Islam v The United States: How To Diffuse a Political Time-Bomb

You wouldnt have a clue as you have not read any Islamic doctrine.
Jihad is primarily warfare against the unbelievers. First 26 verses from the Bukhari hadith that contain the word Jihad demonstrate this.

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25:
Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25:
The Prophet said, "The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). Had I not found it difficult for my followers, then I would not remain behind any sariya going for Jihad and I would have loved to be martyred in Allah's cause and then made alive, and then martyred and then made alive, and then again martyred in His cause."

Volume 1, Book 10, Number 505:
I asked the Prophet "Which deed is the dearest to Allah?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is the next (in goodness)?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents" I again asked, "What is the next (in goodness)?" He replied, 'To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's cause."

Volume 2, Book 15, Number 86:
The Prophet said, "No good deeds done on other days are superior to those done on these (first ten days of Dhul Hijja)." Then some companions of the Prophet said, "Not even Jihad?" He replied, "Not even Jihad, except that of a man who does it by putting himself and his property in danger (for Allah's sake) and does not return with any of those things."

Volume 2, Book 24, Number 547:
Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) ordered (a person) to collect Zakat, and that person returned and told him that Ibn Jamil, Khalid bin Al-Walid, and Abbas bin 'Abdul Muttalib had refused to give Zakat." The Prophet said, "What made Ibn Jamll refuse to give Zakat though he was a poor man, and was made wealthy by Allah and His Apostle ? But you are unfair in asking Zakat from Khalid as he is keeping his armor for Allah's Cause (for Jihad).

Volume 2, Book 26, Number 594:
The Prophet was asked, "Which is the best deed?" He said, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle." He was then asked, "Which is the next (in goodness)?" He said, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause."

Volume 3, Book 29, Number 84:
I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shouldn't we participate in Holy battles and Jihad along with you?" He replied, "The best and the most superior Jihad (for women) is Hajj which is accepted by Allah.

Volume 3, Book 31, Number 121:
...So, whoever was amongst the people who used to offer their prayers, will be called from the gate of the prayer; and whoever was amongst the people who used to participate in Jihad, will be called from the gate of Jihad;

Volume 3, Book 46, Number 724:
Allah's Apostle said, "A pious slave gets a double reward." Abu Huraira added: By Him in Whose Hands my soul is but for Jihad (i.e. holy battles),

Volume 4, Book 51, Number 33:
When 'Umar got a piece of land in Khaibar, he came to the Prophet saying, "I have got a piece of land, better than which I have never got. So what do you advise me regarding it?" The Prophet said, "If you wish you can keep it as an endowment to be used for charitable purposes." So, 'Umar gave the land in charity (i.e. as an endowments on the condition that the land would neither be sold nor given as a present, nor bequeathed, (and its yield) would be used for the poor, the kinsmen, the emancipation of slaves, Jihad, and for guests and travelers; and its administrator could eat in a reasonable just manner, and he also could feed his friends without intending to be wealthy by its means."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 41:
I asked Allah's Apostle, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the best deed?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents." I further asked, what is next in goodness?" He replied, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." I did not ask Allah's Apostle anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 42:
Allah's Apostle said, "There is no Hijra (i.e. migration) (from Mecca to Medina) after the Conquest (of Mecca), but Jihad and good intention remain; and if you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 43:
(That she said), "O Allah's Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah's Cause?" He said, "The best Jihad (for women) is Hajj-Mabrur (i.e. Hajj which is done according to the Prophet's tradition and is accepted by Allah)."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44:
A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed." Then he added, "Can you, while the Muslim fighter is in the battle-field, enter your mosque to perform prayers without cease and fast and never break your fast?" The man said, "But who can do that?" Abu- Huraira added, "The Mujahid (i.e. Muslim fighter) is rewarded even for the footsteps of his horse while it wanders bout (for grazing) tied in a long rope."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 56:
,,,Later on it happened that she went out in the company of her husband 'Ubada bin As-Samit who went for Jihad and it was the first time the Muslims undertook a naval expedition led by Mu awiya.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 79:
On the day of the Conquest (of Mecca) the Prophet said, "There is no emigration after the Conquest but Jihad and intentions. When you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately." (See Hadith No. 42)

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 81:
In the life-time of the Prophet, Abu Talha did not fast because of the Jihad, but after the Prophet died I never saw him without fasting except on 'Id-ul-Fitr and 'Id-ul-Aclha.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 85:
....He told us that Zaid bin Thabit had told him that Allah's Apostle had dictated to him the Divine Verse:
"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and lives.' (4.95)
Zaid said, "Ibn-Maktum came to the Prophet while he was dictating to me that very Verse. On that Ibn Um Maktum said, "O Allah's Apostle! If I had power, I would surely take part in Jihad."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 87:
Allah's Apostle went towards the Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and saw the Emigrants and the Ansar digging in a very cold morning as they did not have slaves to do that for them. When he noticed their fatigue and hunger he said, "O Allah! The real life is that of the Here-after, (so please) forgive the Ansar and the Emigrants." In its reply the Emigrants and the Ansar said, "We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will carry on Jihad as long as we live."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 88:
The Emigrants and the Ansar started digging the trench around Medina carrying the earth on their backs and saying, "We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will I carry on Jihad as long as we live."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 104:
The Prophet said, "Good will remain (as a permanent quality) in the foreheads of horses (for Jihad) till the Day of Resurrection, for they bring about either a reward (in the Hereafter) or booty (in this world."

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 112:
The one for whom they are a source of reward, is he who keeps a horse for Allah's Cause (i.e. Jihad)

 

Unlike you, obviously, I tend to avoid sites like Jihadwatch. Cherry-picking quotations is fundamentally dishonest; or, perhaps, I should do the same with the Christian bible in order to demonstrate what a murderous doctrine Christianity is? Would you like that?

 

By all means read everything in context. You can search for the quotes with Google or whatever and read in context.

"It's a range of activities all based on the Arabic meaning of the word 'exerted effort.' In the Koran it's projected as exerting effort to change oneself, and also in certain situations physically standing against oppressors if that's the only way." http://news.nationalgeographic.co.uk/news/2003/10/1023_031023_jihad.html

The problem is that Islam is not a faith it is a government with taxes, so oppression could simply be the human right of self-determination of peoples to reject Islamic ownership of the land for all time:

“Ownership of land

In Islam there are three kinds of land from the stand‑point of ownership:



(1) Lands owned by society

(2) Lands owned by State

(3) Lands owned by private individuals



Lands owned by society

This kind of lands is not salable. Even the State has no right to sell them. Lands developed and tilled by human hands and those which come under Muslim control consequent on jihad are considered to be the property of the Muslim society and none can purchase or sell even one metre thereof.“

http://www.al-islam.org/philosophyofislam/17.htm

Mob protection racket:

"111a. The Jews in Arabia sided with the enemies of Islåm in their endeavour to extirpate the new religion, and this notwithstanding their pact with the Muslims, but they were not successful in inflicting any serious harm upon the Muslims, and whenever they openly faced the Muslims they fled. As the concluding words show, the idolaters, who gave them secret promises of help, never came to their aid when they were in distress."

112a. Almost the same words, excluding the exception, occur in 2:61. The Jews
had already been subjected to the greatest humiliation and disgrace before the appearance of the Prophet. But with the advent of Islåm they could better their condition either by accepting the covenant of Allåh, by which is meant the acceptance of Islåm, or by making a compact of security with such men as could give them protection. This remains true to this day." http://www.muslim.org/english-quran/index.htm

"Surat Al-Imran (III), verses 109-111 Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors." http://middleeast.about.com/od/palestinepalestinians/a/me080106b.htm

“The Jews in Arabia sided with the enemies of Islåm in their endeavour to extirpate the new…” Government.

“One day while the Prophet was sitting in the company of some people, (The angel) Gabriel came and asked, "What is faith?" Allah's Apostle replied, 'Faith is to believe in Allah, His angels, (the) meeting with Him, His Apostles, and to believe in Resurrection." Then he further asked, "What is Islam?" Allah's Apostle replied, "To worship Allah Alone and none else, to offer prayers perfectly to pay the compulsory charity (Zakat) and to observe fasts during the month of Ramadan."
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/bukhari/bh1/bh1_46.htm

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 191:

..."In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad, the slave of Allah, and His Apostle, to Heraculius, the Ruler of the Byzantine. Peace be upon the followers of guidance. Now then, I invite you to Islam (i.e. surrender to Allah), embrace Islam and you will be safe; embrace Islam and Allah will bestow on you a double reward. But if you reject this invitation of Islam, you shall be responsible for misguiding the peasants (i.e. your nation). O people of the Scriptures! Come to a word common to you and us and you, that we worship. None but Allah, and that we associate nothing in worship with Him; and that none of us shall take others as Lords besides Allah. Then if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are (they who have surrendered (unto Him)..(3.64)"...

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 191:

Narrated Abdullah bin Abbas:
"He said, 'Do the noble or the poor follow him?' I replied, 'It is the poor who follow him.' He said, 'Are they increasing or decreasing (day by day)?' I replied,' They are increasing.' He said, 'Does anybody amongst those who embrace his (the Prophet's) Religion become displeased and then discard his Religion?'. I replied, 'No. ' He said, 'Does he break his promises? I replied, 'No, but we are now at truce with him and we are afraid that he may betray us." Abu Sufyan added, "Other than the last sentence, I could not say anything against him. Caesar then asked, 'Have you ever had a war with him?' I replied, 'Yes.' He said, 'What was the outcome of your battles with him?' I replied, 'The result was unstable; sometimes he was victorious and sometimes we.' He said, 'What does he order you to do?' I said, 'He tells us to worship Allah alone, and not to worship others along with Him, and to leave all that our fore-fathers used to worship. He orders us to pray, give in charity, be chaste, keep promises and return what is entrusted to us.'"

Operative words are “be not the first to deny it”:

“[2.40] O children of Israel! call to mind My favor which I bestowed on you and be faithful to (your) covenant with Me, I will fulfill (My) covenant with you; and of Me, Me alone, should you be afraid.
[2.41] And believe in what I have revealed, verifying that which is with you, and be not the first to deny it, neither take a mean price in exchange for My communications; and Me, Me alone should you fear.
[2.42] And do not mix up the truth with the falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know (it).
[2.43] And keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and bow down with those who bow down.”
“[2.83] And when We made a covenant with the children of Israel: You shall not serve any but Allah and (you shall do) good to (your) parents, and to the near of kin and to the orphans and the needy, and you shall speak to men good words and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate. Then you turned back except a few of you and (now too) you turn aside.”

At that point they had not denied the new government. My advice search the Koran for the word “communications.” Those who reject the clear communications of the government of Islam are what?

“Hitler, wrote Speer, viewed Christianity as the wrong religion for the ‘Germanic temperament’:[68] Speer wrote that Hitler would say: ‘You see it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?’[69]” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_religious_views

http://books.google.com/books?id=XLSa_RIDHMUC&pg=PA96#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Persecution of a religion tends to strengthen it and make its members more extreme, unless its persecutors can wipe it out altogether. Christianity was savagely persecuted for 300 years and ended up dominating the countries it was persecuted in.

As for wiping out Islam, one in five people in the world is a Muslim and at least one Muslim nation (Pakistan) has nuclear weapons. You folks do the math.

 

I think we're starting to get the hang of it now... a little...

 

Now, bear in mind I'm not just talking about religion in this thread, but the overshadowing cultural values that always seem to morph and redact original concepts in the religion's doctrine, as well as just social trend in general.

No, so that we can understand our current situation. I understand. The notion of self-reflection is such a huge barrier to some. The reason is that people are kind of intellectually lazy. It's the monkey in us. We prefer to just accept the troop's values system without reflection. It makes things much easier to just conform. We've been conforming since were were too young to remember even. Yet at the same time, the angels in us were in conflict with many of the monkey values. So we grew up in a weird tug of war between what the troop was teaching us was "OK" and what our higher minds were saying, "hey...wait a minute?..." We all go through that.

At a given point many of us just give in, give up and handg our hat on the peg of the social matrix we find ourselves in. It is at this precise point we all begin to defend it blindly. Because if we were living wrong, it would create too much angst building up as time goes by. So we stuff that nagging feeling back and turn it into a defensive system: defending the tribal laws. This is how we all make the transformation from questioning and thinking individuals to reflexive defenders of that which we have chosen to stop thinking about. It takes an enormous amount of energy to be in a state of examination of the self, but perhaps just the same amount as denial and defensiveness.

This thread was about backing up into space and starting FIRST with an honest examination of our own cultural values and THEN the examination of islam in the same light.

It helps to start with little things. I'll go first. I'll give you an example of what I think is wrong with our culture. The wizard in Oz said on page 1 that America always needs to be hating/at war with someone. I think our slavishness to industry that profits off of war is a very bad American social value. The only reason to go to war is to defend our shores, or those of our allies. Not to further some corporate interest as we did in Vietnam & Iraq. What bothers me about islamic culture is that they may be praying 5 times a day on a carpet facing East, but that on-demand praying might tend to sap the deep spiritual nature out of prayer and turn it into a daily task instead. When that happens, people tend to go asleep at the wheel. And that is the last thing that should be associated with prayer. My understanding of it is to expand the mind, not close it down. This doesn't apply to all islamics but you have to wonder how many of them actually pray and how many of them are just going through the motions. Sometimes their actions in unison all remind me of a yoga class.

See? It's not that hard. Give it a try. What about American culture bothers you. Then islamic.

 

Mine. Yup, time for your meds.

 

???? I am quoting the bukhari hadiths and quoted the first 26 verses only because it takes too much time and effort to copy and paste 52 verses. The second 26 verses also confirm my assertions

 

The misguided hate and bile spewed in this thread demonstrates depth of the problem. Just today I received an email chain letter showing a sign in a shop window in Houston that stated they will be closed on Sept. 11 to celebrate the martyrdom of Imam Ali. Of course the sender in typical reactionary hysteria stated that Imam Ali was one of the 9/11 highjackers. In truth Imam Ali is 7th century Caliph that was murdered while praying in the Great Mosque of Kufa, the son-in-law of Mohammed, and whose teaching are the root cause of the scizm between the Sunni and Shia.

The idiot that started that spam could have looked up Imam Ali in about 3 seconds but instead spent his time making the equivalent claim that Christmas is to celebrate the Crusades. As with all such prejudice, the sender demonstrated his profound ignorance of the subject while alarming as many people as possible. The sad fact is his email will reach some that don't know, could care less, and will accept his ignorance as truth.

It is merely one more example of the many steps into fear and prejudice we have taken on a whole range of subjects in the last couple of decades. No need to fear the terrorists now. They have succeeded in creating the malignant fear that rots us from within. Now our most pressing threat is what we do to ourselves.

 

Now what did Obama actually say? And why did you feel compelled to 'fictionalize' what he said?


Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...marks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

And what did Clinton actually say?

The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.


And you claim they must be impeached? For standing up for religious freedom?

I have noticed that for some of the posters the U.S. Constitution is just seen as an irritatant that prevents the U.S. from a rightious pogrom against American Muslims.

 

This is the kind of idiocy that will have us battling radical Islam forever. They're "intolerance" of us is an entirely predictable result of our foreign policy.

They don't hate us because we eat McDonalds, watch reality TV and have pre-marital sex. When will people get this through their thick skulls?

 

I'll tell you what bothers me about American Culture, the whole concept that Past Victimhood validates the use of contemporary violence, and that in turn is justly mollified by future Appeasement Concessions.

That process and concept encourages violence against innocents to achieve your ends.

I don't OWE you or anyone else anything because someone who looked allot like me, 100 years ago, did something bad!

The whole notion of two wrong making justice is flawed. The whole notion that you can inherit guilt is wrong. The whole notion that you are guilty of Group Identity Sins is Wrong. The whole notion of GROUP IDENTITY is twisted.

I don't owe anyone in America or anywhere else more than a quiet, civil "GoodDay" for the fact that you were born, under whatever disadvantages, ...

sorry to hear it, but we've all got something, I don't care about yours, and you don't want to see mine. Lets get on with the business of the here and now, get things built, and earning a nice life by hard work, innovation, tolerance and playing by the rules.

-

 

Actually it became the dominant religion WHILE it was being persecuted. Christianity had encircled the entire Med. Sea within 300 years of the death of jesus. THEN the Roman empire decided to coopt the religion as their own.

 

I think our first encounter with Muslims as a nation demonstrate the conflict between our culture and theirs.

Our culture failed to stay on our side of the ocean and their culture is to "fight", "kill"' "slay" and "smite the necks" of the unbelievers "until religion should only be for allah".

 

Confiscate their oil. No nation-building, just send them back to the desert where they belong. Without oil money, the jihadists will be fighting us with sticks and stones.

 

I know how NOT to solve the problem. Keep installing and or supporting US friendly despots around the world.

 

Which is fine, but that creates its own problems because each side is looking for a sign of weakness in the other. We unilaterally stop fighting, and it looks like Allah won. If they stop, it looks like we kicked Allah's butt. Neither side can allow themselves to look weak. So we end up with a hangup in which each side is waiting for the other one to cave because they can't be the first to cave. When both sides are unable to cave, to look weak, you get what we have -- a hangup.

I don't disagree, but the thing is that this cannot proceed from guesswork, we have to know. And the other side is that we can't give away everything. I don't think women in burkas are a solution, Americans are not going to do that. And muslims are not going to close their mosques either. There are things that make sense, and then there's crazy.

 

This is what they said:

"The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of [Shaitan]." (Clinton)

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of [Satan]." (Obama)

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of [those that follow Koalemos the god of stupidity]." (Obama)

I am sorry, you very very ignorant person, but the word “others” can be replaced with any “other” I fracking want to replace it with, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ENGRISH LANGUAGE? “Others” can be replaced with Satan, as your Obamanation’s butt buddy has beliefs too.

They did not stand up for religious freedom, because religious freedom includes the ability of that religion to denigrate Satan’s beliefs and that of his prophet.

Our commitment to religious tolerance of the Digambara and baby killers of Molech goes back to the very beginning of our nation?

Is the electorate in this country that fracking ignorant or retarded?

 

When you take things that don't belong to you, eventually somebody will step in and stop you!

It is their OIL, not ours.

-

 

Oh for pete's sake what is it with the American left and this odd notion that history only began in the Middle east in 1948?

Why do modern history books seem to refuse to acknowledge the fact that the Crusades weren't a heinous assault upon peace loving Muslim but in reality a push back against an aggressive and constantly expanding Muslim Empire which had been waging war against Europe's Eastern bulwark - the Byzantine Empire - for more than 150 years by the time of the 1st Crusade.

Why do we essentially ignore the Battle of Tours, and Talas, and the one in west Afrca that cut of the intnernational trade in Gold and salt and had as much to do with Europe's slide into darkness as anything else. All of those battles had Muslims on one side and Muslims that were a hell of along way from Saudi Arabia. Out of Talas came, in no particular order, the Moghul empire, and the current state of almost war between India and Pakistan, The conversion of the Turks who at that time were denizens at the Western edge of China along the silk road, and, eventually, the fall of Constantinople.

Talas is one of the most singularly important Battles in the History of the World and almost no one talks about it in the West. Islam is now and always has been an exceptionally militant religion. Actual history demonstrates that the forces of Islam have only been at peace with those not of Islam when the only other choice was a the annihilation of islams adherents. It is fortunate that in the 15th Century when Europe began it's slow withdrawal from the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings Islam only began to embrace it the more tightly. One should note that Osama chief complaint against the Saudi royals isn't that they are tyrants but essentially boils down to a statement that they aren't sufficiently Muslim enough. The could be said of the Mubarak Government and most other Middle Eastern autocrats, the majority of whom have been in power for longer than the US has been a country.

 

I think it's a little of both actually. Their leadership that is all about greed and market control, like ours is, hates us for the foreign policy issues. The common people hate us for our easily-balked depravity. It's really a battle of a much larger beast than even politics. Both of our de facto leaderships are just greedy SOBs. The muslim way of placating the masses is to blame all the hedonism on the US. How easy, right? While the big money guys East and West rub elbows with each other on the Bush's private ranches in Texas. The American way of placating the masses is just letting them run wild with hedonism under the banner of "freedom" to keep them distracted also from the real enemies.

The trouble with these two systems is that it's a setup to turn the masses of rogue commoner islamics against the US with a deep and justified cause. Theirs is a "religious cause" right? When we justify invading their countries etc. it's because this problem has caused islamic semi-knowledgables to commit acts of terrorism "agaist the infidels"...and we retaliate, justifying it as "defending threats to our [hedonistic] freedoms".

And hence the reason I started this thread to get people to look underneath the rug a little and see what has been swept under it, why, and by whom...

 

And what was the First (and Second through Seventh) Crusades? A historical misunderstanding about Christian militancy? Or how about the forceable conversions of Central and South American natives by the Spanish and Portuguese? The Muslims are hardly the only monotheistic religion with blood splashed all over them.

 

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of [the Grand Inquisitors]." (Obama)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Inquisitor

Please, don’t be another one who cannot look up the word “other” in a dictionary, and if you are give me the limitations of who can be another or different. How many galaxies are there, and potential planets, and potential history of religions on all of them; how many “others” are there? How many of them want to eat our brains?

My father had a Muslim guide when he was in the Attock District during WWII, have picture of him, and a business card from the chief of the Attock District. Not all Muslims are bad.

Is the blood on our hands because we could not denigrate the religious beliefs of others? Don’t they pretty much have that same problem right now?

 

I am seriously wondering about one of our posters now

Now what did Obama actually say? And why did you feel compelled to 'fictionalize' what he said?


Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...sy-staff-libya

And what did Clinton actually say?

The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.


And you claim they must be impeached? For standing up for religious freedom?

I have noticed that for some of the posters the U.S. Constitution is just seen as an irritatant that prevents the U.S. from a rightious pogrom against American Muslims.

 

All benevolent reilgions start out with about a dozen universal truths to their foundation. Then as time goes on, silverbacks attach their favorite pet causes to them and call those "holy". These attachments, and not the core faith are the seat of all religious conflict and all cultural conflict for that matter. The apes usurp the angels over time with clever monkey politics and the next thing you know, they're beating each other over the head fighting over females and bananas....or variations on that theme...and calling it "justified in the eyes of God"...

I told you, we're looking at this thing from WAY out in space...