This man still refuses to apologize, and adds:
Many critics of my statements have characterized them as “offensive,” and indeed they may have offended some. But in this battle against fundamentalist Islam, I am hardly preoccupied with political correctness, or who may or may not be offended. Indeed, al-Qaeda cares little if the Western world is “offended” by televised images of hostages beheaded in Iraq, subway bombings in London, train attacks in Madrid, or Americans jumping to their death from the Twin Towers as they collapsed. (Source)
Twin Towers? What the heck is he talking about…oh, he means the attack on our soil eons ago! Anybody remember that???
Mr. Tancredo, support you 100 percent I do. (Yoda impression)
(Hat tip: View from the Right)
Related post: Tom Tancredo Refuses to Apologize
{ 5 trackbacks }
{ 54 comments }
For once…
someone not afraid to speak. Now if only the others would take their “umm…two that were given to them” out of the PC crowds pocket and put them back where it belongs, we might get somewhere.
I especially like his most truthful and obvious comment of “Indeed, al-Qaeda cares little if the Western world is “offended†by televised images of hostages beheaded in Iraq, subway bombings in London, train attacks in Madrid, or Americans jumping to their death from the Twin Towers as they collapsed.”…
which those for the “Reactive” and not the “Proactive” way of fighting terrorism seem to always overlook.
THANK God he refuses to apologize…And I support him 110% …. And I will continue to do so.
Politically correct behaviour benefits NO one..
Dan
Remember? We’re supposed to be “better than that.”
Sarcasm now dripping from my keyboard.
This guy will get more respect because he stands by what he says than any pol that backtracks and apologizes. That’s leadership.
I support Tom 110% too. Maybe we should start the LBC chapter of the Tom Tancredo fan club???
Tom Tancredo has my vote if he ever decides to run for president. Honesty, integrity and common sense – oh how I miss those traits in your average politician.
Tom Tancredo for President in 2008!
The ONLY Republican with a spine!
Have you really thought through the logic of this? Targeting the holy sites of Islam as a response to extremist terrorism is like bombing the Vatican for terrorism committed by Catholics, or blowing up the Western Wall for crimes committed by Jews. You can’t punish an entire religion for the acts of a subsection of the population. Of course this is crazy, because it is beyond the pale. This would not deter terrorists in any way, but rather set off a global war that makes the current conflict look like a spitting match.
This would not deter terrorists in any way, but rather set off a global war that makes the current conflict look like a spitting match.
Let the games begin.
Yes you can punish an entire religion when that religion itself is a portal to the purest form of evil this planet has ever seen. islam has NEVER contributed anything of worth to this Earth. The cult called islam is a religion of despair, denial, hatred, oppression, hyterics, fanaticism and death.
It is the enemy’s religion. It no longer has a legitmate place among the world’s two great religions. islam has failed to evolve and for that reason we cannot let it into the club and don’t you dare think for a minute that those muslim fools wouldn’t blow up the Vatican if given a chance. How quickly we forget that one of the practitioners of the “religion of peace” SHOT THE POPE!!!!!
Come on! grrrrrrrrrrrr.
A global war against islam. I’m with LaShawn. If they are feeling froggy……..jump!
People always try to use that old stand by; moral and cultural equivication, to compare Christianity and Islam. They claim that Christianity was just as violent until the reformation. While I don’t buy this argument it really doesn’t matter anyway. Even during Christianity’s most violent moments in past centuries, we were talking about spears, clubs, and swords for your weapons of choice. Islam has had centuries to reform and IT HAS NOT DONE SO! Never mind that Islam is a satanic cult founded by a false prophet. These people are willing to destroy with WMDs not clubs and swords. No, this will have to be a full on battle of civilizations. We cannot coexist. People better wake up and realize that before it is too late.
I still have not received an answer from muslims I know as to whether or not the 72 demon virgins their “martyrs” are supposed to get are girls or the fine young fair boys that their prophet muhammed historically preferred.
La Shawn:
Most have it all wrong. Rep Tancredo explained his position on Fox News yesterday. He is being quoted out of context.
He did not say he wanted to bomb Mecca. He just noted it as a “worst case senario” – “What if?” And he would have to be convinced such a move would deter furthar terrorism – at present, we have no such assurance. And I believe Mr. Tancredo understands this.
So if people want to praise or condemn this guy, go back to the original discussion.
Seems to me that a nation full of Christians captured, prosecuted and execute their own home-grown terrorist, Timothy McVeigh, and that no one in any pulpit issued statements of support for his murderous actions.
As soon as Muslim nations and Muslim clerics show the same degree of hostility toward their own home-grown terrorists, I’ll listen to arguments that there is indeed a moderate Muslim population out there.
Are we talking about a nice little nuke on that black rock in Mecca just for starters to a huge global conflict against Islam, as opposed to just the terrorist faction of it?
Wow. Seems a bit harsh. When you say that Islam has not evolved into modernity, it may be that most of its believers have not had the opportunity to embrace modern life as we know it.
Knowledge is power. If huge masses of people are denied knowledge by a few, then it hardly seems right, or Christian, to wipe out the whole.
The UK’s largest Sunni group issued a Fatwa denouncing the London bombings, but it is up to the British government to handle the prosecution of those involved. In fact many Muslims in the UK saw it as an attack upon them as well since the Edgewar tube station is in the heart of a predominantly muslim neighborhood. I don’t know how you can claim that there aren’t any moderate Muslims out there. The Muslims living in the US are for the most part integrated into American society and are prospering, unlike Muslim immigrants in Europe which live largely in ghetto style neighborhoods which tend to breed extremists. Moderation grows largely out of pluralistic societies that are free. Most Muslims do not live in such environments, and instead live in regimes that hold their power by fear and intimidation (and that the US government has been propping up for decades).
As far as the McVeigh analogy goes, I am sure that there were militia groups who call themselves Christians (although a perverted strain of it I’m sure), who supported his actions.
A nuke would not be wise or necessary as we have learned from the weather patterns brining African desert dust to the continental US, BUT we have a plethora of other cool weapons we could use to erase islam if we have the commanders with the spine and will to use them.
We do not want the fallout to come back on us. We have great conventional weaponry we could employ to apply “The Tancredo Option.”
Look people. I hate no one. I don’t even hate muslims at first sight, but I am not stupid enough to provide them with a trust which must be earned. Because of the sins of their other cult members, they can no longer as a rule be automatically trusted. Sorry, but you just can’t do it.
By definition, the practice of their religion is anathema to what this country is all about and the practice of it is not more legit than socialism, fascism or communism. I for the life of me can’t understand why people who believe in such evil would even come to the US as opposed to staying in the hell holes they come from. Do they think they can convert or overthrow us? Must be.
Are we going to let this happen? I hope not, but unless we elect more Tancredos and less Frists and McCains the muslims just may have a shot at causing some real chaos over here.
Me thinks you should all get very real. There is a real enemy among us and he is not BSing. He is FOR REAL!
The question has to be asked. Which Amendment is more important now? The First or the Second?
Even if Tancredo has said we should bomb Mecca, where would he have needed to apologize?
If the election were held today, he’d win.
I think Tom Tancredo has been a standup guy to date, but based on the past performance of the GOP in Washington, anyone care to bet that he will at least be pressured to offer something in the way of an apology.
I expect it to happen end of week or weekend. Will he cave. All signs point to yes.
Josh,
Let’s take a good, hard look at this:
1) First, the old “Vatican” thing doesn’t hold up; remember the attempted assassination of the Pope? That was the incident that necessitated his use of the “Popemobile” thereafter-=to protect him against Muslim attack. The minute they think they can get away with it, you can bet the farm they will. It isn’t respect for the Vatican that is the reason it hasn’t been done, it’s lack of appropriate opportunity.
2) Second, are you familiar with Victor Mordecai, an Israeli terrorism expert, and his Egyptian-born Jewish wife, who monitors all forms of communication throughout the Muslim world? Mordecai points out that Muslim psychoepistemology is pretty primitive; if Islam wins its declared war on the Infidel world, then Allah is stronger; on the other hand, if Mecca etc. should be destroyed, then the Judeo-Christian God is stronger. Mordecai points out that should Mecca be destroyed, there would be many Muslims seeking conversion in order to be on the same team as the Strong God.
Visit his site, or hang around the talk show of his good frend, Michael Medved, where he is often a guest.
3) You maintain that nuking Mecca would not be a deterrent. Well, it would be for the dead ones.
4) Nuking Mecca wouldn’t make them angry; they are already perpetually angry. It would simply provide another excuse for them to display their anger. Actually, look at 2) above–according to Mordecai, they would seek refuge in Christianity and Juda–naw. Just Christianity.
5) Many people say that it would anger the moderate Muslims. Folks, there just aren’t enough of them (real, honest to gosh moderates) to make a difference. In poll after poll, the results are the same: About 70%–80% favor what the terrorists are doing. Remember, their canonical documents–the Koran, the Hadith, and the Sira Al-Rasul–all point out that it is their RELIGOUS OBLIGATION to wage war on all non-Muslims until the earth is an Islamic planet. The choices are: Conversion, death, or dhimmitude. Those who cannot wage active war (through terrorism, financial means or da’wa, etc.), must at the very least give it their moral support.
Those Muslims who “compartmentalize” Islam, choosing to live only by its more reasonable parts (those parts that do not mandate war against the Infidel), and who reject the parts that demand war, are considered heretics by the majority. Under sharia, the body of religious law derived from the Koran, such heresy is punishable by death.
The consequences of heresy are so horrible (you ought to read what Mohammed had to say about that) that most Muslims won’t even entertain the idea of peaceful co-existence with the Infidel.
This is the kind of thinking that’s passed down from one generation to the next.
It wasn’t always that way; there was a group called the Mu’tazilites which, if it had continued to exist, would have produced a totally different history.
There was even one last opportunity for a change in the course of history. Not too long after the Mu’tazilites disappeared, there was a Muslim scholar named Ibn Rushd. He was born of Spanish parents who were forced to convert to Islam before he was born, and he was a huge fan of Aristotle. Dark Age Europe, where most of Aristotle’s works had been lost, was the benficiary of Ibn Rushd’s work, which gave us the Renaissance, while Islam rejected his work. Ibn Rushd died under suspicious circumstances after his colleagues in North Africa destroyed his works and he was banished to a remote location.
The nail was hammered in the coffin of potential reform about 100 years after Ibn Rushd’s death. There was an influential scholar called Al-Ghazali who became known as the “father of Islamic fundamentalism.” He had such power and influence that fundamentalism, in contrast to the views of the Mu’tazilites, which did not subscribe to literalism, became engraved in stone and gave us the Islam we all know today.
Today’s Muslim has a religious obligation to convert the entire planet, and the moral authority to do whatever it takes, up to and including murder and mayhem, to achieve that end.
You cannot negotiate with a view that is morally mandated; “peace” to Islam (which means “submission” in Arabic, by the way) means “lack of opposition to Islam.”
A few Muslims from every generation will reject that proposition, but most will agree with it. This is why the conflict we see today, including terrorism, will be unremitting.
This is what Tom Tancredo understands. This is why he will not endorse taking the “nuclear option” off the table.
Islam is an entity unlike any we know, in that state and religion are totally–we’re talking 100%–fused; the Koran is their Constitution, sharia is their “holy law” derived from it, and both are the literal word of Allah. Allah is superior in every way to any man-made entity, so Islam will always take precedence over a man-made administrative entity such as the United States, and sharia will always take precedence over a man-made entity such as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Former political science professor from Yale, Imam Zaid Shakir, said that Islam pushes us (Muslims) in the exact opposite direction to the forces at work in the American political spectrum,and that as a result, Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the existing (American) system.
Just remember, it was the concern of pre-Revolutionary writer Robert Molesworth that a problem as that experienced by Muslims under Islamic rule might happen in this country unless we found some way to prevent the fusion of religion and state here. He had studied the problem extensively, and concluded that where government and religion are fused in any way, there is the danger that government could be considered an agent of God instead of a human production, and that criticism of government could be considered a sin instead of honest intellectual disagreement.
The Framers of the Constitution agreed with him, and thus wrote in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an estabishment of religion…”
The purpose of this first article of the Bill of Rights was to protect the right of each citizen to criticise, alter, or even abolish the government, should it stray too far from its Constitutional limitation.
This freedom is what Islam fears.
Joshua, none of this stuff is a state secret. Start reading, my friend.
Frank #13,
Thank you. It’s been what I’ve been trying to remind people all along. You did it much more concisely.
Phoenix #15,
You’ve changed the debate. You simply do not know the question that was asked of Tom and then Tom’s response.
Misinformation is your game?
It is not muslims alone that I consider the enemy. It is Islam. If every muslim on Earth denounced Islam and refused to live by its code then I would have no problem with the muslim world. As long as they embrace the hate filled Koran, then they are soldiers in an evil army. If you accept those as your perameters then attacking everything that represents Islam (Mecca) is the ONLY tactic that makes sense. It is a death cult and no amount of PC phychobabble will be able to dress it up as anything other than the path to Hell. The only “moderate muslim” is the one that says Islam is a false and evil religion and I denounce it.
I heard a report that many muslims were afraid and were thinking of leaving England. What a novel concept. All of a sudden when some angry teenagers jump an average everyday muslim and kill him with their bare hands after the 7/7 bombings and a courageous hero cops empties a clip in a some idiots head who acted like a muslim, now they are AFRAID?
Hmmmmmm…..GOOD. They should be afraid. Fear is their game. About time they tasted some of the west’s brand. You’d think these people would have learned the lesson from the Japanese as far as waking sleeping giants.
You don’t see many in the Arab world converting to Judaism, even though Israel has thoroughly defeated most of the countries in that region on several occasions. Let’s not be naive and call Muslims “primative” in their religious views, because the diversity in the way it is practiced is enormous.
Joshua: “islamic diversity?” Would that mean some use less C4 than others? Some only shoot one clip instead of two? Some were appalled that they tok down both towers instead of just one?
After 9/11 I thought we should have bombed the Saudis, as it was their citizens who commited an act of war against us. Not very Christian of me I admit, but it would have made me feel better. Islamic countries that sponsor international terrorism should feel the wrath of Allah, especially when it is being dropped by the USAF.
I don’t ever want to hear a muslim EVER try and tell me that allah and God are the same Being. No way that is true!
Looking, looking, looking………… where is that diverse Muslim view of the brain and skill of the female flourishing? Come out, come out from wherever you are!
“Let’s not be naive and call Muslims “primative†in their religious views, because the diversity in the way it is practiced is enormous.”
Indeed. Some use knives. Some use saws. Some use guns. A lot have a thing for stones. There have been reports of acid baths used in Pakistan. Some who have managed to get past the 13th century are now using explosives.
Diversity, indeed.
Joshua, just pray you never fall into the hands of those “nonprimitive” practitioners of Islam. While you explain that you believe in multiculturalism and diversity and go on about how much you value and cherish his cultural identity, Achmed will be sharpening his knives. Don’t expect the “moderates” to help you out either. They have made an art form out of turning a blind eye. How attached are you to your head?
I think his comment was obnoxious, but I’ve said really obnoxious stuff about the gangs in the city, especially those who are either non-American or are first-generation losers.
This is why I think Tancredo’s hypothetical deterrent could work.
While it would seem likely that nuclear retaliation would not be much of a threat to the terrorists themselves, it is those muslims that aid and abet the terrorists that need detering.
Scenerio: Achmed the Syrian goat herder overhears a couple of guys talking about the delivery of “an ultimate weapon” into the U.S. Six months ago Achmed would have lamented to himself about the horror of our times but he would have kept his mouth shut for fear of his life and that of his family. But Achmed feels a real delimma now. There are rumors that American leaders will destroy Mecca and other holy sites if they are hit hard enough. Achmed has no real love loss for America, but he does love his faith and his way of life. The two guys he hears talking could set something into motion that ends everything he has ever known. The terrorists are not detered, but Achmed decides to leak a little information to American officials possibly saving the life of millions. Achmed and some like minded muslims could start a little resistence movement of their own against the “radicals.”
Understand, this is just to get back on topic of Tancredo’s remarks. I think Islam should be outlawed and eradicated at every opportunity.
I supported the Tancredo position even before he took it. See Desperate Situations and The Suicide Strategy.
La Shawn:
The real issue here isn’t that “moderate” American Muslims are being complacent and supporting the terrorists by their perceived silence.
These people are afraid – of the terrorists in their midst.
Mafias of every color have terrorized citizens of almost every immigrant group. People have remained silent in the midst of chaos. It takes a critical mass of agressive attacks against the terrorizers – just ask older Italian businessmen in New York – people dominated by the mob were simply afraid to speak out. And what about the White people terrorized by the KKK in the South – does any sane person believe they weren’t afraid?
Give these Muslims a little more time – they will do what every other terrorized group does.
Frank Zavisca,
If they were keeping their problems in their own neck of the woods this would not be an issue. We could offer humanitarian help and the like to help them fight off the Islamic menace. But by the very definition of what Islam is, they have exported their insanity into the western world. Granted, we are complicit in allowing it to come here. We should have nipped that in the bud a long while back. I’m simply not willing to offer my family or a few million Americans (or allies) up for sacrifice while the muslim world works out their issues. ok?
La Shawn, I know that comment was addressed to you and I’m sorry to speak out of turn. It’s just that that kind of “give peace a chance” talk at the expense of our own, just sets me on edge.
Fear is a real issue, but it simply must be overcome, or bypassed, by those resolute enough to take appropriate action.
Peace and freedom are obtained by defeating evil, not by negotiating with it, and certainly not by trying to understand it.
We really tore the Nazis apart and big, brave, bold, swaggering Hollywood has made a gazillion movies to prove it.
But Stalin whacked a bunch more of Russia’s people and a lot of them were Jews and where has Hollywood been on that history?
The Japanese can not be duplicated in the last 100 years for their savagery and brutality. Hollywood=all but silent.
Why pick on Hollywood? Because it is the propaganda machine of the liberals and the history book of the masses.
Does anyone expect Hollywood to rush the “Tom Tancredo Story” into production? If they did, they would cast Anthony Hopkins or Jack Nicholson to star as a demented half wit.
The popular culture will not accept the truth. Tom Tancredo is not about to show up positively in rap or Doonesbury or editorial columns or with the “dial-a-quote” pundits or anywhere in the MSM. To them, he is the plague and anyone who listens to him in a thoughful way is in immediate need or elitist guidance and extreme mind altering.
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,163020,00.html
Tancredo confirms what he originall said which is how I interpreted and liberals misinterpreted.
Here is text from that transcript:
REP. TOM TANCREDO, R-COLO.: Well, I’m standing by my comments, but those weren’t really my comments.
GIBSON: OK. What did you say?
TANCREDO: I was asked to respond to a hypothetical situation.
I was on the radio, and the guy was asking me, he said, you know we have got all these reports out here now of nuclear devices in the United States that have been smuggled into this country, and these reports are coming more and more regularly. And what should we do? If they set these things off, what should we do? That was the question he posed.
I said, well, you know, first, of course, you have to think about what you do in as a deterrence to that. And what you may want to do, as a threat is say that if this happens and if in fact we can prove that it was perpetrated by some fundamentalist Islamic — Islamofascists is really I think what we should call them — then you might think about this as a threat, the retaliation on their holy sites. Now, that’s what I said. I never said, let’s bomb Mecca and Medina. You know, I mean, that’s a heck of a lot different than saying, what if we posed this as a threat?
———
Now. Any liberal or conservative like Hugh Hewitt who mischaracterizes what was said is lying
My question is why? Why lie? Why when we are in a war on terror would you take the position you are taking (mischaracterizing what was said? You either believe that is a deterrent or not. If you don’t then what is the deterrent?
Frank Zavisca
You make a good point here. There may be fear of reprisal but there is probably another concern of moderate Muslims which is the fear of taking the side of individuals who they feel show disdain for them. In the process of speaking out against terrorism, many attack Islam the religion. A moderate Muslim may very well feel that being vocal against Muslim extremists is jumping on the bandwagon with folks who express hatred for all who practice the religion, and no one wants to to give applause to someone who seems to hate them.
It reminds me of how difficult it was for me to make the transition to supporting the Republican party when viewing so many non-constructive verbal insults thrown at the black community by some Republicans. It took much soul searching before getting over the feeling that by supporting the conservative party I was joining ranks with people who despised my presence.
I have several Muslim friends who have stated to me that they feel alienated; that they have problems on both sides. On one side there are the terrorists that misrepresent Islam and on the other side, those that dislike them simply because they are Muslims. They thus choose to keep quite and simply live their lives. I recall that the greatest expressed hatred for Saddam Hussain that I have ever heard came from a Muslim Iraqi immigrant.
P.S. I apologize for my original post not being appropriate. I am still become familiar with the standards of Ms. Barber’s blog and I meant no disrespect.
Anthony wrote, “by supporting the conservative party I was joining ranks with people who despised my presence.”
Sorry you feel that way. There is no thinking conservative that I know that that statement is true for. There may be reactionary redneck types that fall on the conservative side of the fence on most issues but I venture to say they couldn’t debate/argue/convey why with any reason. And this is not to say that all rednecks “despise your presence”, in fact it would be a small minority that do. In fact such a small minority that I find so much more racism (100 times more) among liberals and the Democrat party.
Thanks for listening to that point of view.
Anthony, the only way I could see them despising your presence is if you were causing trouble by being purposely condescending, contrary and argumentative.
If you were doing that then TRUE conservatives may have been annoyed. Now moderates would put up with you more easily.
Depending on where you are, most Republicans are moderates. Other than me an a few others out there, you have to look very hard to find a true, hardcore, America-loving, patriotic, Conservative. Everything wearing the elephant is not conservative. Beware.
I could be a Lincoln Republican, a Truman Democrat, an Eisenhower Republican, a Jefferson Democratic-Republican, or even a Federalist. What I can’t be is a member of either major party today, because they both have an odor to them. Admittedly I think the Dem odor is stronger and more rancid, but both organizations are unworthy these days. I’m happy just being a conservative, and I get to save the dues.
Here here RedBeard.
Both parties are to the left of center. Conservatives are centrists and to the right of center.
I often times fail to make that distinction well enough also. Just call me conservative.
Interesting how some people call themselves conservatives and you go back and check their histories in responding to simple issues and see otherwise.
Beware. John McCain lurks!
John is even further left of center than the average Republican. Might as well be a Demican or Republicrat.
John is a liberal.
McCain doesn’t know WHAT he is. Well, except for being a camera hog; of that he’s quite sure.
The only question I am interested in was nicely stated by “Independent” above: would a clearly defined policy of “Mecca Assured Destruction” cause “moderate” Muslims to ACTIVELY turn in violent extremists?
I define “Mecca Assured Destruction” as follows: the US Government announces that it will use a nuclear missile on Mecca if:
(1) a nuclear weapon goes off on US soil;
(2) there are civilian casualties; and
(3) there is incontrovertible proof that Muslim extremists participated in the attack.
(To minimize casualties, the US would promise to provide at least two weeks warning to allow civilians to leave Mecca if they so choose.)
I don’t think a MAD policy would be right. I believe it would be extremely immoral. What I want to know is whether it would be EFFECTIVE.
I know he is a pain in the neck and more troublesome than any liberal. He is worse than a liberal. He is a moderate. At least liberals stand for something. Dare I say I respect muslims more than moderates.
Yes. Republicans on average are left of center. If John is further to the left than average, I’d agree with you that he could be characterized easily as a liberal.
Voting patterns confirm that (on the sites that rank voting patterns).
Walt Disney side with the terrorists and suspends Graham.
WMAL Suspends Talk-Show Host for Comment on Islam
Is that true Raymond?
Yes it is. Go to Worldnet Daily
Comments on this entry are closed.