Translated … “They have the weapons. F$%k Them! We have the Champagne!”
Translated … “They have the weapons. F$%k Them! We have the Champagne!”
ISIS wants to turn the rhetoric on their terrorist attacks into a religious war against Islam. But the real fact is that ISIS are pretty equal opportunity murdering scumbags…
None of which have anything to do with so-called right wing “christians” in the US.
Now America certainly has the capability to turn any stretch of landscape in the Middle East into “temporarily uninhabited” with conventional means as demonstrated in WWII in Dresden, or uninhabitable for periods in excess of 5,000 years as demonstrated by the relatively primitive weapon which devastated Hiroshima. All without reaching deep down into the arsenal of the “unthinkable” and with less than 20 minutes notice. The consequences of which aren’t likely to solve the “problem”.
Making Republicans ISIS’s dumbest “useful fools” of all.
The distended Republican presidential field’s (AKA The Clown Bus) response to the terror attacks in Paris is a conglomeration of policy proposals that look something like this: a ground invasion of Syria and Iraq that will explicitly be less careful about killing civilians, combined with a policy of relief for refugees only if they’re Christians.
One can almost see the Islamic State’s top ideologues and propagandists celebrating. And why not? Muslims the world over, which Isis views (wrongly) as a sea of potential recruits, could be forgiven for viewing the Republican rhetoric as a declaration of holy war against their coreligionists.
I wish my thumbnail descriptions of Republicans’ talking points were a joke, but they’re not. And the policies described by the candidates line up almost exactly with the image of America that Isis seeks to portray in its propaganda. The target for Isis’s messaging was made abundantly clear in a statement last month from the group: “Islamic youth everywhere, ignite jihad against the Russians and the Americans in their crusaders’ war against Muslims”, said Isis spokesman Abu Mohammad al-Adnani.
Florida Senator and Republican presidential hopeful Marco Rubio might as well have had this very idea in mind when he said repeatedly, of the fight against Isis: “This is a clash of civilizations”. Rubio relished in his identification of Isis as an “Islamic” group – a notion President Barack Obama has disavowed. Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who has otherwise taken to defending his brother’s legacy, however ahistorically , evendisavowed George W Bush’s proclamations that the “global war on terror” wasn’t “against Islam , or against faith practiced by the Muslim people”.
Rubio even challenged Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s reluctance to use the term “radical Islam” with an inapt comparison: “That would be like saying we weren’t at war with Nazis because we were afraid to offend some Germans who were members of the Nazi Party but weren’t violent themselves”. The Nazis, in this comparison, would be Isis – but no one is contending that any Isis members should be spared the fight.
That the American fight against Isis is one aimed at Muslims, rather than a particular extremist group, was reinforced when the Republican candidates blamed Europe’s acceptance of Syrian refugees for the Paris attacks. Subsuming the news from Paris into their extremist platforms, Republican hopefuls moulded their usual anti-immigrant stances into positions against allowing any Syrian refugees into the country – on the rare occasion that they could demonstrate any knowledge of the specifics of Obama’s plan to settle 10,000 Syrian refugees in the US.
Donald Trump, for his part, couldn’t quite grasp the scale of Obama’s plan: “Our president wants to take in 250,000 from Syria. I mean, think of it. 250,000 people”, Trump told a rally in Texas. But Texas Senator Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush , usually considered a moderate among the zany Republican field, took it a step farther: they urged that only Syrian Christians be allowed to come to America as refugees. (Cruz hasstaked out this position before .)
That callousness not withstanding, Bush told NBC : “I think we have a responsibility to help, but ultimately the best way to deal with refugees is to have a strategy to take out Isis”, nodding to a declaration of war against the militant group and calling for a plan to “eradicate Isis from the face of the earth”. Other Republicans echoed the call for a stepped-up US military intervention .
So how would America wage this total war? We should “go in on the ground and destroy their caliphate”, said South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham. Ben Carson, the famed neurosurgeon seeking the Republican nomination, said American troops on the ground would “ probably ” help the anti-Isis effort, but was short on other specifics: he said the fight should utilize American “covert resources, military resources, things-that-they-don’t-know-about resources”…
This one wouldn’t be so tragic, if this first class hypocrit Lawn Jockey wasn’t running in a party which believes this is a “Christian Nation”, and which tries to infuse their religion into everyone’s daily lives through legislation. He said at a Tea Bagged Rally –
“It was during the Fifties that the United States Congress voted to add ‘one nation under God’ with liberty and justice for all, because we are a God-fearing Christian nation!”
Before that, Herman Cain wrote that non-religious Americans should submit to Christian control over the government.“Stay out of our way,” Cain warned. “Too many Americans are guided and implicitly threatened by the misinterpretations of the Constitution’s establishment clause that found a non-existent ‘separation of church and state.’”
Cain’s newest buckdance?
Herman Cain says voters across the country should have the right to prevent Muslims from building mosques in their communities.
In an exchange on “Fox News Sunday,” the Republican presidential contender said that he sided with some in a town near Nashville who were trying to prevent Muslims from worshiping in their community.
“Our Constitution guarantees the separation of church and state,” he said. “Islam combines church and state. They’re using the church part of our First Amendment to infuse their morals in that community, and the people of that community do not like it. They disagree with it.”
Asked by host Chris Wallace if any community could ban a mosque if it wanted to, Cain said: “They have a right to do that.”
Cain, an African-American who grew up during the civil rights era, claimed he was not discriminating against Muslims. He said it was “totally different” than the fight for racial equality because there were laws prohibiting blacks from advancing.
Nonetheless, Cain has drawn backlash for comments about Muslims in the past, saying that he would be uncomfortable if a Muslim served in his Cabinet if he were elected president.
“I’m willing to take a harder look at people that might be terrorists,” Cain said Sunday. “If you look at my career, I have never discriminated against anybody. … I’m going to err on the side of caution.”
Cain is an ordained minister. With the Tomming done by Mr. Cain…
I can see why is afraid folks in his church might want to convert to Islam.
Hitler had the Jews to blame…
Lenin had the bourgeois…
Seems that every totalitarianism movement has one… Somebody to blame.
To be honest, right about now if I were President Obama – I would be bringing the full power of the Federal Law enforcement apparatus…
Against the radical right.
Biggest threat to this country isn’t “radical Islam”… It’s American born right wing whackjobs out of control.
In the following video, we have the Tea Party’s official Lawn Jockey Candidate, spreading love for Muslims…
This from the DOJ, discussing the impact of Cain’s type of “love”…
American Muslims face a rising tide of religious discrimination in U.S. communities, workplaces and schools nearly a decade after the September 11 attacks, a senior Justice Department official said on Tuesday.
Evidence of growing anti-Muslim bigotry, aired at a Senate Judiciary hearing, poses a challenge for President Barack Obama as his administration works to foster good relations with American Muslims at a time when the United States is threatened by home-grown terrorism.
“We should all agree that it’s wrong to blame an entire community for the wrongdoing of a few. Guilt by association is not the American way,” said Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, who chaired the hearing.
He said Muslims account for less than 1 percent of the U.S. population but more than 14 percent of religious discrimination cases investigated by the federal government and 25 percent of religious discrimination cases involving workplaces.
The Justice Department has investigated over 800 incidents of violence, vandalism and arson against people believed to be Muslim, Arab or South Asian, since the September 11 attacks.
U.S. homeland security officials say the United States faces a home-grown threat from Islamic radicalization, including attempts by al Qaeda to radicalize and recruit U.S. Muslims to carry out attacks here and abroad.
The hearing quickly took on a partisan edge when Durbin responded to criticism from Republican Peter King, chairman of a House of Representatives panel widely criticized for a hearing on radicalization in the U.S. Muslim community less than three weeks ago.
King said on Monday that the civil rights discussion would “perpetuate the myth that there is a serious anti-Islam issue in this country.”
But at the start of the session Durbin shot back: “Inflammatory speech from prominent public leaders creates a fertile climate for discrimination.”
“All of us, especially those of us in public life, have a responsibility to choose our words carefully. We must condemn anti-Muslim bigotry and make it clear that we won’t tolerate religious discrimination.”
Thomas Perez, the assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights, said anti-Muslim bigotry has brought a surge in the number of federal discrimination cases involving zoning boards and other local authorities that have acted to prevent mosques from opening in their communities.
The Justice Department has begun 14 such cases since May 2010, around the time when plans for a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center attack in New York seized media headlines and ignited a national political uproar.
Before last May, the government had pursued only 10 land-use discrimination cases over a decade.