalaya that uses tomatoes and tomato paste and a brown variety that uses no tomato products. When I get home today I'll try to find the one I've been using lately and hopefully the internet link from which I got it.
 
I never said the United States inserts puppet dictators in the Middle East, although we do. I said that one of the major reasons we are targeted by terrorist organizations was for installing puppet dictators in general.

Again cite specific examples. And why would Islamic terrrorists care about the U.S. installing puppet dictators that were not from Muslim countries? Anyways, the idea that Islamists give a damn about democracy is laughable. They aren't anti-tyranny they are anti-secularism.

I was trying to keep my arguments to the Middle East region because that's what you wanted to argue about,

None of the countries you listed were in the Middle East.

but that region certainly doesn't contain the best examples. Historically, our puppet dictators have been installed in other parts of the world -- places like Honduras (Roberto Cordova) and Taiwan (Chiang Kai-shek), El Salvador (Cristiani), South Vietnam (Ngo Dinh Diem), and in Africa -- Liberia (Samuel Doe), Zaire (Mobuto Sese Seko) and Morocco (Hassan II).

We didn't install any of those people they came to power through their own means, though the U.S. may have supported them to various degrees after they were already in power.

The Carter Administration inserted Ferdinand Marcos in the Phillipines.

We didn't install him, in fact he actually came to power democratically though became increasingly authoritarian due to reactionary policies implemented in response to Communist forces.

The CIA backed Efrain Rios Montt's campaign to oust the leadership in Guatemala.

We may have backed a coup against another authoritarian I have seen no evidence for direct U.S. involvment though.

We inserted Noriega in Panama.

No we didn't. Noriega manipulated U.S. foreign policy to suit his own agenda and the CIA turned a blind eye to his drug trafficing but we didn't install him, we in fact ousted him from power.

We continued to support Ozal in Turkey despite the fact that he committed many of the same crimes we criticized Saddam Hussein for.

We didn't install him.

For 20 years, we backed Pahlevi in Iran, with the CIA managing daily operations to support his tactics of torture and violent suppression.

Yes we backed the Shah in his counter-coup against Mossadeq after Mossadeq dissolved parliament through a fraudulent referendum in which he garnered a 99.9% yay vote and then proceeded to legislate by decree, because (survey says) the Parliament refused to grant him direct control over the military.

And remember Pinochet in Chile? Guess who led the effort to overthrow his predecessor?

Pinochet was ordered by the Chilean Chamber of Deputies and Chilean Supreme Court to oust Allende from power for his numerous violattions of the Constitution. There is no evidence demonstrating that the U.S. directly supported the Pinochet coup.

These are not all examples of dictators that the United States flat out "installed," but most of them are,

They're not actually.

and we financially supported every single one of them.

With the exception of Turkey and Iran none of those have anything to do with the Muslim world whatsoever and Iran isn't even the same type of Islam that attacked us on 9-11.

And the President in Azerjiban is widely viewed as a product of American influence, although it's hard to say what is and isn't true there.

So now the U.S. is at fault for other peoples perceptions whether true or untrue?

As to the population of Native Americans, perhaps you should read more carefully. The estimate of 900,000 was credible at the time -- 100 years ago.

The 18 million figure is listed as THE highest credible estimate and it's from the 1960's but even so states that it wasn't the result of genocide but disease.

Since then, no attempt to discern the actual number has used such primitive methodology (they were estimates that were based on multiplying previously recorded estimates) and none have ever estimated the number to be so low. That's why I used the number 12 million, all of the most credibly studies hover around 12 million.

Prove it.

It's funny that you "clarified" that 18 million is the highest estimate, since my post SAID that's the highest estimate. Either way, there's a more important number -- .8%. Native Americans used to comprise 100% of this country, now they are .8% of the nation's demographic. We took their land,

They didn't own the land, they did not even have the concept of land ownership, they were nomadic, there was not a single permanent settlment in North America at the time the Europeans arrived.

brutally killed their men, women, and children,

The vast majority of deaths have been attributed to disease.

and subsequently destroyed major portions of their languages and cultural traditions, then we forced them to convert to Christianity.

Really? When did the U.S. ever forcefully convert anyone? When did the British use forced conversions?

Anyways this is a very good description of the Arabization of the lands conquered by Islam.

I'm not sure why you would want to defend these actions. It removes any credibility you might otherwise retain.
 
Last edited:
Yep and it doesn't excuse it but again you're deflecting the issue away from the tolerance they had over Christians and Jews.

So monotheistic religions are the only ones that count?

Deflecting again.
The fact that they could go to a court and had a chance to argue their case was better than the persecutions in Europe.

lol once again their testimony against a Muslim was worthless.

We've discussed this already.

Except in the Ottoman empire this was not largely practiced and those Muslims largely did not do this.

Muslims didn't practice Dawa in the Ottoman Empire? :roll:

Christian debate on persecution and toleration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It covers all the areas I mentioned. ;)

Forced conversion, execution of heretics and expulsion.
All cataloged in the above link.

All conducted by Muslims as well, the Ottoman Empire engaged in institutionalized forced conversion called Devşirme:

Dev

The Ottoman Empire executed heretics (apostates) until the Tanzimat reforms of 1839.

And the Ottoman Empire engaged in wide spread large scale forced expulsion:

Population transfer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which largely compared to Europe was better.

It depends which European country and the period of the Ottoman Empire and European country you are talking about.

Yep but over the course of the Ottoman Empire, relations between the different religions, were better in the Ottoman Empire than they were in Europe.

And what do you base this on?
 
Last edited:
So monotheistic religions are the only ones that count?

When talking about relations between Christians, Muslims and Jews, absolutely.


lol once again their testimony against a Muslim was worthless.

Not entirely, you're applying a concept as universal through out a kingdom, which wasn't true.

Were Christians and Jews lesser to the caliphate and sultan, yes.
Worthless as you say, not at all.


Muslims didn't practice Dawa in the Ottoman Empire? :roll:

Didn't say that, "largely" doesn't mean "never."

All conducted by Muslims as well, the Ottoman Empire engaged in institutionalized forced conversion called Devşirme:

Dev

That was a tax, for living in the empire.
It was not done by the sword and these people lived in very high status.

The Ottoman Empire executed heretics (apostates) until the Tanzimat reforms of 1839.

Yep, they weren't perfect.


And the Ottoman Empire engaged in wide spread large scale forced expulsion:

Population transfer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Expulsion because of religious prejudice (being kicked out of a country) and transferring citizens (from one place to another inside the country) are two totally different things(these were done for economic and civil reasons).

You're being dishonest now.

It depends which European country and the period of the Ottoman Empire and European country you are talking about.

I already listed them before, provided a link to back it up.
I'm not doing it again.

And what do you base this on?

The historical record.
 
Last edited:
Um...where did I say that? Please stop trying to bait.

I'm not baiting, I'm just stating the fact that for someone to say a bigoted thing, that thing has to be bad in the eyes of the person that thinks it is bigoted, or there would be no reason for that person to think it is bigoted…… is that too deep for you?
 
I'm not baiting, I'm just stating the fact that for someone to say a bigoted thing, that thing has to be bad in the eyes of the person that thinks it is bigoted, or there would be no reason for that person to think it is bigoted…… is that too deep for you?

I didn't even use the word bigot. Perhaps you should actually read my posts before replying to them.
 
When talking about relations between Christians, Muslims and Jews, absolutely.

But we weren't talking about Christian, Muslim, and Jewish relations, we were talking about religious tolerance.

Not entirely, you're applying a concept as universal through out a kingdom, which wasn't true.

Were Christians and Jews lesser to the caliphate and sultan, yes.
Worthless as you say, not at all.

Under the Sharia of the Otttoman empire the testimony of a non-Muslim against a Muslim was viewed as worthless if they were even allowed to testify against the Muslim at all.


Didn't say that, "largely" doesn't mean "never."

Again, Muslims were allowed to prosteltyze in the Ottoman Empire but non-Muslims were not. What exactly do you base your assertion that Dawa was not largely practiced in the Ottoman Empire? How do you think they got all of those people to convert?

That was a tax, for living in the empire.
It was not done by the sword and these people lived in very high status.

WTF? That's the Jizya tax, I said Devşirme which was the institutionalized practice within the Ottoman Empire of stealing Christian Children and converting them to Islam and using them to fill the ranks of their military. If that's not a forced conversion then I don't know what is. In fact that is not only an example of forced conversion but an example of ethnic cleansing as well.

Yep, they weren't perfect.

Expulsion because of religious prejudice (being kicked out of a country) and transferring citizens (from one place to another inside the country) are two totally different things(these were done for economic and civil reasons).

lol ya o.k. forcefully expelling entire Christian Communities from their homes and their lands and then forcefully transferring them from one part of the Empire to another is not an example of forced expulsion. :roll:

You're being dishonest now.

They expelled entire Christian communities from their homes and their lands, that is forced population transfer which is an example of ethnic cleansing.

I already listed them before, provided a link to back it up.
I'm not doing it again.

The Ottoman Empire did the exact same things you act like uprooting entire Christian Communities and engaging in forced population transfers is somehow better than kicking people out of the country. :roll:

The historical record.

The historical record is something which you are completely ignoring in order to illustrate some fanciful age of Islamic tolerance that never existed.
 
Last edited:
My brother used to grab my arm and use it to hit me in the face. Then he'd say: "why are you hitting yourself?" This is what your posts remind me of. I weep for anybody who debates you as though you have credibility.

Cry your eyes out as it seems logic isn't your strongest feature.

For example:

Would you call me a bigot if I said Barry was a great guy? Of course not, I’m saying something nice about him…. Yet People are calling others bigots because they are calling him a Muslim, so in their minds being called a Muslim must be bad. QED.
 
i'm sorry, are you completely ignorant of the role Afghan troops are playing in Afghanistan? and they're certainly not Zoroastrians.

Oh, puuhhhleeeese! Did you hear about that Afghan soldier that wasted a few American troops on a rifle range?
 
Cry your eyes out as it seems logic isn't your strongest feature.

For example:

Would you call me a bigot if I said Barry was a great guy? Of course not, I’m saying something nice about him…. Yet People are calling others bigots because they are calling him a Muslim, so in their minds being called a Muslim must be bad. QED.

No. False. Not bad. Just mindlessly false.
 
No. It was Americans. Many of the American soldiers in Bosnia were Muslim. We don't have an established religion in this country. Yes, I'm sure I read that somewhere...

You got an actual number? I was in The Balkans, with 1/26 infantry and don't recall nary a one.
 
Do you realize that the reason we live in this country is because the colonists wiped out Native Americans, claiming that they were barbarians who hadn't accepted Christ? And Christopher Columbus did the exact same thing when he came over from Europe. The colonization of both North and South America was based on Christians killing in the name of divine right.

9/11 was not done for religious reasons. It was done for political reasons. They hate America because America occupies the Arabian peninsula, interferes with their politics, inserts puppet dictators and steals their oil. Moderate Muslims condemn acts of terror, but when you have a whole region destroyed by war and poverty, extremism is going to manifest itself there and it cannot be completely stopped.

It's amazing to me how ignorant Americans still are. Do you think the Muslim world likes Barack Obama? Let me tell you, they don't. They like him better than Bush, but they don't agree with his policies at all. Not that facts are going to persuade you, but I thought at least one or two people here could get something out of the truth.

That ended 100 years ago and we've been paying the Indians back for it, ever since. However, the Muslims are still practicing conversion by the sword. It's funny how Liberals will bust their asses to defend such behavior.
 
Yes. I would guess that most our our citizens who have died violently in this country have been killed by christians.

Are you really going to go with that?

LINK? :roll:
 
Might I suggest it's in your best interest to be more specific.

I wish you didn't have that user name. I actually love jambalaya, it's my specialty.

The joke forum is farther down the line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom