KVOR's Johnson indicated support for Tancredo's strategy of threatening to bomb Muslim holy sites
Referring to U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo's (R-CO) recent comment that the United States could use the threat of a strike on Muslim holy sites to deter a nuclear attack by Islamic terrorists, News Radio 740 KVOR host Russ Johnson on the August 7 Afternoon Show agreed with a caller's suggestion that "it would serve a lot of strategic value ... to take out something like Mecca." After the same caller added, "[A]nd if we were to go ahead and bomb that place, what questions would it put into the mind of Muslims about how powerful Allah is that he could not prevent something like this from taking place?" Johnson replied, "Now, actually, that sounds like a possible reason why we may want to consider this as an option."
According to CNN's "Political Ticker" website, Tancredo told a group of Iowans on July 31: "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." As the Rocky Mountain News reported on August 6, Tancredo defended "controversial comments threatening to target Muslim holy sites as a deterrent to Islamic terrorism" during an August 5 Republican presidential debate. The News further reported, "Tancredo has said he sees no other way to deter a potential nuclear attack by Islamic terrorists except to threaten to destroy the Muslim holy sites of Mecca and Medina."
Tancredo's July 31 comment echoed a controversial remark he made in 2005 in which he said that if terrorists struck U.S. cities with nuclear weapons "and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites."
Later in the Afternoon Show broadcast, after another caller suggested the reason Tancredo "said it was OK" to bomb Muslim holy sites "is because if the terrorists are there hiding behind the skirts of the women in the mosque, then of course you go in to do that, because of his belief that the mosques are a harboring place for terrorists," Johnson responded, "I definitely agree with that part."
As Colorado Media Matters noted, Fox News Radio 600 KCOL host Scott James on his August 6 show similarly defended Tancredo's comments by saying Tancredo has "got a point" and "is being a pragmatist about this."
From the August 7 broadcast of News Radio 740 KVOR's Afternoon Show (Live & Local):
CALLER: Now, I'm also in the military, so let me say it would be against the laws of war to hit what would be deemed a cultural site. So, from that standpoint, there would be possible war-criminal charges that, that he could wind up facing. But beyond that, it would -- it would serve a lot of strategic value to, let's say -- I'm going to just throw this out -- if you were going to take out something like Mecca. Because that is the focal point of Islam and it is thought to be, you know, Allah's favor is on it, and if we were to go ahead and bomb that place, what questions would it put into the mind of Muslims about how powerful Allah is that he could not prevent something like this from taking place?
JOHNSON: Now, actually, that sounds like a possible reason why we may want to consider this as an option.
CALLER: Absolutely.
[...]
JOHNSON: And as I think about this Tom Tancredo story, I think about this, this -- it is experience I had as a youngster where my Dad said, "You take on the bully." And we've all heard this common wisdom before. But in practicality, in reality, the fact is, it can fail miserably. So, if they attack the United States and we go and bomb their holy sites, are we ready for holy hell? Are we ready, ready for the, the, the apocalypse?
[...]
JOHNSON: Tom Tancredo is standing by his comments. Told a group of Iowans that another terrorist attack on the United States by Islamic fundamentalists would mean that the United States, if he were in charge, would attack holy sites in Mecca and Medina.
[...]
CALLER: The reason he said it was OK to do that is because if the terrorists are there hiding behind the skirts of the women in the mosque, then of course you go in to do that, because of his belief that the mosques are a harboring place for terrorists.
JOHNSON: Well, I definitely agree with that part, and I want to continue the conversation on the other side. Hold on. Let's get to the news. Russ Johnson, KVOR.
—J.S.W.
to listen to this audio clip
Comments (8) Show
1 - 8 |
I can't believe people can say such as a horrible and racist remark and no is condeming him for it. If he made the same remark about another religious group of people, he would of been forced to step down.
Let me get this straight. I thought honorary Colonel Tancredoo of the Loonies Border Militia said the "generals on the ground" should make strategic decisions regarding the bombing of Mecca, not a bunch of Republican fixtures in Congress. (Wasn't the Colonel supposed to quit after 3 terms?) If Al Qeada were to successfully plant a listening devise on the White House toilets and the tapes were made public, would'nt that send a powerful message that W. is not the prodigal son but just another ahole.
THIS is what they got to replace Joseph Michelli???? Is that racist pinhead Ed Bircham making the programming decisions at KVOR now, under the threat of pulling his advertising?
Taj Ashaheed wrote a great piece on this for the News:
"Among Muslims, Tancredo an old joke" August 9, 2007
[link to blogs.rockymountainnews.com] was just starting to yawn as I heard the news of Rep. Tom Tancredo's regurgitation of his threat of retaliatory bombing of Mecca and Medina, and, to be honest, the news didn't stop me from completing it..."
I heard this Taj Ashaheed the other day on Jay Marvin (who somehow avoids any scrutiny from CMM despite the tripe he regularly dispenses - so much for objectivity). Mr Ashaheed contends that public funds should be used to install footbaths in restrooms on college campuses for the purpose of Muslim prayer, (this topic no doubt stems from the contraversy over the same issue at the University of Michigan Dearborn campus).
Tacncredo did not say "LET'S BOMB MECCA!" He merely stated that this issue could be considerd as a possible deterrent effect if indeed jihadists leave several of our cities smoldering from nuclear attacks. If the Soviets had nuked us during the cold war should we have refrained from retaliating simply because a lot of innocent Russian civilians who had nothing to do with the government would have been killed as well? Remember, these guys do not fear death, in fact they welcome the chance to be with their 72 virgins. The only possible deterrent effect might be the destruction of the center of the one thing they hold dear, their religion. Lets hope it never comes to that!
Here is an interesting scenario. What if the Provisional Irish Republican Army were to execute a terrorist attack on the United States? Not likely, but what if? Would Congressman Tancredo call for a strike on their most holy site? The Vatican? While Rep. Tancredo has denied that he is a Catholic (he was raised in a Catholic home), would he advocate this response? Food for thought.
MFIET is right. Commando Tommy didn't say "lets bomb Mecca". He said "lets bomb Mecca and Medina". Lets get those "footbaths" installed and some mouth wash for Tommy.
Ok, folks, lets get something straight. This conversation DOES NOT express racisim! Maybe, probably, a lack of ethics and bad judgement, but not racisim. I don't understand, and maybe someone can explain it to me... What "race" is Muslim? What "race" is Jewish? I was under the (obvously mistaken) impression that they were religions and cultures, not races. And, if you can successfully explain what "race" they are, why is it not racism when you bash the Catholics, Baptists, etc.? I am sooooo sick of hearing that if you are aginst somthing, you are imidately called a "racist"! For example, if you are against illegal immigration, you are a racist. Exactly what race is an "illegal immigrant"? I thought there were all kinds of illegal immigrants. If you are against Affirmative Action, you are a "racist". What about if you are against "white people"? Are you a "racist"? If not, why not? I don't recall there being a "no minority can be" clause in the definition for the word "racist".
So, knock off the name calling, and discuss the topic with thought and reason, not name-calling and "shut-up" tactics.
1 - 20 |