Republican Congressman Threatens Islamic Holy Sites

[Totally Committed]

DENVER - A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons Rep. Tom Tancredo made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.

Talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons. "Well, what if you said something like -- if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.

"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said. "Yeah," Tancredo responded. The congressman later said he was "just throwing out some ideas" and that an "ultimate threat" might have to be met with an "ultimate response."

>snip<

"We have an enemy with no uniform, no state, who looks like you and me and only emerges right before an attack. How do we go after someone like that?" Adams said. "What is near and dear to them? They're willing to sacrifice everything in this world for the next one. What is the pressure point that would deter them from their murderous impulses?" he said. Tancredo is known in the House for his tough stand on immigration and had a 100 percent rating last year from the American Conservative Union his votes and positions on issues. Mohammad Noorzai, coordinator of the Colorado Muslim Council and a native of Afghanistan, said Tancredo's remarks were radical and unrepresentative but that people in Tancredo's position need to watch their words when it comes to sacred religious sites and texts.

Tell Tom What you think about his "Plan"...

Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado

When Tom is not threatening to blow up MEcca, the subjects near and dear to his heart are THE RIGHT TO LIFE, and ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

tancredo.house.gov/

Contact: http://tancredo.house.gov/contacttom.asp

Tom's Blog:
http://www.myownjournal.com/journal.php?u_mem=tancredoblog

DC Office
1130 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515-0606
202.225.7882

District Office
6099 South Quebec St., Suite 200
Centennial, Colorado 80111-4547
720.283.9772

And, the next time you hear anyone wonder out loud about why "they" hate us so much, remember that we have elected US Congressmen out there talking shit like this! (Can you imagine what would have happened if a British MP said that Britain would nuke the Vatican if the IRA didn't stop their bombings???)

TC

[wtmusic]

1. The threat of bombing Mecca would 'deter them

from their murderous impulses'

Reality check.

[Burma Jones]

2. Now here's someone that should keep their damn mouth shut

However, if we get Nuked, some extremely serious shit WILL happen, and the dead will be counted in the hundreds of millions, count on it.....

[Old and In the Way]

3. Hmmmm, wonder why Republicans are amping this idea?

(1) Preparing the country for this to occur? Martial law, anyone?
(2) If this occurs, can we hold people like Cheney and Rumsfield accountable for selling dual-use components for making nuclear weapons when they were selling this stuff to Pakistan in the 90s?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x66773
Democratic Underground - AMERICAN JUDAS


If the unthinkable should occur, we need to be prepared to expose the traitors who allowed these weapons to fall into the hands of terrorists. The real story is that Republicans have allowed terrorism to flourish, to both feed the MIC and diminish our civil liberties.

[Ian David]

10. Related thread: Does GOP think urban centers are expendable?

Hypothesis: The GOP thinks cities and urban centers are expendable
Topic started by IanDB1 on Jul-15-05 03:13 PM (13 replies)
Last modified by MisterP on Jul-16-05 02:37 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1931548

[Totally Committed]

4. And this guy actually has the nerve...

to go on about "The Right To Life" on his website under "My Issues".

TC

[ieoeja]

5. I would have thought this was a given.

They nuke us, any US president who fails to respond in kind might just as well resign before the American public hangs him by his heels.

[Totally Committed]

6. Are you saying you support his...

going out and saying this sort of thing to the media? Do you think you, your family, your friends or your country is safer now that he's said it?

It's one thing to know there would be a response in kind should something happen. I doubt there is a country on earth that doesn't know that. But, to come out and actually say this in an interview???

It is absolutely unnecessary and provocative. He should be slapped down hard... and very publicly. Unfortunately, I think pigs will be flying overhead before that happens. It'll just hang out there making us look like a country full of arrogant asshole cowboys.

TC

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. Who is 'they'?

Some Saudi funded, Pakistan educated Jordanians get a bomb and have an Iraqi set if off in Seattle.

Our response is to nuke Mecca and Medina?

How about nuking Jerusalem? It is the 2nd holiest city in Islam. Never mind that there are millions in those cities who had nothing to do with the terrorists.

I may be ill.

[JHBowden]

7. If we are nuked, **everything** is on the table.

If they kill millions of people, by, let us say, turning the Los Angeles area into a radioactive heap of rubble, all of their holy sites aren't the only thing we'll destroy.

[Totally Committed]

8. All I'm saying is...

shouldn't that remain IMPLICIT.

Do we really need some Republican "tough-talker" yahbo out there saying such bellicose things? It's provocative. It is arrogant. And, It could incite the very violence of which he speaks.

TC

[JHBowden]

9. It needs to be explicit.

Many think American civilization has become lazy, decadent, corrupt, and unwilling to defend itself, especially after Somalia and the non-response after Dar es Saalam and Nairobi.

The radical Muslim community in the Middle East needs to know that if they allow attacks of biblical proportions on the United States, our response will not be equal, but ten fold. It will be like Rome destroying Carthage.

[Totally Committed]

11. Really?... This has been an intersting response...

I'm going to save this thread for the next time I get into one of those "This person or that person is a war-monger threads."

I can't believe you are not all outraged.

TC

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Old and In the Way]

39. And you will know who the perps are......

how?

Al Qaeda won't be launching their missles via conventional means. No AQ bombers or hardened silo's from which to track them from. So what state would be responsible? Saudi Arabia? We'd didn't hold them accountable for 9/11 when 15/19 hijackers were Sauds.

What if some other state did it? There are plenty of countries who might have a hidden agenda and might like to see the US get hit...and then hit the wrong country in retaliation.

Because we did not have an independent investigation of who really carried out 9/11, how are we to know who the perps are? Remember, the same bunch in our country who have sold dual use WMD components to Pakistan are the same ones who were so incompetent on 9/11. These are the same bunch who couldn't find that Anthrax killer and who outed a serious player tracking WMD undercover. Think they'll be more competent to stop a nuke if one is lit in one of our major urban centers?

I'd be mighty skeptical of letting this current administration, who disregarded the 9/11 warnings and lied about the causus belli with Iraq, to tell us the truth should another unspeakable event like this scenario occur. The fact that it is a Republican who is seeding the idea should give us all pause.

If you were guilty of capital crimes against the United States, what other deeds would you consider to save your sorry ass? Especially when such an event will pave the way for a dictatorship. I put nothing past these criminals.

[sled]

14. So...

What would be the proper response, in your opinion, TC???

[0rganism]

23. And what if some American white power group nukes LA?

What then, praytell? What's the "appropriate proportional response"?

Remember, right after the OKC bombing, the radio and papers were all abuzz with the "2 dark-complexioned men possibly of middle-eastern origin in a pickup truck," and there was plenty of talk about "proportional response" back then, too. It's not outside the realms of speculation that a domestic militant rightwing group could destroy a "hotbed of interracial liberal decadence" and implicate Al Qaeda in a false flag operation. Are you prepared to take that into consideration?

[JHBowden]

30. Yeah, and what if Martians do it.

If a city is nuked because of our negligence, we obviously wouldn't be targeting other nations.

[0rganism]

37. What part of "false flag operation" don't you understand?

If an American city is nuked, do you think Rep. Tancredo is going to sit around waiting for a criminal investigation to complete before he advocates the annihilation of Mecca? Wake up. This has nothing whatsoever to do with Martians.

You've got two answers for two scenarios:
1) Islamic nuclear terror attack == justification to nuke Muslim holy sites
2) American nutjob nuclear terror attack == obviously not targeting other nations

But the entire premise of the question, which you saw fit to ignore, is that of a domestic attack by American terrorists implicating Islamic organizations. So how about you tell me how we'll be ascertaining the difference before carrying out the "proportional response".

[fujiyama]

44. Ah nice to see RW talking points being used

This whole lie of Clinton not responding to the terrorist attacks in Kenya and Tanzania after 9/11.

I'm no MIHOPer (or even LIHOPer), but I also find it interesting that you actually dismiss any accusation of negligence against this administration over 9/11.

[Mass]

12. So all muslims are guilty from the actions of a few?

This is NOT their holy sites. This is the holy sites of hundred of millions of muslims most of them having nothing to do with this horror.

In addition, this would be totally counterproductive as it would probably transform every muslim into an anti-american ready to fight.

[JHBowden]

15. Turning the other cheek is lame.

If these people were reasonable as you imply, they'd understand in this scenario that some mosque in the middle of the desert is worth much less than MILLIONS slaughtered in Los Angeles.

If not, they truly are medieval and would have it coming.

[5X]

16. So you think all muslim holy sites are isolated in a desert?

We would be nuking much more than just a mosque.

[JHBowden]

17. No.

But you're not seeing the proportionality of what the scenario entails. After MILLIONS of Americans are incinerated, some here are worried that a response (not necessarily nuclear) might involve the destruction of one or two of their holy sites.

I simply can't believe what I'm hearing.

[Kraklen]

18. What you're describing is a war crime.

Nuking mecca in response to a terrorist nuking Chicago is the moral equivalent of being a terrorist and nuking Chicago.

[JHBowden]

20. Do you have a point?

Destroying 50-90% of Japan's 67 largest cities in WWII wasn't nice either. Again, if the Communists nuked us during the Cold War, many here would not advocate any retaliation because of Ralph Nader-like scruples about moral purity.

Massive, total retaliation for a massive attack is the proper response, and yes, it has a proven record of being a deterrent.

[Kraklen]

25. It's also racist and antisemitic.

Really, I expect that kind of thing from Anne Coulter and David Duke, but DUers?

[JHBowden]

28. You're not addressing the point.

Would massive retaliation toward the Soviet Union after a nuclear attack be "racist" and "anti-semitic?"

[Kraklen]

31. That would be if the Soviet Union launched the attack.

Mecca isn't the Soviet Union.

What you're advocating is burning down a negro church if one of them darkies rapes one of our white women.

[JHBowden]

34. MILLIONS of people dying is different than rape.

And if Saudi nationals are involved, everything in the country is fair game.. We're not talking about car bombs, we're talking about NUCLEAR BOMBS that reduce major American cities to heaps of radioactive rubble. If "Death to America" had actual consequences, a rational community would think twice and report terrorists to the authorities.

[Mass]

19. Their??

do you mean all muslims are terrorist?

What Tancredo proposes is exactly the same as what he says the terrorists would do: attack a totally innocent population that has nothing to do with the act as retortion for something.

This is called a war crime.

[JHBowden]

21. If they look the other way when their community obtains a nuclear bomb,

which ends up being used to kill millions of Americans, everything is fair game.

If the Soviet government attacked us with nuclear weapons in the 1960s, you're telling me you'd simply let them keep hitting us with nuclear weapons over and over and over again, because retaliation would be a war crime?

You gotta be kiddin' me!

[Mass]

24. You would not be hitting those who are hitting us.

This is the problem with terrorism.

The Taliban made it easy by saying that they would support Al Quaeda no matter what.

You got to be kidding me.

May be we can focus in avoiding that before we send inflammatory messages in country where our troops are.

[JHBowden]

27. Look at it the other way.

Suppose our government, which in this scenario has popular support from the people, conveniently looks the other way and lets a stupid redneck American terrorist group acquire a nuclear weapon, which is subsequently detonated in, let us say, Dubai.

Do you think people living in the region would be like, "well, we should pursue peace and understanding, even though millions of our people were just butchered. Not all Americans are bad." We both know descriptively, that would not happen. But as you can see normatively, if the society put the government in place which led to the action, retaliation would not only happen, it would be justified.

There's NO EXCUSE for *any* of these societies to let private citizens their get their paws on a nuke. We should make the consequences of such behavior clear, especially if we allow nations like Iran to have nuclear weapons, which many here strangely advocate.

[Kraklen]

29. So, using your logic...

since U.S. forces have needlessly slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Arab civilians, they'd be perfectly justified in slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Using your logic.

[JHBowden]

33. We are not targeting civilians.

Moreover, we're losing people to the terrorists there too.

[eomer]

32. So if Christian extremists obtain and use a nuclear weapon somewhere

then it would be proper to nuke the Vatican in response. Do I understand your position correctly?

[JHBowden]

35. No.

If the Vatican was inciting violence against the United States, it would be a different story.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

22. Oops

He put his foot in his mouth after walking the cow pasture.

[Zero Division]

36. Suppose some Christian extremists detonated a nuke in DC

...should we then pick several Christian fundamentalist churches or communities and bomb those and their inhabitants to smithereens? Makes about as much sense. Wonder how Rep Tancredo would feel about that scenario.

An entire religion cannot claim responsibility for the actions of even a significant minority. Nuking holy sites in retaliation for the actions of religious extremists is not logically comparable to the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction between nations.

One of these day I fear that our country, or another country with nuclear capability, will lose its collective mind in response to an horrific attack of some sort and end up causing all of humanity, including those of the counter-attacking nation, to suffer for the horrendous actions of a few.

This is cold, hard logic that leads to the conclusion that such an extreme reaction must be prevented. Conservatives would have you believe that this is simply "peace-loving, naive hippie BS". They're wrong. They refuse to look at all of the possible consequences of such a reaction.

[maxsolomon]

38. lets all live in fear of nuclear terror

what a bunch of crap. we're just making stuff up to be scared of.

the real threat to our existence is OURSELVES.

[CJCRANE]

40. Wonder what Bush's buddies

i.e. the Saudis, think about a fellow Republican threatening their country?

[CJCRANE]

41. It's amazing how much

anger can be stirred up from something that hasn't even happened!

Kinda reminds me of how Bush & Blair said we should be so scared of Saddam Hussein's nonexistent weapons that apparently could be activated in 45 minutes and cause a mushroom cloud (according to Condi Rice).

All those who are scared and angry - calm down, take a deep breath..

[Totally Committed]

42. This is why -- He's Running for President!

And, Bay Buchanan is his "guru"...

Tancredo for president? Little-known Colo. Republican hits Iowa
By M.E. SPRENGELMEYER
Scripps Howard News Service
July 15, 2005

DUBUQUE, Iowa - After his first long day stumping across Iowa last week, a weary Tom Tancredo dragged himself up to a hotel room in Cedar Rapids, zipped open the suitcase and started looking for his pajamas.

"This doesn't look like my wife's packing!" he exclaimed. Inside, he found a bag of dirty laundry and other stuff belonging to some poor guy who was making a connecting flight for Hawaii. The congressman had grabbed the wrong bag when their puddle-jumper landed in Moline, Ill.

Uh-oh.

>snip<

Tancredo has visited New Hampshire and now Iowa, testing the waters for a possible presidential run. But the real goal is to turn his pet issue - a hard line on illegal immigration - into something none of the contenders can ignore.


Entire Article:

http://www.knoxstudio.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=EARLYBIRD-0...

TC

[Totally Committed]

43. OMG! -- From the same article:

... And it includes the childhood depression treatments that led to Tancredo's mental-health draft deferment during the Vietnam War.

In a restaurant in Cedar Rapids, Tancredo talked about offering to make public service announcements telling people who suffer from depression: "I know what you're experiencing with depression. You can overcome it. You can live your life."

"I can't live my life worrying about that limitation," Tancredo said. "The other way to look at it is to say, 'America, this is who I am. (Here is) what I've had to go through.' "


He has a mental health deferrment from the Vietnam War AND he's up for nuking Mecca... this is the kind of candidate that the Republicans want to run for President?

Bay Buchanan actually said "he's the best grassroots candidate" in the Party.

This is why this Party has GOT TO BE taken out of power, my friends!

Maybe this could be his campaign slogan:

"Vote for Tancredo - He puts the NUT in Wingnut"

TC