• 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!

Egyptian minister: Obama told me he is a Muslim

I think it's obvious that Islam and Muslims in general are not terrorists or extremists, although extremist islamism is a problem and this problem may be larger than problems with extremism in other religions.

But over-generalizing, painting all Muslims in general with the same broad brush, won't help matters. Such islamophobia is not much better than anti-Semitism (and its line of reasoning is similar).

It would help if the main stream in the religion condemned the terrorism. That seldom happens
 
I believe Obama made a statement that was misinterpreted, and we're hearing it 3rd or 4th hand in any event.
The man's name is Barack Hussein Obama.
Clearly, Islam figures into his background and family history in some way, shape, or form.
He has made it clear that he is not anti-Islamic.
I'm sure he's tried to reassure Islamic leaders of this fact; why wouldn't he, since he's been perfectly open about it with the American people?
He made it clear from the start that he hoped to use diplomacy to resolve some of the conflicts in the middle east, where his predecessor had used force.

As I said, I believe perhaps he said something he meant to be reassuring, and it was misinterpreted, possibly because of a language or cultural barrier.
 
It would help if the main stream in the religion condemned the terrorism. That seldom happens

How often do mainstream Christians condemn Christian extremists?
Mainstream Islamics have no obligation to do anything other than what they're doing, which is to continue to live their lives in a peaceful way, according to the tenets of their faith.
 
I think it's obvious that Islam and Muslims in general are not terrorists or extremists, although extremist islamism is a problem and this problem may be larger than problems with extremism in other religions.

But over-generalizing, painting all Muslims in general with the same broad brush, won't help matters. Such islamophobia is not much better than anti-Semitism (and its line of reasoning is similar).

You do realize that I am an Islamophobe dont you? I have yet to figure out a way to distinguish between a peaceful muslim and an extremist until they detonate. Therefore I trust no muslim. I will think diferently when so called peaceful muslims protest in mass against the extremist. I won't be holding my breath waiting for that to happen
 
You do realize that I am an Islamophobe dont you? I have yet to figure out a way to distinguish between a peaceful muslim and an extremist until they detonate. Therefore I trust no muslim. I will think diferently when so called peaceful muslims protest in mass against the extremist. I won't be holding my breath waiting for that to happen

I live in a city where there is a large Muslim community. I deal with Muslims on a daily base, and two of my friends are descendents of Muslim immigrants. All of those I have talked to about it condemned terrorism. They often said "those terrorists are not true Muslims". Some may be a bit wacky when it comes to sexual moral, family values and role of the woman, but not moreso than very religious Christians I've met.

Do you have personal experience with Muslims?

It's easy to be afraid of what one doesn't know. It's also easy to generalize people you don't have to deal with in person. I understand that many are afraid and angry because of 9/11 and other terrorist acts by extremist Muslims. But I think it's unfair and not helpful to paint them all with the same broad brush. And understandable fear doesn't make it any more sound or legitimate.
 
I believe Obama made a statement that was misinterpreted, and we're hearing it 3rd or 4th hand in any event.
The man's name is Barack Hussein Obama.
Clearly, Islam figures into his background and family history in some way, shape, or form.
He has made it clear that he is not anti-Islamic.
I'm sure he's tried to reassure Islamic leaders of this fact; why wouldn't he, since he's been perfectly open about it with the American people?
He made it clear from the start that he hoped to use diplomacy to resolve some of the conflicts in the middle east, where his predecessor had used force.

As I said, I believe perhaps he said something he meant to be reassuring, and it was misinterpreted, possibly because of a language or cultural barrier.

No he lied
 
He either lied to voters or to the head of Egypt you figure it out
 
Nice try but when you put Cair in there it shows how disingenuous they are

CAIR: 'Moderate' friends of terror :: Daniel Pipes

I don't see that anything in this article you provide contradicts all the denouncements of terrorism that are presented on the site I linked to.

You are attacking a strawman, a common reasoning fallacy: The claim never was that there is no extremism and support for terrorism among Muslims. That CAIR or others do what they are accused of does in no way negate the claim that many Muslims denounced and condemned terrorism. For that claim, I have provided evidence.
 
I don't see that anything in this article you provide contradicts all the denouncements of terrorism that are presented on the site I linked to.

You are attacking a strawman, a common reasoning fallacy: The claim never was that there is no extremism and support for terrorism among Muslims. That CAIR or others do what they are accused of does in no way negate the claim that many Muslims denounced and condemned terrorism. For that claim, I have provided evidence.

You claim an organization that is started by former Hamas people and that supports terrorism denounces it. Nice try but does not work
 
Or it was a misunderstanding. Or that Egyptian guy lied. Or the source reporting it lied.

So the Egyption lied and not Obama? With Obama's history I would say Obama lied as he has for years
 
About what?

Obama lied about alot of things. How about closing Gitmo, ending the war in Iraq, He said his administration would be transparent unlike the previous administration. He said he would work with republicans. He said he would require a public option in the healthcare reform legislation. To many lies to list.
 
You claim an organization that is started by former Hamas people and that supports terrorism denounces it. Nice try but does not work

Look, on that site I linked to are dozens of external links to many different, various Muslim sources condemning terrorism.

You posted a link to an article that condemns a completely unrelated Muslim organization that has nothing whatsoever to do with the condemnations on that other side. What is that supposed to prove exactly?

Is it an attempt at dadaist humor?
 
Last edited:
He either lied to voters or to the head of Egypt you figure it out

I could see Obama saying all the things that Egyptian guy claims he said, except that he himself is a Muslim (because clearly he's not, or if he is, he's a wretched one; he drinks and smokes cigarettes. His daughters wear miniskirts, and his wife bosses him around), and that he supports "the Islamic Agenda", because there isn't one, and so that would be a rather silly thing to say, especially to an Islamic individual, who would be like, "WTF are you talking about, dude?" :confused:

Besides, if he actually said all these things, what motivation does this Islamic minister have in blowing the whistle on him?
Wouldn't it behoove him more to just keep his mouth shut, smug in his knowledge that the leader of the most powerful nation in the world secretly "supports" his "agenda"?

I mean, he dang sure won't be supporting it now. :doh:lol:
 
Look, on that site I linked to are dozens of external links to many different, various Muslim sources condemning terrorism.

You posted a link to an article that condemns a completely unrelated Muslim organization that has nothing whatsoever to do with the condemnations on that other side. What is that supposed to prove exactly?

Is it an attempt at dadaist humor?

Look at your list Cair is on it. Are the rest as much of hypocrites as Cair is. Organizations like Cair make people suspicious of Islam
 
I could see Obama saying all the things that Egyptian guy claims he said, except that he himself is a Muslim (because clearly he's not, or if he is, he's a wretched one; he drinks and smokes cigarettes. His daughters wear miniskirts, and his wife bosses him around), and that he supports "the Islamic Agenda", because there isn't one, and so that would be a rather silly thing to say, especially to an Islamic individual, who would be like, "WTF are you talking about, dude?" :confused:

Besides, if he actually said all these things, what motivation does this Islamic minister have in blowing the whistle on him?
Wouldn't it behoove him more to just keep his mouth shut, smug in his knowledge that the leader of the most powerful nation in the world secretly "supports" his "agenda"?

I mean, he dang sure won't be supporting it now. :doh:lol:

He also claims to be a Christian. With what you just stated how good of a Christian is he?
 
He also claims to be a Christian. With what you just stated how good of a Christian is he?

As I stated in a previous post, I believe he's a nominal "Christian", ie a Christian in name only.
Until this fundamentalist revival occurred about 25 years ago, this was quite common for men, and was considered very appropriate.
In fact, I'd say the vast majority of US presidents have been nominal Christians only.
Until this generation, religious fervor in males was considered unseemly and in poor taste, unless they were actual members of the clergy.
I think nominal Christianity befits a leader of a country which espouses freedom of religion.
His positions are likely to be more rational and moderate than those of some flaming cokehead-turned-fundy like his predecessor.
 
As I stated in a previous post, I believe he's a nominal "Christian", ie a Christian in name only.
Until this fundamentalist revival occurred about 25 years ago, this was quite common for men, and was considered very appropriate.
In fact, I'd say the vast majority of US presidents have been nominal Christians only.
Until this generation, religious fervor in males was considered unseemly and in poor taste, unless they were actual members of the clergy.
I think nominal Christianity befits a leader of a country which espouses freedom of religion.
His positions are likely to be more rational and moderate than those of some flaming cokehead-turned-fundy like his predecessor.

Which brings into question the whole faith of the candidate question to begin with. You can't know a man's heart, and just wanting a show is hardly something we should encourage.
 
Look at your list Cair is on it. Are the rest as much of hypocrites as Cair is. Organizations like Cair make people suspicious of Islam

So there are, what, a hundred organizations, scholars and private people on that list of Muslims condemning terrorism, and one of them apparently is shedding crocodile's tears only (assuming they didn't change after 9/11)? That's your reasoning?

Assuming someone held the same kind of suspicious attitude towards Jews in general, wouldn't you jump at him calling him an anti-Semite immediately? (Correct me if that's not the case.) Double standard ... ?
 
As I stated in a previous post, I believe he's a nominal "Christian", ie a Christian in name only.
Until this fundamentalist revival occurred about 25 years ago, this was quite common for men, and was considered very appropriate.
In fact, I'd say the vast majority of US presidents have been nominal Christians only.
Until this generation, religious fervor in males was considered unseemly and in poor taste, unless they were actual members of the clergy.
I think nominal Christianity befits a leader of a country which espouses freedom of religion.
His positions are likely to be more rational and moderate than those of some flaming cokehead-turned-fundy like his predecessor.

Nice BS and bias
 
So there are, what, a hundred organizations, scholars and private people on that list of Muslims condemning terrorism, and one of them apparently is shedding crocodile's tears only (assuming they didn't change after 9/11)? That's your reasoning?

Assuming someone held the same kind of suspicious attitude towards Jews in general, wouldn't you jump at him calling him an anti-Semite immediately? (Correct me if that's not the case.) Double standard ... ?

Nice try but I showed that some Muslim organizations say one thing but believe another. Spin if you want but the truth is we can not tell if these groups really dislike the terrorists. Funny how you bring uo Jews
 
As I stated in a previous post, I believe he's a nominal "Christian", ie a Christian in name only.
Until this fundamentalist revival occurred about 25 years ago, this was quite common for men, and was considered very appropriate.
In fact, I'd say the vast majority of US presidents have been nominal Christians only.
Until this generation, religious fervor in males was considered unseemly and in poor taste, unless they were actual members of the clergy.
I think nominal Christianity befits a leader of a country which espouses freedom of religion.

Most real Christians would agree that there is no such thing as a "nominal" Christian. The term Christian is interpreted literally "Little Christ" You either have Christ in your spiritual life or you do not. There is no "grey area."

His positions are likely to be more rational and moderate than those of some flaming cokehead-turned-fundy like his predecessor
You're referring to Bush? Cokehead turned "fundy?" as in a fundamentalist Christian? So, what presidential actions/statements from Bush would lead ANYONE to assume that Bush CLAIMED to be a fundamentalist Christian? LOL This seems to be a blatant ad hominem on your part. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom