View Single Post
  #24  
Old 08-04-2007, 12:51 PM
adios adios is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,132
Default Re: Tancredo: Threaten to Bomb Muslim Holy Sites in Retaliation

[ QUOTE ]
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...irst/#comments

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

“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.”

----------

I'm obviously no fan of Ron Paul, but recall that Republican leaders around the country called for him to be barred from debates for suggesting American foreign policy influenced or motivated the 9/11 terrorists (something that almost everyone who isn't a right-wing nut job agrees is a legitimate possibility).

We can only wait and see if Tancredo, who has made this "warning" numerous times in the past, will receive similar treatment from Republican leadership (for what we should all agree is nothing more than sheer barbarism).

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe it's not only Ron Paul's comments in the debates but other things as well like the charges of racism levied against him. Tancredo has been accused of racism as well but at least he showed up at a recent NAACP convention. He was the only GOP candidate to show up btw.

Tancredo gets standing ovation from NAACP for showing up


Tancredo seems to wield more political power in Congress than Paul does IMO which may be another contributing factor. Guliani used Paul as his tool for promoting his anti-terrorist ideas in his campaign.

No doubt though that as ideas for rational discussion, Paul's ideas on jihadist terrorism are amenable to rational discussion while Tancredo's way, way out there somewhere.

Haven't watched the debates at all. Guliani's diatribe against Paul was played so many times in the media I couln't help but be aware of it.
Reply With Quote