Who is to blame for the London terror bombings? The terrorists themselves, of course.
But isn’t there a secondary cause? Aren’t there Westerners whose public statements contributed to the resentments felt by the bombers?
The answer is yes.
Who?
The leftists like Dick Durbin who exaggerated the interrogation practices at Guantanamo.
Jeff Goldstein explains. (Via Baldilocks.)
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Powered by WordPress.
“The leftists like Dick Durbin who exaggerated the interrogation practices at Guantanamo.”
What was the exagerration? reading FBI emails?
actus (a5f574) — 7/24/2005 @ 11:56 amI very much disagree with this idea that anyone outside the moslem faith has inspired this terrorism. I do not doubt that Senator Durbin has given a propaganda coup to terrorist groups, however I believe that The Islamic terrorists are motivated by RELIGIOUS philosophy gounded in certain passages from the Koran which have been interpreted to justify or even require violence. While there may be other provocations, the ultimate reason for 9/11 and all other violence directed at non-moslems is found in the Koran. Any attempt to justify Moslem violence by citing other reasons than the interpretations of the Koran is to ignore reality and shift blame from Moslems and the Koran. The Moslems need no apologists. They need to be disarmed and rendered harmless to Moslems and non-moslems alike. If this could be done peacefully, I would be all in favor of it. But if the only way to protect nonviolent peoples everywhere from these religious fanatics is to hunt them down and kill them, so be it. Since nonviolent Moslems are among the largest number of people killed by these fanatics, those of the Moslem faith who interpret the Koran as the basis for a nonviolent religion may end up the biggest winners if the U.S. wins the war on terror.
john (fb05db) — 7/24/2005 @ 1:44 pmNot Just Durbin who took the unoficial comments of one man about a few things he may or may not have seen and extrapolated by between 1,000% and 10,000%. But also the MSM who take a unsourced report and report it as fact. When it turns out not to have been fact. The bogus Rathergate like flushing report. Both obvious examples of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. As well as motivation which in both cases turned out to not be based on facts, or in Dick’s lie a fact multiiplied by something like 500 times.
Rod Stanton (7b6143) — 7/24/2005 @ 4:39 pm“The bogus Rathergate like flushing report. Both obvious examples of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. ”
I don’t know what kind of comfort it is to have your Koran flushed. Sounds rather discomforting, to a muslim.
actus (a5f574) — 7/24/2005 @ 6:01 pmYour literacy skills are at work, as always, actus.
Angry Clam (f05866) — 7/24/2005 @ 8:01 pm“Your literacy skills are at work, as always, actus.”
I am having a hard time understanding the idea that saying things that make the enemy upset is giving aid and comfort. That’s an odd standard to apply. I mean, just go read some threads over at freerepublic.com and you’ll see plenty of such treason then.
actus (a5f574) — 7/24/2005 @ 9:02 pmThe history of the Federalist Party ought to ve instructive here — the basically picked the wwrong side in 1812 and were destroyed as a party because of it. See here and expecially here.
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 7/24/2005 @ 11:05 pmUmm here and expecially here
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 7/24/2005 @ 11:05 pmand I do know how to spell escpecially.
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 7/24/2005 @ 11:06 pmespecially. sheesh it’s late.
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 7/24/2005 @ 11:07 pmactus – Are you really incapable of understanding that a prominent politician purporting to confirm an enemy’s accusations of the US is giving that enemy aid and comfort?
I suppose you also believe that the witness who testified regarding Mark Furman’s use of racial epithets did not aid OJ’s attack on the prosecution case. Gee, what were Cochran and Bailey thinking?
eddie haskell (8fd1a1) — 7/25/2005 @ 8:51 am“Are you really incapable of understanding that a prominent politician purporting to confirm an enemy’s accusations of the US is giving that enemy aid and comfort”
Yes. I mean, I can’t understand how wrong it is to read an unclassified FBI agent’s report. Likewise I don’t see how Tom Tancredo acting the idiot is any aid or comfort. Is it really treasonous to upset the enemy? Was all that WW2 propaganda about “the jap” or “the hun” treason?
actus (cd484e) — 7/25/2005 @ 9:04 amactus – You’re a waste of time.
eddie haskell (8fd1a1) — 7/25/2005 @ 9:52 am