"Bomb Mecca"

[DaveC]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/03/tancredo-bomb-muslim-holy-sites-first/

CNN.com
August 3, 2007
Tancredo: Threaten to bomb Muslim holy sites in retaliation

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo’s campaign stood by his assertion that bombing holy Muslim sites would serve as a good “deterrent” to prevent Islamic fundamentalists from attacking the United States, his spokeswoman said Friday.

“This shows that we mean business,” said Bay Buchanan, a senior Tancredo adviser. “There’s no more effective deterrent than that. But he is open-minded and willing to embrace other options. This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.”

On Tuesday, Tancredo warned a group of Iowans that another terrorist attack would “cause a worldwide economic collapse.” IowaPolitics.com recorded his comments.

“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said. “That is the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they would otherwise do. If I am wrong, fine, tell me, and I would be happy to do something else. But you had better find a deterrent, or you will find an attack.”

Tom Casey, a deputy spokesman for the State Department, told CNN’s Elise Labott that the congressman’s comments were “reprehensible” and “absolutely crazy.” Tancredo was widely criticized in 2005 for making a similar suggestion.

–CNN Associate Producer Lauren Kornreich

Great idea. Not only would we be pissing off a billion Muslims even more than we already have, but we'd be asking the extremists to level Jerusalem and murder every single Christian who lives in the Middle East.

Yeah, that's a hell of a deterrent.

Seriously, America. This is the kind of absolutely insane person you have running for President?!?

Jesus H. Christ on a bike.

 

[Axver]

If anything would start a third world war, it is the destruction of Mecca and Medina.

But of course, in the minds of millions of fundamentalist voters out there, that would bring about the Rapture and the Apocalypse, wouldn't it?

 

[hardyharhar]

Have you seen our current administration?

Just another psycho from our wonderful Republican party. The scary part is that one of these nuts is going to be elected eventually.

 

[Pearl]

That idea is simply not rational, and does not justify anything.

 

[ylimeU2]

I would love to know the thought process involved in coming up with crap like that.

 

[phillyfan26]

I would love to know the thought process involved in coming up with crap like that.

"How can I flex my political power best?"

 

[MadelynIris]

Never heard of the guy. He's running for president? Hmmm, I've been following the campaign and never heard of him.

 

[anitram]

Never heard of the guy. He's running for president? Hmmm, I've been following the campaign and never heard of him.

I'm not American and I've heard a lot from him. He's the lunatic who goes into every Republican debate ranting about immigrants, with xenophobia just dripping down his chin. And one of the "I don't believe in evolution" crowd too. He's quite vocal in the debates.

 

[MadelynIris]

and apparently a great subject for foreign press.

 

[anitram]

and apparently a great subject for foreign press.

Actually, no.

Everything I've ever heard from him was on CNN or MSNBC. I don't recall a single time he's been mentioned in a Canadian paper.

 

[indra]

Who voted for this nutjob in the first place?

 

[Axver]

and apparently a great subject for foreign press.

I've only seen him on Australian TV once. Heard plenty from the American media online though. I can't believe this guy is a federal politician.

I was going to say that he'd get laughed out of the country if he ran in Australia, but then I remembered that this is the country that elected Pauline Hanson to a seat in federal parliament.

 

[2861U2]

Have you seen our current administration?

Just another psycho from our wonderful Republican party. The scary part is that one of these nuts is going to be elected eventually.

Tancredo's statement is insane and does not reflect the GOP. No other candidate believes we should bomb Mecca, so dont clump all the candidates with this position.

 

[phillyfan26]

Tancredo's statement is insane and does not reflect the GOP. No other candidate believes we should bomb Mecca, so dont clump all the candidates with this position.

I don't think that was his point. I think his point was that the GOP has plenty of nuts.

 

[hardyharhar]

Thanks, Philly. That was my point.

Whenever I hear something like this, I think of the Dead Zone, where Sen. Stilson feels the same way, yet keeps it to himself in the hope of getting elected. I think a person like this is more likely to be residing within the GOP, imo.

 

[martha]

And one of the "I don't believe in evolution" crowd too.

Isn't it somewhere in Christian doctrine to bomb the hell out of the holy places of other religions? Wasn't that part of loving other as yourselves?

 

[deep]

why is everyone so upset?


he didn't do anything

what ever happened to free speech?

 

[DaveC]

This is not a free speech issue in the least. Nobody's said he shouldn't be allowed to say it. I think we're all quite shocked at the fact that someone seriuosly running for President of the United States is honestly and unapologetically advocating the leveling (he's not just saying we ought to bomb their power plants to deter them, but to flatten the entire city) of the holiest cities of a religion that is already pissed off at us (us = the West). How do you go about flattening an entire city in the most efficient way in this day and age? Drop a nuke. Plop one on Mecca and I guarantee Washington, DC would be next.

And this is a great message to send the Saudis, considering that probably 80% of the places Tancrazy's thinking of wiping off the face of the map are in Saudi Arabia. A nation that's been an ally of the United States for decades.

Obviously a foreign policy whiz.

On an interesting note, I think we might have found someone even more reckless and stupid than Bush & Co. in the federal government.

 

[martha]

what ever happened to free speech?

He's got it, we've got it.

 

[Inner El Guapo]

Seriously, America. This is the kind of absolutely insane person you have running for President?!?

Any citizen 35 years of age can run for President, many millions.
And only about 5 of all of them have a realistic shot of winning.

So just be cool on the U.S, most of us can sniff this stuff out, easily.


Really though, he can't even get a break in the Republican side taking a HARDLINE stance against illegals. He is the Kucinich of the right.

 

[Inner El Guapo]

why is everyone so upset?

what ever happened to free speech?

I detect sarcasm, one question, what is the point being made by the sarcasm?

If no sarcasm, are you aware of the delicious irony?

 

[DaveC]

irony

 

[BVS]

Tancredo's statement is insane and does not reflect the GOP. No other candidate believes we should bomb Mecca, so dont clump all the candidates with this position.

No, it doesn't reflect the GOP, but many(more than anyone would acknowledge) secretly hold this type of feeling.

I've heard many say we should just turn the Middle East into glass... and guess who all of them voted for

 

[Inner El Guapo]

No, it doesn't reflect the GOP, but many(more than anyone would acknowledge) secretly hold this type of feeling.

I've heard many say we should just turn the Middle East into glass... and guess who all of them voted for

How many people secretly hold the position that we should have taken no military action after 9/11? Or even before for that matter? And who are they voting for?

The GOP doesn't endorse this drivel anymore than the Dems endorse a pacifist lunatic fringe. We should all be fair here.

Oh, and ......Neil Diamond is the balls.

 

[BVS]

How many people secretly hold the position that we should have taken no military action after 9/11? Or even before for that matter? And who are they voting for?

The GOP doesn't endorse this drivel anymore than the Dems endorse a pacifist lunatic fringe. We should all be fair here.

Well you missed my point...

and

How is that the same?

 

[Inner El Guapo]

Well you missed my point...

and

How is that the same?

What point did I miss exactly?

This would have been a perfect opportunity to say "you missed my point, my point was this....."

You're saying it doesn't reflect the GOP but (paraphrased) "there are people who support it and they all vote GOP"

You're taking the apologetic view that this lunacy represents the GOP, otherwise what sense does it make to draw any distinction whatsoever?

I'm saying you could easily paint it the opposite way. That's all.

We are talking about how individuals who are linked to parties Tancredo/GOP on some fringe issues don't represent the masses of said party, I tried to illustrate one view of how the Dems could be painted against themselves so to speak, as in Pacifist/Dems.
I'm saying it doesn't add up.

What point am I missing? (asking in all honesty)

 

[BVS]

What point did I miss exactly?

This would have been a perfect opportunity to say "you missed my point, my point was this....."

You're saying it doesn't reflect the GOP but (paraphrased) "there are people who support it and they all vote GOP"

You're taking the apologetic view that this lunacy represents the GOP, otherwise what sense does it make to draw any distinction whatsoever?

I'm saying you could easily paint it the opposite way. That's all.

We are talking about how individuals who are linked to parties Tancredo/GOP on some fringe issues don't represent the masses of said party, I tried to illustrate one view of how the Dems could be painted against themselves so to speak, as in Pacifist/Dems.
I'm saying it doesn't add up.

What point am I missing? (asking in all honesty)

The point you are missing is that the secret feeling of many GOP would be destroying lives...

Your theory of pacificts is one that no one can predict how many lives would be lost if we never did anything...

 

[Inner El Guapo]

The point you are missing is that the secret feeling of many GOP would be destroying lives...

Your theory of pacificts is one that no one can predict how many lives would be lost if we never did anything...

So we protect all lives at all costs.
Sounds like a great idea.

We can't quantify what would be a greater number.
An ouright aggressor Tancredo bomb over Tehran or an outright pacifist stance that led to an Al Qaeda bomb in a major U.S city.

These aren't pressing issues though.

I don't think either party entertains anything near those extremes, which was my point.

 

[BVS]

What we can and should say is that either of these stances is far from any type of mainstream opinion and not a serious issue.

Of course it is...

But one is a violent genocide of an idea... and the other isn't.

Yet both are voting. Let's just hope that the fuckers are less...

 

[Inner El Guapo]

Of course it is...

But one is a violent genocide of an idea... and the other isn't.

Yet both are voting. Let's just hope that the fuckers are less...

Fair enough.

It's just I detest a pacifist stance as much as the Bush bullshit.

I don't think our answers are there, thaks for the discussion tonight.