Perhaps not so much a conspiracy theory as it is a crank opinion, the meme that Barack Obama is a Muslim goes hand in hand with views that he’s a [insert bad thing here]. A recent Pew Research poll says that 20% of Americans think that Barack Obama is a Muslim.
This is perhaps a little less crazy than some of the stories about Barack Obama. He spent 4 years as a small child in Indonesia, a predominantly Muslim country. His Indonesian school record lists him as Muslim. His step-father’s family was Muslim. His grandparents in Africa were Muslim, and he carries the middle name Hussein.
Obama was for two decades a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ congregation and is a self-described Christian, yet Obama’s consistent refusal to demonize Muslims has fed belief that he is one of them.
A recent article in the Washington Post attributes birther sentiment and belief that Obama is a Muslim to more than rumors on the Internet. It also comes from remarks by politicians including: Sarah Palin, Jean Schmidt, Tom Ganley, Bill Posey, Randy Neugebauer, Dan Burton, John Campbell, Jim Inhofe, Richard Shelby, Marsha Blackburn, Cathy McMorris-Rodgers, Charles Boustany, Aaron Schock, Dave Reichert, Jeff Fortenberry, Greg Harper, David Vitter, Paul Broun, Bull Hudak and Ken Cuccinelli. The Post article has all the details.
Are you working for obama to defend him. It seems so.
Yeah, anyone who defends a president they like must be working for him.
I wonder how much money all the people who supported and defended Bush during his
presidency made. Seriously, how can anyone in their right mind defend someone
they happen to like for free! It boggles the mind.
Good Article….
Lawmakers and the ‘birther’/Muslim myths
Updated: 3:44 p.m.
A recent poll shows that of the approximately 20 percent of Americans who wrongly believe that President Obama is a Muslim, a majority said they learned this from the media. But the media are not alone when it comes to promoting or insinuating falsehoods about the president’s religion and, by extension, his birthplace. We’ve collected a list of lawmakers whose comments have helped fuel the debate. Most either said outright that the president is a Muslim, that he is not a U.S. citizen or appeared to leave open the possibility that either falsehood could be true. Several of the officials later issued statements saying that they don’t doubt the president’s citizenship. Feel free to let us know of others that we may have missed in the comments below:
Republican House candidate Tom Ganley
Ganley, of Ohio, told Roll Call “I don’t have a position on whether he’s a Muslim.” A spokeswoman later told the Cleveland Plain-Dealer that Ganley does not believe the president is a Muslim.
Sarah Palin
The former vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor said in a 2009 interview that the president’s birth certificate was “a fair question.” (Politico)
Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio)
In this video, Schmidt appeared to agree with a woman who claimed that Obama could not be president “by our Constitution.” Schmidt later issued a press release stating, “The President is indeed a Citizen of this country and constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States.”
Arizona state Rep. Judy M. Burges (R)
CNN reported that in April, Burges said, through a spokesman, that an amendment she introduced was “an attempt to bring back transparency and confidence in the electoral process.” The amendment would have required presidential candidates to provide documents, including a birth certificate, to show they were legal citizens of the United States.
Rep. Bill Posey (R-Fla.)
He introduced a bill that would have required presidential hopefuls to produce “a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate.”
Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Tex.)
Expressed support for Posey’s bill that would have required presidential candidates to produce a birth certificate.
Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.)
Burton co-sponsored Posey’s bill. In July, the Washington Independent reported that a spokesman for Burton called the bill “a good idea,” saying: “If candidates provided that information to the Federal Election Commission you wouldn’t have all this hullabaloo. You don’t want to needlessly expose presidents to crazy conspiracy theories.”
Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.)
Campbell has become well known for this heated exchange over the president’s birth certificate with MSNBC host Chris Matthews.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Inhofe told Politico that birthers “have a point.”
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Shelby told the Cullman Times last year: “Well his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven’t seen any birth certificate. …You have to be born in America to be president.” A spokesman later clarified, “While [Shelby] hasn’t personally seen the president’s birth certificate, he is confident that the matter has been thoroughly examined.”
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.)
Co-sponsored the Posey bill that would have required candidates to produce a birth certificate. A spokesman for Blackburn said the congresswoman did not doubt the president’s citizenship.
Reps. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-Wash.), Charles Boustany (R-La.), Aaron Schock (R-Ill.), Dave Reichert (R-Wash.), Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) and Greg Harper (R-Miss.)
All are featured in this video produced by the progressive Web site Firedoglake and, to varying degrees, express doubts about Obama’s citizenship.
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.)
The Associated Press reported that Vitter said that although he doesn’t personally have legal standing to bring litigation, he supports “conservative legal organizations and others who would bring that to court.” He said, “I think that is the valid and most possibly effective grounds to do it.” He added later that the debate could distract from policy issues.
Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.)
Broun questioned during an interview in March whether Obama was a citizen. The interview was initially spotted by the progressive organization Think Progress and later reported by Politico:
“Is he a Christian?” [Sirius XM host Pete] Dominick then asked.
“I don’t know that,” Broun responded, explaining that “I’m a Christian but only me and the Lord know that for sure.”
Bill Hudak, a Republican congressional candidate from Massachusetts
Hudak told a local paper that he believed the president was born in Kenya and had ties to radical Islam.
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli
A recording of Cuccinelli features him saying, “Someone is going to have to come forward with nailed-down testimony that he was born in Place B, wherever that is.” Cuccinelli later clarified his remarks in statement: “I absolutely believe that President Obama was born in the United States. I don’t buy into the claims that he wasn’t. On the recording, I was asked a hypothetical legal question, and I gave a hypothetical legal answer in response,” (Politics Daily/Talking Points Memo) (Thanks to commenter “vexvet” for the tip.)
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/08/lawmakers-who-push-the-birther.html?hpid=topnews
Countdown: Awesome Analysis By Georgetown Univ.’s Michael Eric Dyson On the “Obama Is A Muslim” Meme
Great analysis….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETB5eULt31g&feature=player_embedded
Are you working for the RNC and conservative organizations like Freedom Watch to bash Obama. It seems so .
/sarcasm
For real though, Every time you guys make a comment like this — all you do is show how pathetic you are and your unfortunate lack of intelligence or logic.
No. Are you an idiot? Proof?
Just took a look at your blog (or at least the one linked to your name)
If this was you commenting on the video of Obama speaking to the Muslim world
”
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Obama Admits He Is A Muslim By Default
Apr 9, 2009 …Quote: “I Am One Of Them”. Obama made an address to the Turkish Parliament and admitted he was “one of them”. He was saying I am one of you. Obama was saying I am a muslim.”
We know you birthers are liars and you make it so absolutely obvious.
Here is his comment
“Many other american’s have muslims in their families or have lived in a muslim majority country . I know, because I am one of them”
Unless you have absolutely no human intelligence what-so-ever or are simply apathological liar, it’s obvious he’s saying he’s one of “the many other American’s who has a muslim in their family and/or lived in a muslim majority country”
So many people like you try to twist his words around here to mean something completely different than what he was obviously saying that I find it hard to believe you are all pathological liars. Most of you must be utterly stupid and lack the reading comprehension of a third grader.
Dear “Story Reports”
Of course we all work for Obama.
Ever poster here is a full time paid Soros operative inculcated in “cognitive dissonance” techniques with extended UN/NWO training where we all work on the weekends training to sweep all the folks like you into FEMA death camps.
None of us has a “real” long form birth certificate and we are predominately foreign born moslems practicing “dhimmitude” here in the Great Satan.
We are training to be the feared “faceless bearocrats” (Palin spelling) who will man the Death Panels of your new health care system and will condemn all non productive members of society to death.
With our work we expect to reduce your numbers to a manageable 15% whilst driving the USA inot 3rd World status.
I believe that covers the basics, unfortunately as a useless tool we will have to send the black helicopters around to scrub you and your details from society and the Internet.
TTFN
Shhhhhhh (we have this one covered)
Code Charlie. Code Charlie. We have a runner. Over.
A few problems with Obama being a Muslim.
1. He smokes.
2. He drinks.
3. Not only does he eat pork, he tuns it into an event (first White House luau).
4. Married a Christian.
5. Spent 20 years worshiping another god in a Christian church.
If Obama is a Muslim, he’s not a very good one.
Using logic and reason to contradict the birther patriots. Must be another damned Alinksy brownshirt tactic.
Doc,
Were you aware that this Pew poll was conducted before the current mosque controversy? I didn’t until I saw it mentioned in an opinion piece from the NYT: Oy Vey, Obama By CHARLES M. BLOW
“Is President Obama good for the Jews? For more and more Jewish-Americans, the answer is no.”
…
(It should be noted that the Pew poll was taken before Obama’s bold support for the right of Muslims to build a community center and mosque a few blocks north of ground zero.)
Blow goes on with discussing various criticisms and concludes:
“Fair or not, these criticisms are crystallizing into a shared belief among many: Obama is burning bridges with the Jewish community in order to build bridges to the Muslim world.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/opinion/21blow.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
In other news: in remarks delivered in Berlin JFK has admitted that he is a jelly doughnut.
Thanks for bringing your blog to my attention. At a glance I couldn’t find a post that had any comments. Do you allow comments?
What’s your point?
Why by defending the rights of Muslims to worship freely on property they own would Obama burn bridges with the Jewish Community? It seems to me that by defending their rights he is defending the rights of Jews, Christians,Hindus, Buddists and atheists. I don’t want the rights of any group or person to worship or not in their own fashion to be undermined by public or politcal pressure. Frankly, his defense should be applauded. To paraphrase: They told the Muslims to move and I don’t like them or their religion so I was silent, then they told the Buddists, then the Hindus, and then the Christians. The folks who wrote the first amendment had people like the people protesting in mind. By the way, the building is already a mosque. They have had as many as 600 at Friday prayer and they have prayer every day.
If a new poll were taken and the number remains steady, it would probably be better news for Obama than if it were to increase of course. But then, taking another poll could have a heuristic effect (if I am using the term properly. I took it from the old thread.)
I hope you realize that the line was from the opinion piece.
Absolutely. And that’s why I commented. And mine was an opinion piece as well.
This flap over the Islamic community center reminds me of another controversy from the 1970’s when a bunch of Neo-Nazis wanted to march through a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, IL. The ACLU had no use for Nazis, but nevertheless supported their right to free speech in the case National Socialist Party v Skokie. They reprinted this political cartoon in their paper Civil Liberties. The ACLU lost a lot of members, Jewish members in particular over their stand.
Courage has to be its own reward.
http://www.johntreed.com/Obamaatheist.html
This guy says Obama is really an atheist.
When you look at the way many politicians live their lives, he may be right that many who say they’re Christian really aren’t, but he lost me on a lot of other points, including the loyalty oath thing.
He also brought up the “nobody remembered him at Columbia” thing.
So 69.5 million of us voted for Obama and if anyone dares to refute a false allegation about him they must be paid? Such logic is astounding.
I understand Obama stopped smoking, which just proves that he’s a Muslim.
Worth noting that there’s nothing in the Pew poll to support Blow’s allegations. The closest thing in there is noting that the number of Jews identifying as Republicans is increasing. It’s still only 33%. That is a pretty small number.
I do get the impression (and I admit I have no poll to back me up either) that Jews are divided between two camps, the first being of the view that the greatest threat to Israel is Muslims, and the second being of the view that the greatest threat to Israel is anti-Muslim bigotry. The President has made extremely clear that he will not side with the anti-Muslim bigots, and that has likely damaged his standing with the first camp.
I don’t have any direct connection to 9/11. I can’t fairly put myself in the place of those who lost someone dear, just friend who lost his friend who worked as a chef at Windows on the World. I don’t even have a relative or close friend who lost someone in the military as a consequence of 9/11. I wonder how many of those who oppose the mosque have that connection?
There is no reason to “work for” someone when their are people who want to spread lies about them. It is the only honorable thing to do. Come on you must defend your friends; or just someone you like; when someone attempts to spread lies about them.
And your point being?
Are you aware of this concept being bandied about? I hope that you are here reading so that you can move the comment to the great mother-in-law thread if necessary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya
A reason for opposition to the mosque. I don’t have the strong feelings that others may have in this regard.
I don’t put a lot of stock in polls.
Oh, opposing something based on misinformation and lies. I though your first question would have been is why are people using misinformation as a wedge? This is the exact same thing that is being done with Obama’s faith.
We have the first amendment to prevent emotions, hatred and dislikes from affecting religious practice. Sometimes you have to say the polls be damned and do the right thing.
It’s difficult to say. We know that some 9/11 families are opposed to the project, but others support it. I haven’t seen any polls which are limited to people who have a direct connection with someone who was killed on 9/11.
That said, it is indisputable that the opposition has been ginned up by people who have been spreading lies and who stoke fear in people who are already inclined to be anti-Muslim. Here are some truths:
1. The people who are behind the project had nothing to do with 9/11. Many people are so ignorant about Islam that they believe that it is a monolithic religion. In fact, there are numerous sects within Islam, just as there are many denominations within Christianity. Feisal Rauf, the Imam who is behind the project, practices a form of Islam called Sufism. And guess what? Obama bin Laden despises Muslims who practice Sufism.
2. The property involved is not located at Ground Zero. It’s nearby, but you can’t see Ground Zero from 45 Park Place and you can’t seen 45 Park place from Ground Zero.
3. Opponents have claimed that the building will be opened or dedicated on 9/11/11, but that is a lie.
4. Opponents claim that it will be a “Victory” mosque, another lie.
5. Opponents claim that it will be a terrorist training center. However, the Imam has consistently condemned terrorism, and in fact he has been a consultant to the FBI on fighting terrorism.
Interestingly, polls show that a majority of the residents of Manhattan support the project. The farther away from Ground Zero, the more they are likely to oppose it.
Full disclosure: I did not personally know anyone who was killed on 9/11. However, my oldest friend’s niece worked in the World Trade Center and she didn’t make it out.
Mary, my view on polls are that they are just a snap shot on public opinion on that issue, something that can be manipulated. I wish we lived in a world where people would base their opinion on the facts. We have political leaders who are supposed to “do the right thing,” but that at times it feels like a Utopian view.
I understand what polls are. My point is that we cannot govern by them. Call it utopian or whatever but I can see this hysteria fed in partly by polls leading to violence. The folks who oppose this rebuilding of the mosque already remind me of the people who rallied against Mormons in the 19th century and ended up murdering people. Listen to Pamela Geller,Gingrich and Palin. Then read some of the anti-mormon rhetoric.
So? This has zip to do with the price of tea in China.
They remind me of the anti-Japanese-American sentiment which led to the internment camps during WWII.
I am just saying that I agree with you. We expect our leaders to do the right things. However, just like the Muslim community center their are those who are more interested in polls than “doing what is right.”
They remind me of the people who opposed the ending of segregation. They remind me of the people who were anti-Semitic. …
It at times feels that no matter how far we have progressed, there is always a time that make it feel like we haven’t. That is why it feels “like an Utopian view.” Does this mean that we should give up? No.
How long will it actually take the mosque to get built, if it is to happen? Should this be resolved first?
http://www.worldwidegreeks.com/profiles/blogs/greek-church-will-not-be
Charo , Please listen. Tthere is a mosque on the site already. People pray there everyday. It does not matter how long it will take. They own the property, have owned it for years and IT IS A MOSQUE ALREADY. In the end, this is case of bigotry in action. It is a case of collective guilt. I can remember as a child folks who still would say “the Jews killed Jesus” and feel comfortable, even after the Holocaust. This belief that was ingrained in the European Christian psyche for centuries and led to an abomination.. Notions of collective guilt lead to tragedy and evil. Have we learned nothing?
This community center is open to all. It simply has accomedations for Muslims who need a place to say their prayers a few times a day as their religion mandates.
You play basketball, run up and say your prayers and go right back to basketball.
Simple.
I think there is much confusion. After reading your comment, this is what I found:
“A building already exists near ground zero which is currently used for prayer by the Muslims. They want to build a bigger mosque to accommodate all the worshipers.”
http://www.chowk.com/articles/17676
I’m sincerely disappointed that not enough people (including those elected to public office) are saying “What difference does it make?” or “Why are you asking such a rude, inconsequential question?” and “Why are you saying Muslim as if it is a slur?”, rather than what they are doing – rushing to assure the public that Mr. Obama isn’t a big scary Muslim.
On a personal level, I just can’t muster the interest to care what Mr Obama (or his predecessors) are or were, religion-wise.
What I am interested in is this, though: Since when is being a Muslim or being “accused” of being a Muslim such a terrible thing?
I attend an inclusive church (Unitarian) when I attend at all (very infrequently). The church I am a member of is one of the co-sponsors of the annual Pride Parade. In the conservative city I live in, this is seen as scandalous. I once had an acquaintance in a social setting say something like, “Only f*gs go there”, not knowing that I was a member.
I said “I’m one of those f*gs” and walked off. Took the wind right out of his sails when I refused to pretend as though being gay (or Unitarian) is a bad thing.
Decent people should never ever allow something which is not bad (being gay or being Muslim) be turned into a slur. They should adamantly refuse to play into the hands of those who strive to do so.
I don’t know your link Charo, but here is the link to Politifact’s analysis:
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/aug/20/fact-checking-ground-zero-mosque-debate/
They are too totally different issues. Did you read the article? And, yes the government can multitask. So, I don’t see the relevance.
Apples and oranges. The Greek church is asking for money from the Port Authority, both to relocate and rebuild it. They haven’t been able to agree on the details, so the church remains unbuilt.
The so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” is not asking for any money from any governmental entity. The developers already own the property and they are still raising funds for the construction.
The issues with the Greek church have nothing to do with the Muslim center.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-19-2010/extremist-makeover—homeland-edition
[Edited to clean up hyperlinks and stuff. You can’t embed video or images in comments. Doc.]
Oops, I probably should have linked that instead of imbedding it. My bad.
There is a small mosque in the neighborhood which has been there for many years. At 45 Park Place, where the cultural center is going to be built, the existing building has been used for daily prayer since it was purchased last year.So there is both an existing mosque in the area and the former Burlington Coat Factory building is being used as a temporary mosque.
When was it right to call someone something that they aren’t, or who they aren’t? Is it okay to make a false claim about a person before or after the facts are known? Decent people should accept other for who they claim to be.
Obama claims to be a Christian and he should be respected for that. If someone claims to be a Muslim they should be respected for that. I don’t think Obama is insulted by people call him a Muslim, but he must be wondering why they don’t listen.
A number of family members of 9/11 victims and responders have been all over cable news and other places being asked their opinion, including those of Muslim background.
Quite simply put, the opinions have been mixed, with some for and some against. In other words, just like broader opinion in general.
Good grief, Charo. You really buy into any RW scare tactic thrown your way, don’t you?
For one thing, on the whole Muslim Community Center issue, they haven’t even raised any money yet, so everyone’s getting their britches in a bunch over what is essentially a non-issue. They’ve been talking about buying that building since last year
(FOX News even had the Muslim people behind the project on several of their shows for a “friendly” discussion about the issue and seemed supportive of it last December…Gee, it’s a little “convenient” that now they use the same people and issue as a scare tactic just months before the elections…don’t you think?)
Especially considering that this Muslim group behind the Community Center still hasn’t done diddly-squat to get their fund raising apparatus up in all that time. It’s sort of hard to buy a building without funds, don’t you think? So, its a non-issue at this point and a tempest in a teapot if you ask me. Trying going to a bank to secure a loan without anything to back it up – this is a multi-million dollar property – so it ain’t gonna happen.
Second, on the whole Greek Church issue – what is their fundraising status of securing their own location? Per the Constitution, the government has no business being involved in the the location or relocation of any religious institution. If they have to move or find a new zoning-approved location, they are responsible for following the same laws and funding that any other property purchaser has to do and the government certainly should not be involved, beyond addressing zoning issues and overseeing that financing for any project is legit and sufficient. That’s pretty much it.
Yeah, so what. Are you trying to make specious insinuations just for the sake of fomenting smears? Otherwise, I fail to see the relevance.
I hate it when folks (including our governments sometimes) use irrational fear-mongering to distract the attention from greater problems.
We have a similar situation here in France right now where the right-wing Sarkozy administration is using some justified concerns about Romanian gypsies’ criminality to blow it out of proportion and engaging into all kinds of unconstitutional shenanigans just like in Arizona.
Frankly, it seems to me that if America is concerned about Muslim extremists, there are so many more obvious steps it could take to minimize the risks of future attacks before worrying about a Mosque. It really makes you look very weak, just as Sarkozy in this Romanian business.
As for Obama’s putative religion, I’d worry a lot more if I thought he really was a devout christian.
Well said!
And I see that Israel is deporting children whose Palestinian parents had overstayed their visa when the children were born. These kids speak Hebrew and have known no other country.
There are also military families affected with service men and women maimed or killed. There are people who are not direct family members but close friends or whose very close friends were affected. I would not want to attribute Muslim hatred to every person who opposes the plan.
There are also military families affected with service men and women maimed or killed. There are people who are not direct family members but close friends or whose very close friends were affected. I would not want to attribute Muslim hatred to every person who opposes the plan.
The context was that Obama isn’t acting like a Muslim. I linked something that I had seen in several places. If you want to believe that I researched it myself and applied it to Obama, I certainly can’t stop you.
You seem to be having a tough time expressing your opinion.
Why do you think that is?
The purpose of this blog is to examine conspiracy theories about Barack Obama. It turns out that they are all baseless and that’s why it appears that I’m defending Obama. If the evidence went the other way then you might say I was persecuting Obama.
In either case, I’m not working for anybody in regards to this web site.
Now let me turn the question around. Are you working for some right-wing political organization to make up baseless accusations against Obama, to twist facts to look totally unlike the truth, and generally spread misinformation? That’s certainly what your blog appears to do.
More misinformation. Charo did you know that there are actual Muslims in Americans armed forced? Do you honestly believe that the only people who died were only Christians? That is no Jew, no Atheist, no Buddhists, no Muslim, etc. It was the world that felt the pain of September 11th. For once think for yourself.
You said “I would not want to attribute Muslim hatred to every person who opposes the plan.” Which is correct they are many people who are utterly misinformed spread by those who want to use being Muslim as a wedge issue.
Why are you linking misinformation? I know why others are as they are generally very clear in their intentions. What are yours?
Doc, That is one ugly website and by that I mean the content, off to the shower.
Yes, but my answer to that is you must be a “secret” Hindu. There’s no way of proving this either way, but it fits perfectly into what I’ve already made up in my own mind and what I desperately want others to think.
I thought those here would want to know what is being said elsewhere. I thought about e-mailing Doc with it, but didn’t want to bother him. I knew that he could just put the comment in the dump thread at his discretion.
I work for Obama. I used to be on a Death Panel, but when that job fell through, I get retrained to drive the bus that will take all the conservatives to FEMA camps.
When you’re a Muslim, you are required to pray 5 times a day. Finding an area to put down a carpet to worship could get tricky in a big city. The prayer room in this community center accommodates this with a prayer room.
If a Christian community center opened and had a small chapel for religious needs, would there be a problem?
Charo, again Muslims are serving in the Armed Forces and have been wounded and killed serving. They died in the 9/11 travesty. Are there lives worth less or do you and the folks “talking” out there choose to ignore those facts. This is an effort to limit the religious expression of a group many folks do not like. That is dangerous for us all. Who will be the next group on the list? If there is a demonstation in front of the Islamic Center in my town, I will be there but on the other side of the line from many of my Evangelical brothers and sisters. Why? Because I know I and my faith expression are protected when theirs is.
Mary,
I was speaking of those who had loved ones or friends in the military. I already said that I don’t have that close connection.
I
You haven’t said much that makes any sense. Are you on medications?
Sean,
I don’t know if you are going back to the Greek Orthodox Church issue or not. That group wants its church back and has had red tape over the whole matter for years. It would seem to me out of fairness (their church already existed and was destroyed on 9/11) to address their issues either first or simultaneously. The link I provided above indicates that their plans were nixed because of the mosque controversy. That may or may not be accurate, but that is what the article stated.
Mary was implying that I was ignoring the service of Muslims. I was discussing the reasons for the emotional response to the issue. Service men and women killed or maimed as a result of war has not affected me personally.
You’re still rambling. Service men? Look it up, “charo.”
The article you linked to about the Greek Orthodox church says no such thing. In fact, the article says that the spokesman for the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese feels that the mosque controversy is “helpful” to the church’s situation. Otherwise, the article only says that the decision to stop negotiations with the Greek church took place “amidst” the controversy about the mosque. No cause and effect is implied by that.
The issues with the Greek Orthodox Church have nothing to do with the mosque. The Greek church was located next to the World Trade Center. Plans to rebuild the church have been coordinated with the plans for the overall WTC site. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has proposed moving the church 100 yards from its original location. In return for letting the Port Authority have the property where the original church stood, the church was going to receive a new plot of land and $20 million. The church apparently wants more money and other considerations, and the Port Authority has balked. The church is free to rebuild on its original site, but it will have to use its own money for that.
The mosque property, 45 Park Place, has nothing to do with the Port Authority.
I expect there would be red tape for any building project. Isn’t the Greek church a separate issue? Would the red tape for the Greek church be based on intolerance of the Greek Orth. religion? Why mix the two issues?
Charo, again I’m failing to understand what you are trying to convey here or how your response is relevant to what I said.
Re-read my comment (included above). I simply said that opinions vary and are all over the map on this issue, including amongst those that were directly affected by 9/11 and even within the Muslim community, just as they are varied within the public at large (hence what “broader opinion in general” means. I did not say Muslim hatred anywhere in that statement, although obviously such basis for reaction would be included as a subset of “opinions vary and are all over the map” – but by the very definition of what I just said, that means people’s reasons for why they are for or against it are VARIOUS.
So, your whole response to me seems either redundant or irrelevant in context of what I said, as neither the group of people (military & their friends/families) would have been excluded from “opinion in general”. And your statement of “I would not want to attribute Muslim hatred to every person who opposes the plan” would already be covered within o”pinions vary and are all over the map”, so there is nothing added within your response…
…Unless you are somehow trying to insinuate a connection between this Islamic Community Center an our military serving overseas in Iraq or Afghanistan. If that is what you are trying to argue, then I would flat out say you are way off base.
You can say that we are at war with Islamic Extremists and that would be a reasonable statement. But we are NOT at war with Islam as a whole, Charo. This isn’t the Crusades here.
There is no relevant connection between what happened on 9/11 and this Islamic Community Center.
There is no relevant connection between our military fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan and this Islamic Community Center.
So again, I fail to see any point for why you felt necessary to specifically inject our servicemen or their friends or families into this whole discussion. They have no special relevance to the Islamic Community Center issue at all.
Of course Obama isn’t acting like a Muslim. He’s not one.
What then was the purpose of your link then, unless to try to foment some sort of excuse for why he doesn’t do any Muslim things and try to cover for still wanting to paint him as a Muslim by accusing him of being a “stealth Muslim”. That is after all what your post and link seem to be trying to insinuate.
So I ask you to be direct with what your thoughts or opinions are on a topic and just come out with what you want to say. Instead, your writings of late appear to be attempts to “play coy” while introducing specious arguments.
Its the old “I’m not saying he’s X, but did it ever occur to anyone that he did Y. I’m just sayin’…” type garbage that is used all the time to cowardly introduce false narratives yet try to dodge responsibility for spreading the rumors.
If a person reacts to personal tragedy by hatred of a whole class of people… then that is racism or religious prejudice.
When I was young I was attacked, robbed & beaten by 2 men who happened to be African-American. I could have used that incident as an excuse to be fearful or prejudiced against all African-Americans — I certainly wouldn’t have been the first person to justify my prejudices that way — but that would have been stupid as well as wrong. The fact that 2 criminals with dark skin traumatized me doesn’t mean that I attribute or even associate such criminal acts with other, innocent, members of the same race.
The muslim religion did not attack America or kill anyone. The fact that a small band of people claiming to be Muslim were the perpetrators of a vicious act of terrorism has absolutely nothing to do with a peaceful group that wants to build a community center and a place of worship.
When you connect that group in any way to the 9/11 acts you are engaging in a prejudiced thought process — they have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11.
“There are also military families affected with service men and women maimed or killed. There are people who are not direct family members but close friends or whose very close friends were affected. I would not want to attribute Muslim hatred to every person who opposes the plan.”
That was supposed to be to Mary, not G. I didn’t hit submit for her response.
“What then was the purpose of your link then”
To show what I have read elsewhere. I didn’t start by stating (as does Black Lion and it is not a criticism of him in this case) you should see what the nutjobs are saying at P&E (or whatever the site is). I didn’t give any sites. I know I saw it on a Freep thread and some other places.
Had I started the comment with “You should see what the nut jobs are saying at …” I doubt I would have been considered sincere. At the time I made the initial comment, I thought that Doc C was reading threads because I saw a few responses somewhere near the time I posted. So, you’ll notice that I said this:
“I hope that you are here reading so that you can move the comment to the great mother-in-law thread if necessary.”
It is being said and I thought he should be aware that it is, given the namesake of this site. I really don’t want to privately e-mail unless necessary.
My comments as of late were as late as last night and continuing into today to respond back, as I try to do (unless it is futile.)
As for the Greek Orthodox Church issue, it seems IMO that the rebuilding has been stymied. I said that church issue should be resolved first or simultaneously with the mosque issue. You can consider that stupid. Fine.
As for the military issue, that discussion was with Mary with some interjections from others. It was a question I had about the emotional response to the mosque. It was a thought that military families (or those who have served in their lifetimes) might haved a more emotional reaction, as well as those who were close to 9/11 victims. There are people who were affected that would not be known to every pollster or journalist.
Maybe that is a stupid opinion. Fine.
I said that I, charo, was not affected by that kind of personal connection. I thought that may be the reason why others were having such a strong reaction.
Also, I am sorry to hear about your attack.
I taught in a school for several years that was 80% African American. One year, I had a Muslim student in my class. I wasn’t going to church anywhere so I didn’t ponder much about his faith. I know that he wasn’t an extremist and was attempting to fast during one of the religious seasons.
His name was Husni, and he was the best kid. All of the teachers thought so. (He wrote an excellent paper on Death of a Salesman). I wish I had talked to him more at the time about his beliefs, but religion was not a big part of my life then.
We’re not saying it is stupid, Charo.
We are pointing out that the two issues are unrelated
and their reasons for moving forward or not being able to move forward have absolutely no connection whatsoever at all, with the exception of the general area in which they are located. Why can’t you see that?
Please read carefully what Rickey wrote and maybe you will see what is simply being explained of why this is an apples and oranges situation:
I’m just trying to understand what the military connection would be to this Muslim Community Center in any way shape or form. Where is the actual connection there that would invoke a reaction related to their military service and this group?
Why did we go to war in Afghanistan?
Charo, you know darn well we went to war in Afghanistan because that is where the perpetrators of 9/11, Osama Bin Laden, and the leadership of Al-Qaeda were based and operating out of and that the Taliban who was in control of that country refused to turn them over.
So again, tell me where there is a connection between them and the people who want to build the Islamic Community Center?
Do you feel that ALL Muslims are to blame?
Do you know of some mystery connection to the Taliban or Al-Qaeda in play here that we don’t?
What IS your exact argument or position on this issue?
Are you personally uncomfortable with that Islamic Community Center being built period (provided they ever got the funding and go ahead, which I have my doubts on would ever happen anyways)?
Or is your concern with either that specific building (Burlington Coat Factory, over 2 blocks away, where you cannot even see “Ground Zero” from its location), because you feel that any single location where any debris fell is “hallowed ground”? (If that is the case, then you must take issue with a huge portion of lower Manhattan and all the blocks of such buildings that are already there).
And if that becomes your argument, than I would ask you quite pointedly, how far away or where exactly would be “fine” with you for them to build?
Or is it simply that the inflammatory and misleading headlines of “Ground Zero Mosque” stoke the same visceral gut and emotional reaction that it does in most of us and sounds like a bad, bad idea when you say it that way
…. except that once you get beyond the trumped up rhetoric, you find that its not really a mosque, its not at nor adjacent to “ground zero” and there are no actual plans moving forward any further than where they were 9 months ago – no funding raised yet, no approval given…and therefore we’re dealing with a trumped up speculative non-issue.
Doesn’t it bother you at all when any organization or media outlet misleads you on stories like this?
Don’t you find these fear/smear tactics being used to influence your opinion offensive? Where is your ire for those conservative voices on the right for constantly pulling these ginned up controversy tactics?
As you have been told several times, the church issue has nothing to do with the mosque issue.
The church issue is between the church and the Port Authority. The church is free to rebuild on its current property and without financial assistance from the Port Authority, or it can continue to try to work out a deal for a new location.
The Port Authority has nothing to do with the mosque or the mosque location. There will be no assistance from the Port Authority. The Port Authority has no say regarding the mosque. Why, then, should the developers of the Islamic Center have to wait for the Greek church and the Port Authority to iron out their differences?
So, your only regret is not talking to him about “his beliefs.” It is hard to find the exact words to say. Why didn’t you just talk to him about things you have in common?
How many times do people have to tell you that Muslims did die in 9/11 and America does have Muslims in their military. You really have to start thinking for yourself.
A wonderful piece by Frank Rich of the New York Times about the “Ground Zero Mosque” controversy. Required reading, especially for Charo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/opinion/22rich.html?_r=1
G’s comment was very clear.
Please, just answer the question.
Either Lower Manhattan (or some section thereof) is “sacred ground” or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then anyone can build anything they want on land they own. If it is, then we really need to remove ALL the various sleasy institutions that currently populate the area, such as strip clubs, cheap electronic stores and investment banks. Especially the latter….
Did you know that Afghanistan is a Muslim country? We went to war to get those directly responsible for 9/11 and those that supported them. We went to remove the extremist from a Muslim country. We are in Afghanistan helping Muslim a population.
I go to banks in lower Manhattan for an electronic strip show and a gyro. Good times.
/end sub happy
Wow. Just got finished reading it. That was excellent and well sourced with all of its links!
Thank you for sharing this Rickey, as well as the other excellent and well-written explanations of things you have provided here.
I agree, the Frank Rich article you provided should be required reading.
I would add that I view your posts as required reading as well.
That is the military connection. Families/friends/girlfriends/boyfriends who have been negatively impacted by the war may have a strong emotions about the site. MAybe even military veterans from past conflicts. I was making suggestions for the strong reactions.
G, I am neutral about the mosque. I can see both sides. It is certainly legal to build a mosque there. Keeping with the current plan instead of some kind of compromise has been a divisive issue.
Your point has nothing to do with me. I was suggesting possible reasons why there has been such a strong reaction.
My personal opinion is that it should be up to the residents of lower Manhattan and the rest of us should STFU. That’s New York for mind your own f-ing business.
So one is manipulating the narrative that is what is trying to be pointed out to you, but you seem to not understand this. Have you actually talked to these people. The plan was approved many months ago, but instead you seem more interested in expressing your emotions by proxy. However, you are still not listen. When will you understand that the issue is being distorted?
“Families/friends/girlfriends/boyfriends who have been negatively impacted by the war may have a strong emotions about the site.” Makes absolutely no sense. Yes, negatively impacted by the war. They good to Afghanistan and Iraq to help Muslims. They are will to die to help Muslims. Why don’t you understand this.
The narrative has always been the closeness to the “ground zero,” which conventionally excludes the other two sites. The narrative is about 9/11 and not the sending the troop to capture Obama bin Laden. Why don’t you understand this?
There is your mistake. Polls, if you believe them, show opposition to the site. Why is there opposition? Maybe you think hatred of Muslims. I doubt that every person opposed has that kind of hatred. There would be much more unrest throughout the country toward Muslims (not to state that there is none). When people have that kind of reaction, it is emotional. I gave a possible reason for the high emotion.
For some of that emotion
Charo, thank you. That was a direct answer and a measured response. I appreciate that.
Believe it or not, my actual opinion on the matter (when I’m not having to weigh in on the merits for or against an argument) is pretty close to “neutral” on this particular matter as well.
My biggest problem with the whole argument is it seems like nothing but a sick political tactic to gin up controversy where there really is none at this point in time.
Please read the Frank Rich article that Rickey provided, as it hits on some points I’ve been saying over and over again – there IS no financing for this yet. This also isn’t some new “idea” to build that Community Center at that location – it had been nationally written about and even covered by FOX News itself as far back as last December, with absolutely NO controversy at that time at all – IN FACT – it garnished support.
All of a sudden it comes up now, approximately 3 months before the 2010 election cycle, suddenly being “demonized” by the very same news organizations that covered it and supported it six months prior.
I find that a little suspicious and telling. As well as a disgusting way to play divisive fear/smear based politics, which I loathe.
I mean really, what actually has changed in the time period between reporting on that, or indeed from then all the way until now in terms of the idea actually moving forward? NOTHING.
What I find most surprising is that the organization hasn’t even gotten around to building a fund-raising structure to get ANY money yet. So, it seems like they are a bunch of dithering dreamers, if you ask me. Without funds, they can’t attempt to actually secure a loan or begin the process of purchasing that location. Therefore, to me, it is a completely NON-ISSUE until that point, as it may never happen, regardless of any “controversy”. Without an actual project to move forward, the whole notion of “compromise” can’t even come into the picture, realistically.
Simply put, if you don’t have money, you don’t have a project. If someone else with funds came in tomorrow and wanted the building, there would be nothing preventing them from moving forward instead. With as little progress they’ve made over such a time period on something that they sought such early public publicity on, I have little confidence of their ability to carry through with the project at all or to succeed in raising sufficient funding. In short, I’m very skeptical that anything would have come of this project, regardless of all the media hype, even if they had “glowing support” instead of such controversy.
I’ve seen many more competently run organizations with a faster and stronger funding base and less national attention fail to ever achieve their goals and buy or build the projects they tout (Cleveland and Akron, near where I live are rife with tons of these “planned” building projects that ended up going nowhere, even after years of hype and support and were eventually abandoned altogether. I’m sure it is the same in any big city area).
If things did ever move forward, I would of course hope that the parties involved would talk directly and take proper considerations, including local sensitivities into account before making a final location purchase decision. However, at this point, such notions are completely premature and in the realm of mere “wishful thinking”…or in the media, a matter of fake, cynical sensationalism and ginned up controversy.
Yes, it has everything to do with you. You fail to see “the forest through the trees.”
I think they are planning to build on property that they already own as opposed to property they don’t own.
It’s not all that easy to find suitable vacant space in NYC.
So, am I understanding you correctly that you are not placing any judgment here on the rationale associated to the “emotions” involved here, just merely pointing out that the issue has been a very emotional one and generated a high percentage of negative reactions?
If that is what you are saying, than I think we agree on that point.
However, I would hope you would also understand that initial emotional reactions, particularly when they are based on ginned-up and inflammatory sensationalized reporting of an event are not a good basis to make sound decisions on, as they are reactions to what they think they are hearing as opposed to actual reactions of the facts on the ground.
Also, what would you say is the basis for such a strong negative emotional reaction – “military” or otherwise, besides “fear” of anything sounding “muslim”?
Charo, you may want to preface some of your comments so that other commenters can understand what your point is. Sometimes it can get confusing at to what your point is or where you are going with your commentary…
It is misinformation about the community center nothing more nothing less. It is people who are being manipulated by those who want to distract from other important issue. There is no reason to look at the polls, all that is need is to listen to the discussion.
There is fear, resentment, distrust, being insulted, …., and many more emotions. None of which are based on the truth or the facts.
And thank you for your measured response. The Rich article focused on public figures. There seems to be widespread dissent from the general public. 9/11 is an emotionally charged issue still. (btw, my family is flying on 9/11. My kids have never been on a plane, and we are taking a mini-vacation. It didn’t occur to me right away that we are flying on that date. We were trying to coordinate my husband’s work schedule with the kids’ soccer schedule and that ended up being the flight date. I am trying not to get freaked.)
I am usually replying on the fly so to speak. I will try to be more clear in the future. Thank you.
American politics has been dirty since the beginning, and as Lincoln supposedly said:
Charo, no problem…
That could be the case — but if it is, then it’s important to recognize that such feelings stem from religious prejudice, and should not be validated. An appropriate response would then be to say something along the lines of “I understand your pain, but the people who hurt you weren’t representative of most American Muslims.”
Well, first of all, my wishes are for very safe travels for your family and that your vacation is extremely enjoyable. I hope the first plane ride for your kids is a memorable one in a positive way. Try not to think about the date too much if you can and make sure you buy some chewing gum or Dramamine, just in case the kids need it for their ears when the plane pressure changes. Also – make sure you get to the airport well in advance, so that everything goes smoothly and you make it through security without feeling rushed or worried about missing your flight. In that respect, don’t forget to check your airport’s regulations on what can & can’t be packed and stowed on the flight.
Now you are right about the “general public” to an extent – but remember – the general public only reacts to the information they are presented with. Therefore, if public figures or media are irresponsible with reporting, then you still have a lot of people who are being emotionally taken advantage of, misled and getting worked up over nothing.
However, as individual members of the “general public”, we all have a responsibility to assess what we are told and not just react out of panic and fear – that just leads to an unhealthy “mob” mentality. Often, when people are willing to get the facts before going off half-cocked, it turns out that reality of the situation is a lot different and a lot more complex than how it was presented. People are responsible for their own actions and to think before they speak or act. If their emotional reactions and fears are based on hyped up controversy or false info, then they are responsible to calm down and adjust their thinking based on reality; not to desperately cling to misguided fears and prejudices.
So, in the end, polls or public opinion based on emotion are not the way to run a city, state, country or business for that matter. Laws and rules are meant to be designed based on facts and evidence. The checks and balances in our system are designed to ensure that rights and freedoms are protected and to not allow emotional witch-hunts to overrule our better nature.
If 9/11 has caused an excessive general “fear of muslims” in the general populace in this country, then I think Expelliarmus’ words of advice said it best, and offer a good way to handle the conversation:
The article focuses on public figures because it is those public figure who have stoked the fear which had led to the dissent.
I know normally rational people who have been convinced that the Islamic center is going to be used to train terrorists and that it is being built to celebrate the 9/11 attacks. If I believed that, I would be opposed to it as well. But those are lies. They are more examples of the politics of fear, designed to demonize Muslims and scare voters into voting a certain way. And who has been spreading those lies? The people named by Frank Rich in his column.
The developers of the Islamic center in lower Manhattan had nothing more to do with the 9/11 attacks than you and I. If people are opposed to it because it is an Islamic center, the only plausible reason for their opposition is that they associate all Muslims with 9/11. And that is wrong, plain and simple.
Oh, no doubt about that at all.
I have no illusions that politics haven’t always been dirty. I’m aware that is reality; yet I’m still disgusted by the depths of dirty behavior that takes place.
Furthermore, it never ceases to amaze (and depress) me to realize how many folks so easily (and often willingly) fall for this kind of stuff as well as how poor a job that mainstream journalism does to fact-check and counter the nonsense.
For a number of reasons, some quite understandable, France has had rocky relations with Algeria, its former colony (although strangely enough not with Morocco, but i digress) and some of that included being the target of several bomb attacks in Paris subway stations which killed a number of people as well as a hijacking in 1994 aiming to crash an Air France plane into the Tour Montparnasse, the tallest skyscraper in Paris.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_8969
The French — and by that I meant not just the Government but the population en masse — did not feel that the proper response was to invade Algeria (again) or bomb them. There is a fair amount of anti-Algerian racism in France, pretty much identical to the anti-Mexican feelings that run in Southern California, but I don’t recall it being exacerbated or taken to the next level by those attacks. It’s as if even people who had negative or racist feelings towards Algerians were able to grasp that these were unrelated issues.
It is a great source of sadness to me that a majority (not all, fortunately) of Americans — perhaps because of a culturally sheltered life and relative ignorance of non-American issues? — are not able to process those kind of things cogently. Your current brouhaha over that so-called Mosque is being reported in the papers overseas, and there is no way it makes you look good. It certainly is not gaining you any friends.
(I rush to add that our present government is just as cynically manipulating a relatively minor criminal issue regarding Romanian Roms, but polls would appear to indicate that a majority of people are not falling for it.)
That of course was not true in the 60s and 70s, when the American press was the envy of the world, a standard which we could only aspire to.
I have never been sadder when a journalist from LE FIGARO told me in 2004 that they used to read the WASHINGTON POST and the NY TIMES to find what the US Government was hiding and what was really going on, and now (them) they read it, like they used to read Pravda, to try to divine what it was thinking.
The credibility of US media worldwide took a hit before and during the Iraq invasion that I don’t think it will ever recover from. Al Jazeera English considered by everyone to be a legitimate and well regarded news source, available in the UK on Sky, and everywhere else, was dropped by Comcast, DishTV, DirecTV, etc. in the US because of anti-Arab bias, and that too is known and has contributed to tarnish the image of the US as a bastion of independent media.
If you travel abroad, watch CNN International, which is actually quite different from the CNN you get in the US, and you’ll be stunned by the difference (although I understand from friends in the biz that tensions gave been growing between CNN-US and CNN-INTL but I digress.)
Finally, the most insidious thing that has contributed to the destruction of the US media’s credibility has been the “Shape of the Earth – Viewpoints Differ” attitudes, partly as a result of the ascendancy of the 24/7 cable news, the decoupling of news and entertainment, and the growth in lobbying and pressure groups.
All in all, it is a very sad news landscape in America right now, not terribly different from what you find in Russia, Italy or Brazil. It may well be a worldwide trend.
Case in point: George Washington in 1758. See The True George Washington
Thank you, as always for your insights and perspective, Lupin, as well as for sharing about how thing are both viewed and addressed over there.
I think there is a significant effect, with this country being so vast and surrounded by 2 major oceans, of many Americans, especially when not near the coasts or borders, having no realistic concept of the world or people beyond our shores…sadly.
Sad to hear how the stupid fake controversy around the proposed Community Center in NY is affecting international views of us…but I’m not surprised either. Many of us within the country are very bothered and sick of all the fake controversies and ginned up fear & hate going around here too.
Thanks again, G, for your response. My husband and I have not flown since before 9/11 so security will be much more complex. We plan to travel light: bathing suits and a couple pairs of underwear 🙂 There is sure to be a Walmart somewhere!
I have two quick responses that also will apply to some others above. Then I’ll check in when I can. School starts next week….
First, I am quite surprised that you would give credit to the media (am I right to assume Fox News?) for influencing 61% of the public. According to the link below, there are moderate Muslims opposed to the location of the mosque, and the reasoning is grounded in the faith.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/18/moderate-muslims-oppose-location-of-cordoba-mosque-%E2%80%94-on-religious-grounds/
Mitch McConnell, playing the “I don’t know if Obama is a Muslim” game, pandering for the far right voters….
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/08/22/2010-08-22_republican_sen_mitch_mcconnell_on_if_obama_is_muslim_i_take_him_at_his_word_hes_.html
“The president says he’s a Christian. I take him at his word,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I think the faith that most Americans are questioning is the President’s faith in the government to generate jobs.”
But McConnell’s carefully worded remark raised eyebrows among those who felt the statement was intentionally cagey.
“By constructing his response in such a peculiar way — suggesting that the debate over Obama’s religion was legitimate and that the president was arguing one side of it — he not only invited the type of skeptical coverage he received Sunday morning but will further spur claims that the GOP doesn’t mind having this image of Obama spread,” Sam Stein wrote at the Huffington Post.
Stein cited other commentators skeptical of McConnell’s vague answer.
Politico’s Mike Allen titled the item “SIREN — OR SHOULD WE SAY “DOG WHISTLE”?
And NBC’s Chuck Todd tweeted “Odd way to phrase it.”
I should have said above, Second, according to the link below … (I didn’t separate that point out.) I suppose you could argue that their faith tells them to be considerate of Islamaphobes but there were two other reasons given outside of faith:
“Second, there is the problem of Imam Feisal’s propensity to mix with radicals. And thirdly, there is a problem with the lack of transparency about money funding.”
Overall, I think the concern was sensitivity.
WND Solves ‘Mystery’ of Why People Think Obama Is Muslim
Topic: WorldNetDaily
An Aug. 20 WorldNetDaily article carries the headline; “Mystery solved! Why Americans think president is Muslim.” And what’s the solution that WND comes up with, via right-wing writer and radio host Chuck Morse? Obama secretly is Muslim.
No, really:
“It’s hard to reasonably explain Obama’s cold relationship with Israel, his inaction in the face of Iran obtaining a nuclear bomb, his giving a green light to the building of a mosque near where Islamic fundamentalists hijacked passenger planes on September 11, 2001, and made them into missiles to destroy the World Trade Center in Manhattan,” says Morse.
One possible explanation, says Morse, is the Islamic principle of Taqiyya – or the sanctioning of hiding one’s Muslim faith.
It’s ultimately fear of the president’s multicultural background and suspicion about his childhood travels that drives public distrust over the president’s religion, reported the Associated Press.
“Obama is the Christian son of a Kenyan Muslim father and a Kansas mother,” writes Hillel Italie. “Born in Hawaii, he lived from ages 6 to 10 in predominantly Muslim Indonesia with his mother and Indonesian stepfather. His full name, Barack Hussein Obama, sounds Muslim to many.”
The name “Hussein” doesn’t just sound Muslim, says Morse. It is “reserved exclusively for Muslims.” In addition, Islamic law upholds that children born to a Muslim father are automatically Muslim, says Morse. The president’s stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, was Muslim. Obama’s school records indicate that in Indonesia he enrolled as a Muslim in Catholic and Muslim schools, and in his autobiography, he acknowledged studying the Quran in Indonesia.
[…]
Morse notes that Obama confessed to converting to Christianity around the dawn of his political involvement, “under the tutelage of the racist anti-American and anti-Semitic pastor Jeremiah Wright,” he said.
But leaving Islam, Morse says, is fraught with complications and deadly consequences.
“By converting out of Islam, Obama either became an apostate, a murtadd, in Arabic, or he began engaging in an Islamic-sanctioned deception and thus remained Muslim,” says Morse. “If Obama truly left Islam, and actively embraced Christianity, he could be subject to severe penalties under Islamic law including the death sentence. Islamic Shariah law calls for the execution of any Muslim who becomes a murtadd.”
[…]
t’s conceivable, says Morse, that the president never truly left Islam at all, but professes faith in Christ as a cover for his true beliefs – an allowable offense for Muslims in certain circumstances.
The “Islamic-sanctioned deception,” says Morse, remains the only explanation to escaping such punishment.
“The other possibility is that President Obama is engaging in a Taqiyya, which is a lie that is spoken in the greater interest of Islam,” says Morse. “There are several quotes in the Quran and the Hadith, the Islamic holy books, that set the conditions under which it is permissible for the Muslim to lie regarding his identity and his intentions when dealing with non-Muslims and the non-Muslim world. Lying is allowed, even encouraged, by the Muslim according to Shariah law, if the lie in some way furthers the agenda of Islam.
“If Obama is indeed a secret-believing Muslim, as opposed to an apostate, the effects on public policy and on American society would be profound,” adds Morse. “Whether Muslim or Christian, Barack Obama is the first ‘Muslim president’ in the same way that Bill Clinton was the first ‘black president.'”
WND has tried to push the secret-Muslim thing at least once before, in a column by Pieder Beeli. And like Beeli, Morse gets the idea of taqiyya completely wrong. As we’ve previously noted, Hussein Ibish, senior fellow at the American Task Force on Palestine, has said that the idea promoted by people like Beeli that taqiyya “constitutes a carte blanche for all Muslims to lie to all non-Muslims” is false; rather, it permits Muslims to lie about their faith in order to save themselves from imminent harm or death. “If there is a major religion that does not contain a doctrine that might permit someone to recant at the stake or before the axe, I am not aware of it,” Ibish adds.
Of course, the fact that right-wingers like Morse and WND love to perpetuate a lie couldn’t possibly have anything to do with why people think this about Obama.
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/
Well, the link you provided is to yet another right-wing website, Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller. The two organizations quoted in the story, Center for Islamic Pluralism and American Islamic Forum for Democracy, are both neo-con organizations which do not represent mainstream moderate Muslims. Interestingly the Daily Caller failed to mention that Dr. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy also is a founding member of the Center for Islamic Pluralism.
From the article:
there is the problem of Imam Feisal’s propensity to mix with radicals.
An assertion made with no supporting evidence. In fact, the Imam has consulted with the FBI on fighting terrorism after 9/11 and he was sent on overseas trips by the Bush Administration. And his name is Feisal Abdul Rauf.
Don’t believe everything you read, Charo. Check your sources.
Oh, no. Trust me, Muslims smoke. In fact they smoke like chimneys. Some branches might forbid it but I think they’re in the small minority.
An interview is an interview. It either happened or it did not.
Are you saying there are right wing Muslims???
Oh my GODDESS *headdesk*
Chuck Morse is a know-nothing clown. Back when I was on the American Partisan, after 9/11, he was one of the regular Islamophobes on the page. He wrote total bollocks, and he still is, from the look of it.
I thought he’d gone to hide under a rock after being disqualified from running as a Republican against Barney Frank when it turned out he was still registered as – drum roll please – a Democrat. I guess he’s ready to poke his head back up again.
But not for long *fires up +13 vorpal chainsaw*
The Post & Email and World Net Daily also conduct interviews. The issue is not whether the interview took place, but whether the interviewee is credible.
Are you saying there are right wing Muslims???
Yes, there are. Read up on Steven Schwartz, the head of the Center for Islamic Pluralism. He supported the Iraq war! He writes for The Weekly Standard! Neo-con all the way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Schwartz_%28journalist%29
Charo,
If you look at the history of my postings, I have consistently pointed out that America’s overall mainstream media and cable news in particular have extremely “degraded” from being institutions who’s primary function was journalism to being mere “infotainment” that does very little fact checking and is all too quick to report and repeat a salacious headline or run with ginned up controversy over and over again, because it drives ratings.
So, I’ve always pointed out the media’s across the board irresponsibility towards informing the public properly. I do think that Fox News is the worst cable news offender and often the source of this irresponsible behavior. Unfortunately, everyone seems to react every time they “wag the dog” and carryover the same memes to their own stations. There’s too much false equivocation happening in the media, where they seem to all just repeat even discredited stories and controversies over and over again and treat them as “legitimate topics of opinion” instead of focusing on getting to the truth and correcting the record.
So, I’m not sure why you were “surprised” by my remarks at all. I have been extremely consistent and outspoken about my thoughts on the matter.
Also, in regards to your wanting to point out that there are “moderate muslims” against this Community Center being built – If you recall my original comment, I already mentioned that even the Muslim community’s reaction was mixed on this issue:
Even Miss USA, the Muslim woman from Michigan weighed in on the topic that she was against it being built there.
I agree with your summary statement that the concerns here are primarily based on sensitivity.
The other 2 reasons listed in that article, unfortunately are based on people reacting to misinformation, which sadly is completely being pushed by “conservative” and RW news outlets.
So, anybody who’s basing their reactions on those elements are reacting to false information.
As Rickey just mentioned above (beat me to it again, Rickey!), the Imam behind this Community Center idea has been used as a consultant by our government ever since 9/11 (by both the Bush & Obama administrations, if I am correct), so painting him as an “extremist” seems to be nothing but more pure smear demagoguery.
And the whole “problem with the lack of transparency about money funding” is another false meme – as I’ve mentioned repeatedly, it turns out this organization still hasn’t even gotten around to putting a fund raising structure in place, let alone start raising any money to support this multi-million dollar pipe dream of theirs.
So, those arguments are bogus.
As Rickey pointed out above, you really need to start being more suspicious of your sources and start looking at them with a more critical eye. You conservatives are supposed to all be about accountability, yet I never really see any conservatives being critical of conservative media for being dishonest and misleading. Why is that?
Personally, I am turned off when I find out anybody is trying to scam or lie to me. I used to watch FOX News on the same regular basis as I did other news channels). I’ve mostly stopped because it became more and more obvious that they were no longer reporting news and were becoming more blatantly a propaganda outlet and actively engaging in fomenting “wag the dog” ginned up controversy stories and spreading obvious false information.
Doesn’t this stuff bother you too? Why do you not get mad that so many conservative news outlets are emotionally scamming you?
I noticed the whole “Taqiyya” meme you started to push yesterday was the topic and focus of the WND article that Black Lion shared with us today. So, the “stealth muslim” BS is being pushed again.
I think it is worth restating and highlighting what BL’s conwebwatch article concluded:
Finally, Lupin provided a very relevant article on another thread that deals with how this Islamophobia driven response is going in a very dark direction.
The article mainly focuses on what happened at a “Ground Zero” protest that took place this past week and how the mob crowd unfairly turned on the only black person in the crowd.
The article and video can be found here:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/23/park51/index.html
Charo,
First of all, Rickey never said the interview didn’t happen. He said that the story is RW spin and that the sources are RW.
And YES, there are RW Muslims. Just as there are RW Jews and RW Christians and RW folks of other religious identities.
Did you somehow think that Christianity had a lock on RW mentality?
BTW – I wrote a very lengthy response to your other points and comments, but for some reason, it is held up in moderation at the moment. I think that happens anytime I embed several links into a post.
Oh, and for everyone, but especially Charo:
If you didn’t see Jon Stewart’s coverage last Thursday of the “Ground Zero” Mosque and the take down of Fox News being behind ginning up the controversy on it, then stop what you’re doing right now and go watch it – it really is a must see:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Segment Title: “Extremist Makeover – Homeland Edition”
Right now, it is still the featured clip and comes up and plays automatically when the main site page loads.
This moron’s in Massachusetts? And he was dumb enough to think he had a chance against Barney Frank?
BWAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!
Of course there are right-wing Muslims. The most prominent is Osama bin Laden.
I meant in the sense of the right wing ginning up Islamophobia. That doesn’t make sense to me, but I’m not going to argue with you over it.
And Bill O’Reilly interviewed President Obama.
Finally, spin is giving one’s interpretation. When I read an interview, the source doesn’t matter, unless there is some indication that the text of the interview is not accurate. I may or may not agree with the interpretation of the interview. But the source of the interview doesn’t matter when reading it just for what was said. That is the reason for my stating that the interview either occurred or it did not. If you don’t believe what Dr. Zuhdi Jasser said, then you are calling him a liar. You may be even judging him for how he practices his faith.
“I meant in the sense of the right wing ginning up Islamophobia.”
Charo, I don’t know if you realize it or not, but Al Qaeda and many other terrorist groups who oppose the United States and the West would applaud any Western efforts to increase “Islamophobia”.
Right Wing ‘Muslim extremists’ hate the freedoms America represents and feel that American Muslims are being corrupted by our culture. They are all for fanning the fears of both American Muslims and non-Muslims- divisiveness and fear is what they are all about.
America? We are supposed to be about inclusiveness and be against the fear-mongering. We play right into the hands of Al Qaeda etc by this kind of controversy.
“That is the reason for my stating that the interview either occurred or it did not. If you don’t believe what Dr. Zuhdi Jasser said, then you are calling him a liar. You may be even judging him for how he practices his faith.”
Interviews are slanted by the questions the interviewees answer, and what kind of opportunity they give the interviewed to respond, along with any editing that may be involved.
An interviewed persons words may be accurately recorded, yet the contents can be editorialzed by not reporting the interviewees complete answer.
For instance, if someone asked me “do you approve of the death penalty for African Americans?- and i answered “Yes”, I could be portrayed as a racist, if the article left off my subsequent response “in as much as I approve of the death penalty for any Americans. However, while i have no philosophical qualms about the death penalty, there have been far too many instances of innocent people who were convicted who were later proven to be not guilty, and an African American man is far more likely to be given the death penalty than a white man. If the justice system were perfect, I would support the death penalty, but as it is not, I do not support it at this time.
Charo, quite simply if a Muslim listens to the same news source that reports a ginned up story, then that person too is reacting to the news they are being told.
In other words, if a Muslim is only hearing reports that this Imam is “radical” or that the funding isn’t “transparent”, and they don’t look into the issue further themselves or hear additional info that might contradict those original sources, then they too are basing their opinion on false information, just like everybody else.
That is why it is so irresponsible for any media to distort/misrepresent a story or to gin up controversy. People react to what they hear and if they are given bad information or being misled, then they make bad judgments if they just buy into it.
Furthermore, on the point of that sfjeff was making, extreme RW muslim groups, such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, the Taliban, etc. want to bring about a religious war and get the broader Muslim community to buy into their crazy notion of “being at war with the West”. Therefore, it is in their interests to stoke anti-Muslim sentiments in our country, so that they can point to it as their justification for warring with us.
Yes he did. Bill O’Reilly can do fairly decent journalistic work when he chooses to. He’s actually quite talented. It is when he lets his personal ego and personal beliefs get in the way of his journalistic integrity that he loses perspective.
I thought he did a good and fair job with his interview of Obama during the campaign. I’m not sure what your point was in bringing that up though, nor its connection to either the “Ground Zero Mosque” nonsense or the issue of irresponsible media.
In essence, if your defense against Fox News as an irresponsible propaganda outfit is that on occasion, they actually have done legitimate reporting…well that’s a weak argument. Doing a few things right doesn’t in any way compensate for nor justify ANY of the things they do wrong. Wrong is wrong. Simple as that. Why are you bothering to waste time trying to make excuses for them or defend them and give a free pass to all their behaviors that fail to display journalistic integrity?
Well, there is “spin” that is a mere perspective of opinion and then there is “spin” that is intentionally misleading or false. There is a huge difference there.
So, in all of these situations, we are pointing out to you where the stories are not accurate and you never respond to that aspect, but keep coming back with excuses, as if its just “opinion”.
Sources do matter in terms of understanding the perspective that the article is coming from. In some cases, where a source has not just a known bias, but also an intentional agenda, that is extremely relevant as well. That is part of the context that cannot be ignored.
Shame on you Charo for trying to say that! NOBODY called Jasser a l.i.a.r or made any judgments on how he practiced his faith. You are now making off-base accusations in an attempt to deflect and ignore the ACTUAL points that were being made! I find that accusatory tactic you just pulled to be quite offensive.
Let me make this crystal clear to you – the point that has been stated and reiterated is that Jasser is coming from a neo-con perspective and therefore is simply buying into the RW memes that are being pushed out there by RW sources. His opinions are misguided because he’s reacting to information and stories that are not true.
Nobody ever said he was the source of that information. Nobody outright called him a l.i.a.r. I would be willing to accuse him of being gullible for believing the hype, or of having his own RW agenda, but that’s abut it.
Again, you seem to be trying to dodge and change the subject and ignoring any comment in regards to the main issues – that the evidence at hand contradicts both the meme of Feisal Abdul Rauf being a “radical extremist” and the meme of the “financing” being suspicious. As it has been repeatedly stated, it is kind of hard for there to be issues with the sources of financing, when they’ve never gotten around to setting up a financing structure or raised money yet.
Why do you keep coming up with dodge excuse replies instead of acknowledging this information contradicts the “story” that is being pushed?
The source should matter to you, because it gives you a clue as to whether there is an agenda behind the publication of the interview. Likewise, the backgrounds of the interviewees should be of intense interest to you.
That is the reason for my stating that the interview either occurred or it did not.
This is why your points sometimes elude us, because neither I nor anyone else ever suggested that the interview did not occur.
If you don’t believe what Dr. Zuhdi Jasser said, then you are calling him a liar.
As far as I can tell, Dr. Jasser only expressed opinions and didn’t make any statements of fact, so he could hardly by accused of lying. However, he does have a neo-con agenda and he does not represent moderate Muslims. Stephen Schwartz, on the other hand, made the claim that the Imam has “a propensity to mix with radicals,” and on that I point I will say it – he is a liar.
You may be even judging him for how he practices his faith.
I don’t give a hoot about how he or anyone else practices his or her faith, as long as they don’t try to force their religious beliefs upon me.
Ron McRae
There is nothing wrong with picking apart the substance but your first statement read as follows:
“Well, the link you provided is to yet another right-wing website..”
Yet another? I don’t have a history of citing right wing websites to makes points. As a matter of fact, I linked to the NYT at the beginning of this thread. Even with that, I don’t even link sites all that often but use my own arguments.
It’s not that I felt you disbelieved that the interview took place, but that where it was published is irrelevant, to me. Picking apart the substance is what matters, which is what you did after accusing me of citing yet another right wing website.
“His opinions are misguided because he’s reacting to information and stories that are not true.”
I don’t know the source of his information. Do you?
I sense anger being projected because you and G find this whole issue offensive. I am not Pamela Gellar, or Sara Palin or any public figure. I remain neutral about the whole matter. It SEEMS that you do not want to acknowledge even the possibility that there may be moderate Muslims who would rather compromise in this case. Is there something wrong with that possibility?
So you think people are sheep? They all listen to Fox News?
Also,
You may have missed my stating this:
“Overall, I think the concern was sensitivity.”
I don’t think he listened to Fox News to examine his faith and come up with the idea that it would show more sensitivity to non-Muslims to not proceed. Why should anyone claim that he was wrongly influenced to come to that conclusion. That is what I meant concerning judging someone for his faith.
judging- I am getting ahead of myself in my thoughts.
No, it was meant to show that one should examine the substance of what was said.
Maybe he’s just considerate of others religious views, have any of you considered that? Just because he doesn’t think that all muslims are terrorists is no reason to assume that he is muslim. And so what if he doesn’t say anything bad about muslims, how would you guys like it if you walked down the street and every other word out of someone elses mouth as they walked past you was little comments like”terrorist”, or “taliban”. Just think about it, do you guys really think he would be making any progress in Afghanistan, or Iraq for that matter, if he was lashing out at every muslim in the united states and in the middle east?
Some of the people are sheep all of the time, and all of the people are sheep some of the time, but all the people are not sheep all of the time.
Abraham Blacksheep
Baaaa 🙂
Fair enough. I didn’t mean to imply that you have been citing only right wing websites, but I can see how it came across that way.
It’s not that I felt you disbelieved that the interview took place, but that where it was published is irrelevant, to me.
It would have been less confusing if you had stated that in the first place.
“His opinions are misguided because he’s reacting to information and stories that are not true.” I don’t know the source of his information.Do you?
That quote is from G, not from me. But I do know where Stephen Schwartz got his information that the Imam “has a propensity to mix with radicals.” It came from the likes of Pamela Geller, Glenn Beck, Newt Gingrich, etc., because they are the ones who have been spreading that particular lie.
I sense anger being projected because you and G find this whole issue offensive.
Actually, I have no problem with people who oppose the project if their objection is solely on the basis that it offends the sensibilities of some people who lost relatives at friends at the World Trade Center. However, I am angry at people who:
1. Blame the religion of Islam for 9/11.
2. Claim, without evidence, that the project is intended to be a “victory” mosque.
3. Claim, without evidence, that the Imam is a terrorist sympathizer.
4. Claim, without evidence, that the cultural center will be a training ground for terrorists.
5. Lie that the cultural center is going to be opened or dedicated on 9/11/11.
It SEEMS that you do not want to acknowledge even the possibility that there may be moderate Muslims who would rather compromise in this case.
You mean like the way you seem not to want to acknowledge that there are right-wing Muslims? Or that you seem not to be willing to concede that there is no connection between the Greek church issue and the proposed Islamic cultural center?
As a matter of fact, I know that there are moderate Muslims. My point is that the organizations cited in the Daily Caller article are not representative of moderate Muslims. They are representative of neo-cons.
Let’s see what I said:
“I meant in the sense of the right wing ginning up Islamophobia. That doesn’t make sense to me, but I’m not going to argue with you over it.”
That is the extent of what I said. It didn’t make sense to me that a Muslim group in America such as the groups sited in the Daily Caller article would want to gin up Islamophobia here because they live here and want to practice their faith here. I wasn’t even considering terrorist organizations such as al qaeda, which I would not generally associate as being on par with right wing groups in America.
As for the Greek Church, it seemed to have been a forgotten cause. I said what I said and have not continued to make an issue of it.
I just saw this 🙁 I did nothing other than point out exactly what you just did: I said the idea was being bandied about. I didn’t continue the topic and even suggested that Doc might want to remove it to the dump thread. This would certainly not be the most effective forum to push an idea like that were I desiring to do so. Black Lion laid out the whole thing not too long after me and in much greater detail by quoting an entire passage. I doubt he even saw my comment.
Submitted for your information:
FEARMONGERING
COWARDS
HATE
G 23. Aug, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Charo – first of all, I see my reply back to you that was in moderation is now posted, so you can find that above at this time stamp:
charo: G 23. Aug, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Second – yes, I do think that a lot of people are sheep. Dr C’s hilarious rephrasing of a classic quote in response to this covers it best, so to his words, I’ll just say…ditto.
Finally, no I don’t think they ALL listen to FOX News. In my comment that was in moderation, I explained that the media in general seems to just pick up on these types of ginned up nonsense stories, such as those being propagated BY FOX News, which just causes the nonsense to become “mainstream”, as they would rather sensationalize controversy for ratings instead of fact check it. This leads to a dumbing down of knowledge for the populace in general and increases the likelihood that folks will walk away from a story not knowing what is really true. As my comment didn’t post for such a long time, I can see how you would be wondering where I was going with some of my other statements. I hope that clears things up.
No, I didn’t miss you stating that. In fact, I quoted you saying that and I quite pointedly agreed with you on that being a valid and legitimate concern for many Muslims.
I’ve also been repeatedly specific on what exactly was “wrongful influence” – making judgments based on misinformation about the financing or the background of Feisal Abdul Rauf being an extremist. Again, I’ve noticed that you’ve chosen to not comment on those two very specific points of misinformation, even though I’ve specifically asked you. You are coming across as dodging by turning this back to “judging based on his faith”, which I’ve never done and which has NOTHING to do with any of the points I made.
I’ve repeatedly said that people, including Muslims have opinions that are all over the spectrum on this issue.
If I need to be more crystal clear in specifying that “sensitivity concerns” are within that spectrum and that I fully understand why BOTH anyone in general would want to avoid the divisiveness of controversy-driven conflict AND more specifically why a number of moderate Muslims would also be against the negative attention and publicity this issue is creating (both in wanting to be “good neighbors, per the tenants of their faith AND in fearing the negative backlash to their community that such controversy causes) …
..then, there you go. I hope that covers any confusion you had on my views on that and addresses what you incorrectly accused me of here:
Ditto for me.
Well, I am willing to apologize to you, if you truly were just sharing that info and pointing out to us what the latest “memes” that were floating around in the RW-sphere are.
Your intent was unclear, as there wasn’t much narrative by you when you presented that link and brought up the topic of “Taqiyya”. So it came across more like you were trying to “push” the meme, instead of merely pointing out a “heads up” that it was floating out there.
If you take a closer look at the pattern of BL’s posts, you’ll see that he usually either starts off or ends with his own commentary to the article’s he finds and posts, so that both his intent behind providing the information and his opinion of it are fairly clear.
Your link was the first mention of the “Taqiyya” meme that I saw, BTW. I noticed that its spreading rather rapidly around RW media and blog sources today. It seems that even FOX News had a mention of it earlier today… *sigh*
Let me ask you a direct question – do you think that Obama is a “stealth Muslim”?
Wow. Thanks for the articles, Keith. I just finished reading them all. Definitely adds additional perspective on the issue and the motivations behind the ginned up controversy.
Way back at 4:27 p.m. from G:
“What then was the purpose of your link then, unless to try to foment some sort of excuse for why he doesn’t do any Muslim things and try to cover for still wanting to paint him as a Muslim by accusing him of being a “stealth Muslim”. That is after all what your post and link seem to be trying to insinuate.
My answer:
It gets tedious to keep repeating the same answer.
You asked for my opinion if I think Obama is a stealth Muslim. No, but I would not call him a devout Christian in the manner that I would use devout. I will my opinion on the matter at that.
“You are coming across as dodging by turning this back to “judging based on his faith””
That was to Rickey and I think we both said our piece on the matter.
As for your repeatedly asking me something, sorry if I don’t make this blog my top priority. Often your comments are lengthy, involve several points and take time to address. Sometimes I scan comments generally and single out something that I want to talk about. I haven’t read your comment carefully about the funding issue or the background of Rauf. I haven’t looked up information on what is being said specifically in support of those accusations. I zeroed in on the sensitivity issue which is what mattered to me. I said, and you seemed to support me on this, that there is certainly a legal right to proceed but it was a divisive issue.
G 22. Aug, 2010 at 4:27 pm (way back at 4:27 on August 22)
A truly devout Christian (one who followed every word that Jesus said) would have a very difficult time in politics and would probably be unfit for office. If you took “Turn the other cheek” literally that would mean not responding to an attack on the country.
How do you, charo, interpret the Constitutional provision to have “no religious test for public office”? I think that, while not legally binding on citizens, it should carry strong weight and good citizens should put aside sectarian religious concerns when they step into the voting booth.
Thank FSM for that. The last thing I want is a devout christian sitting in that office.
It may not have dawned on you but when it comes to running countries competently and peacefully, christianity has a very bad record.
We haven’t really had a devout christian president for a long time. Clinton wasn’t, the Bushes weren’t. Actually Carter was pretty devout but we remember how much the christian right hates carter.
The last time we had a devout Christian, we invaded Iraq.
Bush: God told me to invade Iraq.
Besides, Jesus, who was certainly a wise man (we can all agree on that) said “render unto Caesar etc.”
Jesus certainly wasn’t encouraging anyone to strive for temporal power.
So a true Christian ought to stay as far away from politics as possible. There’s plenty of charitable causes around.
The way I see it most American Christians are being played as dupes and fools by a bunch of hucksters.
Very true.
Obama’s deputy press secretary felt that it was important to emphasize that he is a devout Christian.
There was nothing devout about that man
Remember during his first term, he had bruises all over his face, and claimed he choked on a pretzel? Nonsense; he was drunk.
How about when Condi Rice spoke of the President as her husband when she’s never been married
Nonsense. He’s a Muslin.
I believe he should have simply quoted the Constitution and left it at that. I long for the old days when President’s religion, sex life, dietary preferences and the like were considered nobody’s business.
WND, still pushing the Obama is a stealth Muslim theme…..You have to wonder if all of the so called right wing conservatives get together and decide which story to fabricate to attack Obama is on the agenda for this week….
Pat Boone Calls Obama White House A ‘Mosque’
Topic: WorldNetDaily
Pat Boone’s latest anti-Obama screed, published Aug. 21 at WorldNetDaily, begins this way:
This isn’t easy to write. It’s not fun to say. It’s virtually unthinkable to realize and acknowledge.
While the controversy still rises and rages on, around the proposed “Cordoba House” mosque and Muslim cultural center right on the edge of Ground Zero, where the World Trade Center stood till Sept. 11, 2001 – there is a world-famous building, dedicated by its current residents to similar purposes, in the middle of Washington, D.C.
We call it the White House.
Oh, somehow we’re pretty sure Boone had no problem whatsoever writing such a thing, given his factually challenged animus toward the president — after all, this is the same guy who thinks Obama is a rodent who must be fumigated out of the building.
Speaking of factually challenged, Boone spreads a few whoppers in his column, such as claiming: “One of his close friends took him on a prolonged visit to Pakistan during those years, and the question remains about Obama’s passport. If it was American, he would not have been allowed in Pakistan – so what was it?” In fact, as we’ve detailed, Obama could have easily — and, accepting the most likely explanation, probably did — travel to Pakistan on a U.S. passport, since the State Department and the New York Times were advising Americans on how to do it.
Boone also claims that Obama’s “support team has spent close to $2 million suppressing all that information.” That’s not exactly true either; as we’ve noted, that’s the amount of money that was spent on attorneys, and there’s no evidence that amount was spent only on birther lawsuits.
And then there’s this statement: “On Friday the 13th, ironically, the president hosted his second Ramadan dinner at the White House. He was not the first to do so; Hillary Clinton did the same in 1996, and a Ramadan occasion has become an expected annual affair since.” Um, Hillary Clinton was never president, Pat.
Boone also makes the baseless claim that “Muslims and homosexual activists have been invitees at the White House more than any Christian or Jewish representatives have.” He offers no evidence to support this claim.
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/
There’s a saying amongst Unitarians (& UUs, to be inclusive): “If someone accused you of being a Unitarian, would there be enough evidence to convict you?” In Obama’s case, if you insert Christian, I think the answer would be yes.
I just love how they can’t seem to decide on their narrative. For a while it was he wasn’t black enough then he’s too black. Muslim and then they spent all that time on Reverand Wright. How could he attend a supposed black seperatist church while being a muslim?
Take a look at some of the other things this “quality demographic” believe in. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/24/one-in-five-americans-believe_n_691843.html
I guess we know why the right continues to push this false claim….
“Picking up where he left off last week, Limbaugh opened today’s show by promoting the falsehood that Obama is a Muslim. Before reading a Boston Herald headline about the president golfing, Rush declared, “I didn’t know Muslims loved golf as much as they apparently do.” Rush feigned ignorance of his role in perpetuating the myth and played audio clips of Juan Williams and Amy Goodman pointing out Limbaugh’s “Imam Obama” “tweak.” Limbaugh then blamed Obama himself for people incorrectly believing he is a Muslim.”
http://mediamatters.org/limbaughwire/2010/08/23#0056
Limbaugh: Imam Rauf “sounds like Jeremiah Wright”
Limbaugh on Obama vacation: “By the way, how many mosques are there at Martha’s Vineyard?”
Limbaugh on Obama golfing: “I didn’t know Muslims loved golf as much as they apparently do”
And then we have WND’s Joseph Farah….
“Right-wing media figures like Cal Thomas and Dick Morris have preposterously suggested that the proposed Park51 cultural center in Manhattan would be a staging ground for future terrorism. But now Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily’s Birther in Chief, has taken things a step further, contending that construction of the cultural center would itself be an act of terrorism:”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008240024
Or the Boston Herald….
“Another Sunday, another missed opportunity for President Obama to prove to America he’s not a Muslim.
Now you’d think, with polls showing that one in five Americans believe Obama is a Muslim – and with the furor over the president’s flip-flops on the Ground Zero mosque – that his White House handlers might have orchestrated a nice little photo op of the first family doing a little vacation worshiping yesterday morning.
Because, despite the administration’s insistence that Barry is a Christian and that he prays daily, most Americans have noticed that Obama rarely attends church. That’s a noticeable departure from previous presidents, such as George W. Bush and Clinton, who were on their knees every Sunday.”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008240023
Charo, thanks for the response and I think I understand your positions. I also appreciate that you’ve finally responded and let me know why you hadn’t followed up further on the funding & Rauf issues.
I also agree that it can be hard with all the posts and back and forth and whether your responses were to me or to others. Sometimes we both miss what the other had already said by that or get the intent confused as a result.
It looks like we both agree on these things:
1. Obama is not a “stealth muslim”.
2. The “sensitivity issue” is a legitimate argument that is out there. It in no way supercedes the protections of the Constitution, but it is an understandable POV for dealing with such a divisive issue.
I have no problem with your opinion that you don’t view the President as a “devout Christian”. Personally, I don’t think many of our Presidents were “devout”.
Nor does that bother me in the least, as the Constitution clearly states that there is to be no religious test for public office. I care about how a President runs the country and not at all about how he worships, where he worships or whether he does at all. I view such things as personal and private matters and intentionally separate from his job.
Well, I’m really uncomfortable when we cast judgments on what is in anyone’s heart.
That is one of the “loaded” problems with subjective terms such as “devout”. The definition of what it means to be “devout” varies greatly within religions and sects and even from person to person.
GWB did make many references to God or his faith while he was in office. He has made many references to how he felt that turning to faith was key to dealing with his former drinking problem and finding focus.
Did many of his actions seem in conflict with various values of Christianity? Well, yes… but people’s faith and the decisions they make in life seem to be at odds quite frequently, so I just view that as a pretty typical disconnect and a fairly subjective one.
GWB also rarely went to church on Sundays or any other day, while he was president. Some Christians seem to equate church attendance with “devout”.
By that measure, he was far, far from it. Same with Reagan.
Personally, I don’t agree with such requirements that someone must attend a church at all to practice their faith…but that’s just me. Many judgmental folks seem to like to hold that out as some yardstick of evaluating someone’s character…
I know that there are many politicians out there who clearly only wear religion on their sleeve and use it cynically to get elected and manipulate a certain segment of the population that is susceptible to that.
However, I truly wouldn’t put GWB in that boat. His personal faith seems to be very important to him and I believe him.
Except they weren’t. People just make up that assumption in their own minds, because they perceived those presidents to be “Christian”.
In reality, they were rarely in Church. Well, Clinton did attend a fair amount – but not every Sunday. GWB and Reagan – rarely ever at all during their entire presidencies.
Not that any of that nonsense should matter and it definitely has absolutely nothing to do with how to run a country.
But this is revisionist history. Anything to smear Obama with is fair game. We all know that Bush was rarely ever at church. But the author is not trying to be fair, the author wants the reader to believe in the “stealth Muslim” nonsense. So like the Post and Fail and WND, the author misinforms the reader on purpose. I can’t recall any President in our history that in less than 2 years has been as vilified and questioned as much as Obama has. They could show videotape of Obama in church with the 12 apostles and the right as well as the people that hate him would still believe that he is some sort of “stealth Muslim”. This has gone way beyond policy with Obama. It seems like for most it is personal hated and dislike fueling his opposition.
My problem is more along the lines of how he only started talking about his religion while running for president. During that time he wore it on his sleeve.
And fundraising is much tougher if the flock stays home. It lacks most of the peer pressure and collective guilt from passing the plate during a church service.
My question is how does this square with their bits on Reverand Wright and Obama sitting for 20 years in that church and listening to “Wright’s extremism etc”. They seem to think of Wright as extreme and at the same time think that guilt by association means what they think Wright’s beliefs were being Obama’s as well but somehow he must be this secret muslim? It’s a contradiction.
.
.
So you believe ALL Muslims Do Not drink, Do Not Smoke? The Pork thing I’ll buy, sort of, but it isn’t full proof. Neither is the Married a Christian woman or worshiping for 20yrs with ole “hate whitey”. One thing for sure, those 5 points aren’t guaranteed Logic/Reason…maybe in your mind they are, but not in Reality. I seen a LOT of drunk Arabs in bars overseas. BUT THEN again, I didn’t card them so maybe they were not Muslims but just drunks in dresses.
What about BHO’s Double-Talk Friday Aug.12th/Sat. 13th? He croons to a large group of Muslims, using words that makes it appear he is 100% behind the Mosque just to get the crowd Cheering for him, then Saturday morning he says to news media “Oh that’s not what I said, that’s not what I meant… etc..” I know, stupid of me for even asking that in a room of his supporters. If BHO shot his dogs head off with a shotgun for pooping in the Oval office, you people would manage to justify it, and probably even blame Bush for it.
Have a GREAT DAY and remember, take out the Trash Nov. 2nd
Beware. Another drive by birther troll and bigot with no interest in the truth. Cowardly and delusional.
A sock puppet?
HATE him? Really? I guess I need to do some digging for I don’t recall the word “HATE” ever being stated from Christians towards Jimmy Peach Carter. Terrible President, Idiot(synonymous with democrat), but not hate.
a Birther troll, “IF” I were one which I’m not, would still be a few levels above Gutless and Clueless Fool that falls for every lie the Teleprompter God speaks.
National Take out the Trash Day – Nov 2nd
Afraid that contradiction can go both ways. If you’re saying he’s Most definately not Muslim(not that I’m saying he is, that’s not my point) BECAUSE he worshiped with Rev. Wright, then you are supporting his attending a radically anti-white preached church. (for lack of a better term but it gets the point across). Point being, BACK ATCHA, Which Is IT?!
I have a question.. Do you feel your points gets acrossed more clear if you type random words in all caps or do you find it comes acrossed less clear? Again there are certain things that muslims adhere to if you want to try to discount everything and just say he’s a muslim, just because, then come out and say it. Supporting the freedom of religion of muslims, doesn’t make him muslim it means he actually believes in the 1st amendment. So what do you have that makes him a muslim?
You don’t seem to have a point kid. Tell me something how many of Reverand Wright’s actual full sermons did you listen to and not just clips you saw on the internet? How exactly do you make the distinction that Reverand Wright is a radical anti-white preacher? Again you missed my point as it clearly went over your head. How can you wingnuts both claim that Obama is a muslim while at the same time saying he’s a radical black separatist church goer?
Teleprompter God? Good lord your mother should slap you for such blasphemy. How many Obama supporters claim Obama is a savior or messiah or God as much as you radical extremists on the right call him? If we’re talking about Teleprompters did you have the same criticism when Ronald Reagan used them all the time?
What makes you think I was talking about you?
Is that your arrogance or just the paranoia sputtering?
This teleprompter?
When words get in the way, Bush goes phonetic
By Matt Spetalnick
NEW YORK | Wed Sep 26, 2007
(Reuters)
How do you keep a leader as verbally gaffe-prone as U.S. President George W. Bush from making even more slips of the tongue?
When Bush addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, the White House inadvertently showed exactly how — with a phonetic pronunciation guide on the teleprompter to get him past troublesome names of countries and world leaders.
The White House was left scrambling to explain after a marked-up draft of Bush’s speech popped up briefly on the U.N. Web site as he delivered his remarks, giving a rare glimpse of the special guidance he gets for major addresses.
It included phonetic spellings for French President Nicolas Sarkozy (sar-KO-zee), a friend, and Zimbabwe leader Robert Mugabe (moo-GAH-bee), a target of U.S. human rights criticism.
Pronunciations were also provided for Kyrgyzstan (KEYR-geez-stan), Mauritania (moor-EH-tain-ee-a) and the Zimbabwe capital Harare (hah-RAR-ray).
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the draft, labelled the 20th version and complete with typos and speechwriters’ cellphone numbers, had been turned over in advance to help U.N. interpreters who must simultaneously translate leaders’ speeches into several languages.
Bush’s text also had to be loaded onto a teleprompter to appear on screens in front of the podium as he spoke.
“There was an error made,” Perino told reporters. “I don’t know how the draft of the speech that was not final was posted but it was and it was taken back.”
“Anyone giving a major speech or delivering a broadcast, like on the morning and nightly network news, has phonetics for cues just for the possibility they’re needed,” she later explained.
Bush is no stranger to the occasional faux pas, and often jokes about his habit of mangling the English language.
One of his highest-profile gaffes came in May when, at a welcoming ceremony for Queen Elizabeth II, he nearly placed her in the 18th century.
At a speech during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Sydney earlier this month, Bush seemed to confuse the organization with OPEC and spoke of Austrian troops in Iraq when he meant to say Australian.
You’re a fine example of a cowardly, birther troll. Fine example.
Dear Mr Hello_Reality: You apparently believe the President should prove his non-Muslimness (non-Muslimosity? non-Muslimitude?) somehow, yet eating pork, drinking alcohol, going to a Christian church, marrying a Christian don’t do that in your book. So, might I ask, how does one prove they are not a Muslim? Take anyone, say, for example, you. How can you prove you aren’t a Muslim?
Reason and common sense are lacking in a birther’s mindset. Bigotry and hatred are the substitutes.
I got your stupid point, and if you weren’t so in LUV with BHO you would have realized I got it. Tell me this genius, if Rev.Wright we’re such a Saint, then why did BHO dissolve all connections with him? Come on Lefty, Twist that Rhetoric to fit it to your needs. I’m just going off the White Houses conclusions, that Ole Jeremiah wasn’t a very good Fellow after all. So once again, Which story are you going to use Dr. Loudsplash? A. or B. I’m not supporting ANY theory, just using your own parties determinations and your words.
The above poster clearly suffers from a severe case of recto-cranial inversion.
I LUV how the left Twists things. LOL!! you’re so good at it.
YOu avoid my point, and make a knew one, only opposite.
I’m NOT SAYING he was a Muslim… DUMBY! What I am saying is those 5 points stated by one of the Know-it-Alls in here are SURE NOT 100% Proof that he Isn’t One. Don’t twist it around on me ya bonehead.
That’s the Truth Ellid, I can’t stand @$$holes that blow rhetoric out their pieholes.
Have you considered going to a psychiatrist? You seem to have anger issues, bad childhood? Politicians often distance themselves from people who are put in a negative light in the media. Tell me what crime did Reverand Wright commit? How about Van Jones? You still haven’t answered any of my questions what exactly makes Reverand Wright an anti-white radical? How many of his full length sermons did you listen to? Which of his sermons? I’m not registered with any political party since I was old enough to vote so nice try again.
You had a point?
BUSH did it BOBBY.. Blame Bush! Here’s a clue, President Reagan isn’t the President anymore. If you wanted to criticize him you are a bit to late. I’m talking about the EMPTY SUIT with ZILCH experience in the White House TODAY! Wake up and SMELL the Coffee(decaff in your case…organic too I suppose)
Who uses the word luv but teenage girls? How old are you kid? You obviously show a tendency of making some rather unthinking and unrational statements. Again you’re not making a point. If its blasphemy in the muslim faith to do such things and so far no proof has been submitted that he was ever a muslim meanwhile you have proof he is a christian I’d say the evidence points to him being christian.
Where did I blame Bush? I said Ronald Reagan. I asked you a simple question did you have the same criticism of Ronald Reagan when he used teleprompters? Can you be more specific of what makes him an empty suit instead of just throwing around empty generalizations?
Van JONES?! Really, you went there? Hey Bobby, maybe you need to improve your research methods, because the current ones suck.
And to follow suit, I guess we’re alike in one regards, I have always registered Independent, but that’s, I’d be willing to bet, where any similarity stops.
Again what did Van Jones do that was criminal? Nothing. Oh wait he started a foundation that got Glenn Beck’s advertizers to drop him. Kid you haven’t answered a single question put to you. Come back when you’re old enough to think rationally
I think Freddy brought some of his underage friends over here
I’ve enjoyed the Banter. Sorry Bobby I don’t have time to answer your questions, I’ll look later when I’m back near a computer. Not avoiding you, but I’ve highway time ahead of me, plus I have to go make preparations to cover my part of the wealth I have to spread.
I wasn’t saying you blamed Bush, that was a “Pun”..a funny…a Joke. Sorry it flew over your head.
Again, Ronald Reagan isn’t President Bobby, Barack Obama is. It’s a Mute point you’re attempting to make. Now go get your I LUV OBAMA pillow and take a nap.
Have a Great Evening.
🙂
In which case you need an immediate anoplasty. Until then, kindly go troll somewhere else.
Of course there are empty suits in the White House. Why would you expect either the President or his wife to wear their entire wardrobes at once?
one more before I go… I thought that VanJones question was a joke. I don’t answer stupid questions. Van Jones, whom YOU brought up for WHATEVER reason, correct me if I’m mistaken, Resigned. And by who’s recommendation?
Ok, running…CYA
Please provide proof that you are old enough to use a computer unsupervised, let alone drive.
Banter? One of us actually tried to have a discussion while you chose to stick to childish insults. It would have been funny or a joke if it had any relevency. Again you missed my point. You seemed to want to criticize Obama for use of a teleprompter but then had nothing to say when other Presidents made use of it. So bringing up the teleprompter was just pointless.
As usual though another hit and run troll who then suddenly when challenged has no “time” to answer. Btw when you come deliver my pizzas make sure they’re still warm.
No you don’t answer any questions kid. That’s why you avoided every question put to you and now you run away. You do however give stupid answers. Once again the point flew over your head. You’re not very bright are you kid?
Hello_Reality: Obama is not a Christian.
Well, this whole experience with “Hello_Reality” was the intellectual equivalent of watching someone walk into a room, having them spit up and drool all overthemselves, and then walk back out.
You know in some cultures it is considered rude to crap all over the living room floor. That’s exactly what that troll just did
Well the only good thing is that even Hello understands that Barrack Obama is the President. Why he came here to smear him i don’t know but we should appreciate his refutation of birther claims.
True. Makes me think his full name must be, Hello_Reality/Goodbye_Lithium.
BEST. REPLY. EVER.
You’re too generous, ellid, but thanks for saying so.
So nobody can hear it? I can see where that might be a problem.
Really? That “no experience” line was a load of crap on the campaign trail two years ago. He’s been president for a year and a half. That is experience. Presidential experience. You really need to get some new talking points.
Obama stated he is a Christian. End of story.
What is the problem is if someone is a secret Muslim? Many people have been a secret-Jews, so they would be persecuted for being Jewish.
Examples where presented in behavior of those who practice the Muslim faith. They were presented to demonstrate how a typical Muslim lives. This is an consistent argument, since it can be applied on any individual. What is typical Muslim’s do are considered as a means to define what a Muslim is. The examples that were presented can be applied to any person, however there will always be variations.
What is quite troubling is people who can’t construct a consistent argument. They seem to want to apply special rules to one individual, while ignoring the broader implication of that rule. According to Hello_Reality, there isn’t 100% proof that the majority of Americans are Muslim. However, that absurdity has to be rejects and it is common to accept a person word as fact on their religious conviction.
Please prove you’re not a Muslim.
AnotherBird 25. Aug, 2010 at 5:55 am AnotherBird(Quote) #
Hello_Reality: .YOu avoid my point, and make a knew one, only opposite.I’m NOT SAYING he was a Muslim… DUMBY!
Birthers can’t get anything right. The poster Hello was replying to is Another Bird, not Another Gumby. I mean, really!
What is the difference between Hello Reality and herpes? One is a blistering pain followed by short remission periods; the other is a viral disease.
Well, that’s rather obvious. When remarks by Reverend Wright, taken out of context, made him appear radical and anti-white, Obama distanced himself from that perception. Being a black candidate, he could hardly get elected with a credible radical anti-white connection hanging around his neck. Obama’s strategy worked.
The game is called politics.
If you’re admittedly that prejudiced, why would anyone want to carry on a discussion with you? Attempts at rational discourse would be a waste of time.
There is hardly any requirement to prove President Obama isn’t a Muslim. Normal folks take someones word about their religion unless something makes them think otherwise. The things listed are certainly facts that would cause any reasonable person pause who was considering the question whether the President was Muslim.
When one looks past the smear tactics, the whole Obama Muslim thing looks pretty silly.
Mr Pot have you met Mr Kettle yet?
Hello Non Reality is just following the RNC and Conservative talking points……Look at the Obama derangement from the right, especially WND. We saw it yesterday with Rush Limpballs and others, they will continue to push this Obama is a Muslim nonsense because they want to appeal to the bigotry of a portion of the electorate….
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Obama Derangement Syndrome Watch
Topic: WorldNetDaily
If Obama’s politics reflect his faith, his fruit is rotten by the very standards of the faith he professes.
Does a “devout” or “committed” Christian reflect the following values?
The most radically pro-abortion record of any U.S. senator or president in our history
The most radical pro-sexual deviancy record of any president in his policy and appointments
Intimate knowledge of and participation in Islamic worship practices
Lies and deception used as tools to further his agenda
Embracement of Marxist economic and political practices
No. Furthermore, pastors like Hunter and Caldwell who serve as spiritual lapdogs to Obama are even more culpable for giving him cover. They are much like the clergy of Hitlerian Germany and the “Positive Christianity” that represented complete acquiescence to and control by the Nazi state.
It is evident that Barack Hussein Obama is neither a practicing Christian nor practicing Muslim, but an opportunistic politician whose beliefs are shrouded within his political philosophy. He is a religious chameleon – not the first, certainly – whose family, heritage, actions and philosophy are much more pro-Islam than pro-Christianity, however.
— Dave Welch, Aug. 21 WorldNetDaily column
Progressives and liberal have long realized that to achieve the abolition of man, society must dispense with Natural Law, objective morality, the republic and God. Only then can state power be used by these utopian socialists as a means to transform the world and human nature with it. Enter President Barack Obama, a utopian socialist who frequently and arrogantly proclaims that he will “fundamentally transform America.”
In modern political terms, the seminal question the voters should have asked themselves in November 2008 was: Obama wants to fundamentally transform American into what? Now it may be forever too late to prevent the abolition of man; to redeem ourselves away from Obama’s soft tyranny and into a republic again.
— Ellis Washington, Aug. 21 WorldNetDaily column
If “being as vague as possible” is Obama’s political advice to himself and others, he sure hasn’t followed it with either his presidential commitment to pro-Islamic brawls or in his past anti-Christian rants. Remember, this is the president who gave this 2009 Cairo creed, emphatically stating to the Middle Eastern world that it was “part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
Yet, when it comes to Christianity, he has actually done just the opposite. Two years after his interview with Chicago Sun Times religion reporter Cathleen Falsani, on June 28, 2006, then-Sen. Obama publicly perpetuated negative stereotypes of Christianity and defamed the religion and the words of its founder. From the pulpit of a church, speaking to a live audience about religious diversity, Obama sarcastically belittled America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and degraded its adherents with trite remarks typical of any atheistic antagonist, saying things like: “Whatever we were, we are no longer a Christian nation,” “The dangers of sectarianism are greater than ever,” “Religion doesn’t allow for compromise,” “The Sermon on the Mount [is] a passage that is so radical that our own defense department wouldn’t survive its application” and “To base our policy making upon such commitments [as moral absolutes] would be a dangerous thing.” (You must see the YouTube video: “Barack Obama on the importance of a secular government.”)
That diatribe is nothing short of a pure unadulterated rallying cry for antagonists of Christianity.
— Chuck Norris, Aug. 23 WorldNetDaily column
Is there a question about his affiliation with Islam? Yes.
Why?
Because our country was attacked on 9/11 by militant Islamists. They’re the enemy, and American citizens have concerns that there might be an element of sympathy for them on the part of a Muslim if he were elected president.
That may not be politically correct, but given what we do not know about Barack Obama, it shouldn’t surprise anyone, and what we do know associates him closely with Islam.
He was born to a Muslim father, which makes him Muslim by birth. He was enrolled in elementary school as a Muslim. Many of his friends and advisers have been Muslim. He’s said the Muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world. He never goes to church and is never seen with a Bible.
Not enough to indict him, but enough to raise doubts.
There’s a litany of unanswered questions about Obama – the man and his life – which, for anyone else in politics or anywhere else for that matter, would have to be answered.
But Obama gets a pass.
— Barbara Simpson, Aug. 23 WorldNetDaily column
America is in need of truly godly leaders – and the fact that we are lacking same is evidenced by the condition our country finds itself in today. America is rapidly becoming a place where Christians need not apply. The country is the recipient of what the church is producing. If Obama had spent 20 years under a truly God-fearing, Bible-preaching, Christ-filled pastor, would we today have these questions? Obviously, we cannot say with absolute certainty that wouldn’t be the case – but I submit the chances greatly favor that we wouldn’t.
A true Christian is more concerned about the eternal benefits of service than about endorsing behaviors and teachings that are antithetical to the God of Scripture. God doesn’t care what color a person is, nor whether you are a man, woman or child – He cares that we accept His Son, lead others to Him, and live Christ-centered lives that make others want to be like “that” which they see in us.
Specific to that point, I see nothing in Obama I want to be like.
— Mychal Massie, Aug. 24 WorldNetDaily column
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/
What I see is “black black black blackity black” When did any of these folks express these same concerns (as loopy as some of them are) during the last Presidency? They can’t stand it that a man of color is in the WH; it drives them nuts.
And, this is suppose to be part of rational dialogue. There are so many problems with Chuck Norris’s column, but they are just irrational words made to misinform.
The quote should have been attributed to Barbara Simpson, as her column seem to contain the most distortions.
Distortions of truths.
An over trivialization of historical events.
Do these people honestly know what tyranny is?
An over simplification of the reality of America and the fact that it was never a Christian nation. Mostly like it is a false quote.
There are so many different kind of Christians, it is hard to understand who would take value in her comment.
An insult to all Christians. Why don’t these people understand that to lie about another person is “antithetical to the God of Scripture.” Trust me helping the sick is part of the teaching of the God of Scripture.
What the Conservatives want people ot hear “blah blah black blah blah Muslim extremist….blah blah Marxist ….blah blah Obama.
The words themselves are interchangeable, this is just an extension of the pre-election smear campaign trying to associate Obama with the bogeymen of the right- Muslim, Black, Communist, Marxist, Anti-Christ.
Lupin, it seems that is the case. No matter how many time it is shown that Obama has attended / not attended church as much as Bush, Clinton, and Reagan, the right continues with this avenue of attack. Keep in mind the only people keeping the so called Ground Zero mosque issue alive is the right and the talking heads on FOX. Any opportunity to perpetuate the Obama is a Muslim / Muslim sympathizer / Obama is not like us attack will be used by these individuals….
Or as poets would pen, “ebon, ebon, ebon, ebony, ebon”
“Heavens ebon vault, Studded with stars unutterably bright . . .
– PBS
Even if Obama went on Maury I still think they wouldn’t believe him
http://www.boondocksbootleg.com/profiles/blogs/politics-is-president-obama-a
Harp playing Sharon Rondeau and her cronies over at the Post and Fail have decided to weigh in on this topic…
“In 2007, a well-known expert on the Middle East and Islam asked the question, “Was Barack Obama a Muslim?” Now, according to The Washington Post, close to one in five Americans believe he is, despite The Post’s unsubstantiated denial of it. The Christian Science Monitor also is participating in a campaign of disinformation, calling people “misinformed” in regard to the same recent poll.”
“ABC News is complicit as well, calling Americans’ increased belief that Obama is a Muslim a “stubborn misperception.”
The aforementioned news services reveal no evidence that Obama is or ever was “a Christian,” as his spokesperson has claimed. The only church he has been known to have attended is the Trinity United Church of Christ, where Rev. Jeremiah Wright stated that “the chickens are coming home to roost” and accused the U.S. of “terrorism” while mentioning Malcolm X and Muomar Qaddafi. Wright is listed as “Pastor Emeritus” on a page with a slide show depicting him in what appears to be Muslim dress. The church’s bookstore sells books such as The Black Christ and Black Religion, Black Theology.”
“Fr. Jonathan Morris, Fox News Contributor, stated on Sunday that “Obama was born in a Muslim country” and has deep Muslim roots because of his father and grandfather. Anchor Alisyn Camerota quickly “corrected” Morris, stating “He was born here,” but offered no proof. Co-anchor David Briggs is then heard to say that the claim of Obama being born “in a Muslim country” is “another misconception.” Morris is then heard thanking Camerota for correcting him on Obama’s alleged birthplace.”
“There are many inconsistencies regarding the history of Obama’s alleged mother, whom he claims was a strong influence in his life. An article from Bloomberg written in 2008 states that Ann Dunham married Barack Obama Sr. in 1960, not 1961, as is commonly reported. However, it is generally reported that she spent many years in Muslim countries, including Indonesia and Pakistan, and visited as India, Nepal, Thailand and China. Her recently-released passport applications reveal frequent travel between Hawaii and Indonesia as well as a trip to the Philippines.
A report of Obama’s years spent in Indonesia which states that he was born in Kenya and confirms that his mother worked in Pakistan and for “Indonesia’s oldest bank.”
One report contends that Obama’s mother worked for a Pakistani bank, Asian Development Bank, for one year; another report states that she was a consultant. Obama reportedly visited Indonesia and Pakistan, where his mother was working and living with his sister, in 1981. If the account is accurate, his trip occurred just two years following an incident in which a mob had launched a violent attack against the U.S. embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan, after the Ayatollah Khomeini accused Americans of “the occupation of Islam’s holiest site, the Great Mosque in Mecca.”
Other reports also state that Ann Dunham worked in Pakistan. A recent unsubstantiated report connects Obama and his mother to the CIA and claims that that connection explains why Ann’s passport applications from the early 1960s were allegedly destroyed. However, it provides two different years, 1964 and 1965, as the time when she divorced Lolo Soetoro. Wikipedia states that Obama went to visit his sister and mother in Indonesia in 1981, then traveled to Pakistan and India.”
Those claiming to have known Stanley Ann Dunham in high school have “misplaced” their yearbooks. Ann Dunham was reportedly married the first time to a bigamist. There are varying reports as to when she married Lolo Soetoro. Some reports say 1967, but Ann’s alleged passport applications state that it was 1965, albeit on two different dates. There are several different years given for her divorce from Lolo Soetoro, and she was known by many different names.
Obama appears to be more connected to foreign countries than to the United States. Another editorial attempting to pass itself off as journalism reports on Obama’s proclamation in Berlin, Germany that he is a “citizen of the world.” The same could be said of the woman he claims as his mother, Ann Dunham.”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/24/is-obama-effecting-an-islamic-takeover-of-the-united-states/
What an article. Those were just some excerpts. But you can see the massive “fail” in those excerpts that are rampant thoughout the entire article, as well as the birther movement. We have the Post and Fail attacking the President’s mother and implying that she is not his mother. On top of that you have the fact that she traveled over the world being held against her. You have the implication that it was difficult to travel to Pakistan. Not to mention so much other unsubstantiated rumors that it is difficult to keep track. However the most interesting thing is how the Post and Fail dares to question the integrity of other publications that have published articles that are positive of the President.
And in the comments the usual blather by our hard core birther friends….
elspeth says:
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 at 10:09 PM
As a Christian, I have been taught that Satan’s goal is to take over the earthly world. Isn’t that what Islam is all about?
AuntieMadder says:
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 at 3:29 PM
In Islam, apostates are to be killed. So, there is no annulment from Islam, at least not from Islam’s point of view, there isn’t. Which leads to these questions: Why is there no fatwa calling for the death of Oilbama? And how could such a high-profile apostate from Islam bow before the Saudi king and then stand back up with his head still attached?
b fuller says:
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 at 12:52 PM
I am still waiting for someone to prove me wrong. In 2007, I started making this challenge – obama is a muslim, illegal alien, usurper for the most powerful office in this country, prove me wrong. I was taught to kill japs in WWII and that learning will now be directed at another invader of our country. Lock and Load.
Broseph Maine says:
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 at 12:51 PM
He’s not muslim. He’s not anything but self proclaimed.The man is a very confused person that is sympathetic to muslims for many reasons. But please recall that the left has historically and is currently linked in supporting Islam. Thus we have our answer.
Is he a Christian? Of course not. It’s harder to get elected if you don’t act the part, though.
And Sharon Rondeau lives approximately twenty minutes from Hartford Seminary, which has several Muslims on its faculty, including Ingrid Mattson, President of the Islamic Society of North America. I’m almost tempted to send her information on classes, workshops, and the magnificent library of Islamic texts at the Duncan Black MacDonald Center, except that Rondeau and her traitorous little friends would probably firebomb the place.
It might be better to warn Dr. Mattson that a seriously disturbed Islamophobe who foments paranoia, hatred and sedition is twenty minutes away.
“I was taught to kill japs in WWII and that learning will now be directed at another invader of our country. Lock and Load”
Wow- we better warn the President about 81 year old(or older) racist who is ready to defend his country against Hawaiians.
Makes me wish I’d taken a class with her when I was in grad school. She’s a very nice woman and the school is wonderful.
Don’t you know? Obama is gonna let the Islamic Japs invade us! This guy is our only hope!!!11!!!1!
Interesting wiki bio with more interesting links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingrid_Mattson
So Stephen Colbert on his show last night said he couldn’t find a picture of Obama praying in a mosque so he photoshopped one. I wonder how long before the radical fringe starts passing it around as if it were real
Never heard of the Barmen Declaration, I gather.
Thank you, Dr., but I feel that to equate the Nazi Germany and those who opposed it to the Obama presidency is a over trivialization. This obviously includes any distortion of history of the time. I find that there is just no honest context that Dave Welch’s comment can be viewed in.
Haven’t been here in awhile, but thought I would take a gander and see what kind of spin was being twirled about over here. 🙂
Is Obama Muslim? I don’t know and neither does anyone else! The only ONE person who knows for sure is Obama himself….and Obama is a politician and all politician’s are liars.
I really don’t care if he is or not – what I care is the fact that many American’s question his honesty. I’m not sure they are questioning whether he is a Muslim or not, but whether he has been truthful about his religion.
One commenter said he wasn’t a very good Muslim, if indeed he is Muslim. Well, he isn’t a very good Christian either, if indeed he is Christian. To be honest, his actions and words don’t represent any religion very well at all. Perhaps he is an atheist? /sarcasm
Lion says that the right is keeping the controversy alive – yet, I really didn’t hear too much about the controversy until Obama himself opened his mouth and opined on the subject. Lion, do you think Obama is a right winger? LOL /sarcasm again
Whether Obama is or is not a Muslim – is NOT the question. The question is – has he been truthful with the American public. I can think of several instances where he has been less than truthful, so I would have to say he doesn’t have a great track record in that regard – although he has been truthful about some things. A few truths do not cancel out a few lies. With regards to his religion – the only thing I can say positively, there is only one person, and I’m not talking about Dr. Conspiracy, who knows if he is a Muslim.
Take care – until next time. 🙂
I’m not a very good Jew, but I’ve learned to live with it.
It’s so comforting to know there are Christians who have appointed themselves as supreme judges of who meets their purely objective religious standards.
/sarcasm
Most birthers are liars. The rest are just too stupid or bigoted to understand the truth.
Ramadan road trip: Moving melting pot finds peace, love and animosity
By Wayne Drash, CNN
August 30, 2010 1:25 p.m. EDT
http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/08/30/ramadan.roadtrip/index.html?hpt=C1
You were here about a month ago. But then again Sally hill, you claimed you weren’t coming back here nor commenting again seems like you’re more dishonest than you claim Obama is. Who cares what his religion is why does it even matter? There is to be no religious tests for holding office and yet the far right want everyone to be christian before entering office. Now there is one thing I like about Bush’s father and that is he understood a bit more than Reagan that religion has no place in politics, at least it shouldnt in this country. George W. Bush wasn’t much of a “christian” either if we are to use your standards and yet you supported him. I can think of many instances where Reagan wasn’t truthful either but that doesn’t stop your ilk from worshipping him.
Scottie the question is whether or not you are being truthful. Remember “A few truths do not cancel out a few lies” your own words.
You talk about spin, but you insist spinning a non-issue, into something else.
When a person says that they are a particular religion, then we must accept their word on that issue. To do otherwise is to propagate a lie. However, you seem to not understand that.
Then there is no point in discussing the matter. What is the point of discussing what is unknowable?
So by your own admision that places him above all other politicians, who are liars.
“Whether Obama is or is not a Muslim – is NOT the question. ”
One that of course was raised in several smear emails prior to his election. It shouldn’t be a question- as Colin Powell said. But for Americans that fear all Muslims, it is a question the right likes to stir the pot with.
” I can think of several instances where he has been less than truthful,”
Care to share? Usually folk come up with a campaign statement and then spin into a lie- so please share.
“Take care – until next time. ”
Toodles. You are sort of like the guest that come by uninvited, eats your coffee cake and drinks your coffee, and then on the way out, mentions how messy your kitchen is.
She reminds me of John Belushi’s character in the SNL skit, The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave (March 25th, 1978, Host: Christopher Lee, Musical Guest: Meatloaf, Episode 3.15, #61).
When interviewed for retrospectives on John Belushi, Dan Aykroyd told stories of John often finishing SNL rehearsals, shows or film shoots and, exhausted, simply walking unannounced into nearby homes of friends or strangers, scrounging around for food and often falling asleep, unable to be located for the following day’s work. This was the impetus for the SNL horror-spoof sketch “The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave”, in which Belushi torments a couple (played by Jane Curtin and Bill Murray) in their home looking for snacks, newspapers and magazines to read, and taking control of their television.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Belushi#1975.E2.80.931979
Question for Scott Brown – Who has done the better job of living up to Christian principles, Barack Obama or Newt Gingrich?
1. Barack Obama
Married to the same woman for 18 years (in November), has never been shown to have cheated on his wife, and was never accused of ethics violations while in the U.S. Senate.
2. Newt Gingrich
Has been divorced twice, was having an affair and notified his first wife that he was divorcing her while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery, then during his second marriage had an affair with a Congressional staffer, then he divorced his second wife and married the staffer, and he was reprimanded by the House of Representatives for ethics violations.
P.S. Is Mitt Romney a Christian?
So, making a snide denigration of someone else’s faith, without so much as one word of justification — is that good Christian behavior?
and you forgot to mentionl, he was engaged to his both his second and third wives before asking his first and second for a divorce.
It transcends all religions as it focuses on the aspects of what makes us humans different from our primitive past where we allowed ignorance to guide us towards fear and hate rather than have hope, love and life prevail.
Not surprisingly the former are our primordial instincts, based on our fight or flight response which served solely to optimize our individual reproductive success. But over time, we humans evolved to be able to apply reason and logic, moving toward morality, love and life. It’s just that some people are more prone, when faced with the unknown, to move towards fear and anger and hate. Which may help understand why, a President like Obama, who in so many ways is different from his predecessors, has caused some to allow the primordial voices to whisper in their ears, rather than to pay attention to the voices of reason.
Imagine, if you want, the following image: A person with on one shoulder a little devil, and on the other a little angel. Both are speaking in her ears, attempting to convince him. One has the voice of reason but its whispers may be soft. One has the voice of raw emotions, and tends to overwhelm those, not practiced in reason.
Do we ‘listen’ to the powerful, hormonal signals of our fight or flight response, or do we allow ourselves to overcome our fear and hatred, often based on ignorance, and attempt to reach out, educate ourselves and move towards concepts of love and hope?
We have a powerful example to follow here.
Judge lest one be judge yourself… Let he without sin, cast the first stone… These are all powerful concepts which we Christians often overlook. And for good reasons, we see ourselves and our community of ‘believers’ as the objective judges of our reality. Whenever a ‘stranger’ enters our ‘community’, our primordial fears cause us to reject, to fear and often to hate.
It takes far more to actually approach said stranger with love and hope and reach out, learn and educate yourself as to his manners and thoughts and customs.
Too bad that we are so easily manipulated towards our reptilian brain.
More Obama derangement regarding his religion….
AIM’s Kincaid Defends Bringing Up Obama Baptism Issue, Denies He’s Asking for Proof
Topic: Accuracy in Media
In his Aug. 24 Accuracy in Media column, Cliff Kincaid makes a big deal out of a purported lack of evidence that Barack Obama was ever baptized as a Christian, claiming that “being a Christian is not just a function of attending church services. Rather, it is related to being baptized. Did this critical development occur in Obama’s life?” Kincaid goes on to quote a columnist who asked, “Where is the baptism certificate? We do not see one because there was no baptism.”
Of course, this is nothing more than yet another effort to denigrate Obama as an “other”; Kincaid goes on to quote people who are “adamant that Obama is a Muslim, based on the fact that his birth father was a Muslim and that there is no evidence that Obama ever specifically rejected Islam.”
In his Aug. 27 follow-up column, Kincaid defends bringing up the baptism issue, whines that he’s being supressed for asking about it, and also denies that he’s asking for proof:
The questions that have been offered by Accuracy in Media concern Obama’s claims about being baptized in the Christian faith. AIM believes that politicians should be held accountable for the claims they make about themselves, even on personal matters of religious faith.
Obama’s aides have claimed the President is a committed and practicing Christian and that he was baptized in Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ. But he has gone to church only a few times since he became President.
“We understand that these are contentious times,” say the Christian leaders, “but the personal faith of our leaders should not be up for public debate.”
However, the First Amendment expressly permits not only freedom of religion but freedom of the press.
The Christian leaders say, “We believe that questioning, and especially misrepresenting, the faith of a confessing believer goes too far.” They do not identify who has misrepresented Obama’s faith.
[…]
AIM also wants accountability. What AIM has done is quote directly from Obama’s books about his spiritual and political journey. We have pointed out that Obama’s claim about his own baptism, as reported in his second memoir, The Audacity of Hope, is subject to interpretation because of the lack of detail about how and when he was baptized and by whom. It appears, based on information provided by Obama’s own church, that Obama was describing how he became a member of that church.
Obama’s claim of being baptized is presented in the context of discussing the fact that he was not born and baptized a Christian. He describes his Muslim father and grandfather and attendance in a Muslim school as he was growing up. Obama acknowledges that, before he joined Wright’s church, some people regarded him as a Muslim. Wright himself dabbled in Islam before establishing his church, Obama concedes.
The proof of the baptism claim is precisely what is lacking in his book. There is no need or demand for a baptismal certificate, but there is no detail about the ceremony, other than talking about a walk down an aisle and a profession of faith, and no information about who performed the baptism and who attended. Traditionally, water is used in such a ceremony. There is no reference to water in Obama’s book.
To add further to the mystery, AIM cited evidence that Christian baptisms were not required to join Wright’s church, which emphasized liberation theology, and that Muslims were permitted to join and not disavow their faith.
[…]
Claims about a baptism cannot be taken at face value, especially because his statements and actions as President have led so many to believe he has a pro-Muslim bent. These have led to the perceptions, captured in the public opinion polls, that Obama may not be a Christian.
The controversy will not go away just because a few religious leaders demand that the media stop covering it.
If Kincaid is claiming there’s “no need or demand for a baptismal certificate,” why is he raising the question? Because he hates Obama, that’s why. That makes him someone who can’t be trusted in discussing such things since his agenda is to destroy, not illuminate.
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/
I’ve always thought that passing judgement on whether or not any other human being measured up to any other human being’s religious standards is just another ugly form of bigotry.
What a remarkable statement! I would commend this booklet from the United Church of Christ on Baptism, from which I quote:
JoZeppy (re Newt Gingrich): and you forgot to mentionl, he was engaged to his both his second and third wives before asking his first and second for a divorce.
I would not vote for an adulterer for president. It sets off all sorts of alarm bells!
Well Obama can always run on restoring honor and integrity to the white house and state how his two opponents in the elections were both adulterers.
The First Amendment is not the issue here.
Article 6 is the issue:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Interesting inteview of a person at the Glenn Beck Elmer Gantry revival….
“So which is it? Is President Obama a Christian or is he a “secret” Muslim? Oh give me a break! This woman represents a large population of what the tea party is all about. IDIOCRACY!”
http://kaystreet.wordpress.com/2010/09/01/glen-beck-rally-attendee-exposed/
Ann Coulter is at it again…..
Fox Nation promotes Coulter’s claim that Obama is an atheist
September 01, 2010 11:26 pm ET by Solange Uwimana
“Fox Nation, which has not been shy about obscuring President Obama’s faith, tonight displayed the following headline on its website: “Obama is not Muslim, but…”
The headline linked to a column by Ann Coulter titled, “Obama is not a Muslim.” This is the same Coulter who repeatedly promoted the lie — three years after it had been debunked by numerous news organizations (Fox included) — that Obama attended a madrassa as a child in Indonesia, and who has relentlessly smeared Islam and Muslims.
In her column, Coulter argues that the “nonsense” about Obama being a Muslim “has got to stop” because Obama “is obviously an atheist.” She goes on to write that while Obama has professed to be a Christian, the “only evidence” is that he attended Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church for 20 years — which “is even stronger evidence of nonbelief than Bill Clinton returning from Sunday services to receive oral sex from Monica Lewinsky.” She concludes by writing that “[a]ll liberals are atheists,” adding, “There’s only one true Christian liberal in the country and that’s Mike Huckabee.”
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201009010055
Ann Coulter? What a clown. What is she going to do when she doesn’t have those long legs to rely upon?
And has anyone ever seen any action of Ann Coulter’s to suggest that she herself has any belief in any god?
Does Mammon count as God for RWNJ’s….(rhetorical)
She’s a Christian, and a closet anti-semite, like Hagee.
http://open.salon.com/blog/con_chapman/2010/03/24/with_ann_coulter_on_the_jewish_conversion_tour