Report: Muslim cleric invited to pray over fallen SEALs damns them during service

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Seal Team 6 is huge. It's so much more than just the ones that got Bin Laden. None of the members on the helicopter were on that raid. Seal Team 6 (DEVGRU) is made up of four shooter squadrons, a recon squadron, and a boats squadron. The four shooter squadrons are broken down into troops, which are broken down into the teams that are mentioned.

reply to post by SeenMyShare


What kind of world do we live in... where people overreact to such a degree where the Times can put out 2 paragraphs of such an important story with just enough generalizations and zero reporting to get people all on the Islam nonsense... Fundamentalist Islam is just as crazy as fundamentalist Christians throwing bombs in abortion clinics.

You religious types keep thinking that Jesus is somehow fundamentally different from Mohammad, and you can watch this world turn into a anthropocentric-fireball because both had the same message.

And even if Obama is a Muslim and he just lied about it, hes a politician first. You don't like him you can vote for the other evil in the next election that will do exactly the same # he has... You have to think about these things otherwise you are going to let those that run a few paragraphs in an online paper set YOUR agenda for your thinking. And I can say honestly there are more important things to think of than that.

reply to post by On the level


They may be the most barbaric at this time but christians are the most barbaric and vicious of ALL time. Just look up their history. To me both religion are disgusting aberrations that only exist to give some confort and raison d'être to its partisans. Hypocrisy at its best.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Seal Team 6 is huge. It's so much more than just the ones that got Bin Laden. None of the members on the helicopter were on that raid. Seal Team 6 (DEVGRU) is made up of four shooter squadrons, a recon squadron, and a boats squadron. The four shooter squadrons are broken down into troops, which are broken down into the teams that are mentioned.

Apparently, some people feel the President released information he should not have, and that it endangered the lives of all Seal Team Six unit members.

www.foxnews.com...

During the event organized by a group called Freedom Watch, family members and former military personnel claimed President Obama turned the SEALs group into a Taliban target after the administration revealed they had conducted the bin Laden raid.

Some people defend this Prez no matter what.

reply to post by _damon

They may be the most barbaric at this time but christians are the most barbaric and vicious of ALL time. Just look up their history. To me both religion are disgusting aberrations

Wait till you find out how many people the secular Communists murdered directly or indirectly.

In the introduction, editor Stéphane Courtois states that "...Communist regimes... turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government"[5]. He claims that a death toll totals 94 million[6].

en.wikipedia.org...


And that's not even counting those who were murdered by the Nazi Totalitarian regime.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Wow, first I'm an apologist for wanting to know the truth, now I'm defending Obama because I don't buy the assassination theory for why the Seals died.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Wow, first I'm an apologist for wanting to know the truth, now I'm defending Obama because I don't buy the assassination theory for why the Seals died.

Wanting to know the truth is not being apologist. But there are many people who are apologists for this President.

Meantime, I posted what I observed in the blogosphere from a fairly casual search of the topic. People believe that he put people's lives in danger by revealing the name of the Unit. Is that such a difficult concept?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


People can believe that all they want, but even without Obama saying anything about who it was, I had it narrowed down to one of three units. If I could do that that quickly, without having any inside sources, then just about anyone with knowledge of SOF units could have done it. This raid was very specialized, and could only have been pulled off by a very small handful of units.

Regardless of if he said anything or not, it would have been difficult to know exactly who was on the helicopter, other than a US military unit.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

People can believe that all they want, but even without Obama saying anything about who it was, I had it narrowed down to one of three units. If I could do that that quickly, without having any inside sources, then just about anyone with knowledge of SOF units could have done it. This raid was very specialized, and could only have been pulled off by a very small handful of units.

Regardless of if he said anything or not, it would have been difficult to know exactly who was on the helicopter, other than a US military unit.

ok sounds logical.

Seal Team 6 guy disagreed

“Aaron called me and said, ‘Mom, you need to wipe your social media clean of any reference to me or any of my buddies. Just disconnect completely,’” Karen Vaughn said her son warned after Vice President Biden publicly identified the SEALs on May 3, 2011 — two days after the raid. “He [Aaron] actually said to me, ‘Mom, there’s chatter, and all of our lives could be in danger, including yours’ … then I realized all of those families, you know, you’re talking about a community of around three hundred families who were all of a sudden made targets by this administration.”

www.foxnews.com...

just sayin....you're right, people have a right to believe what they want.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Have you actually read the proper translation, or did you skip to the end of the thread to post?
Because none of the proper translations posted have had anything to do with denouncing the dead.

Your arguments lose a lot of their impact when you're talking about something that didn't happen.

reply to post by MaxSteiner


What is a proper translation? I read the two which were provided by the Blaze article someone posted. Then I read the partial translation of someone here.

Is there another "proper" translation you know of?

talking about something that didn't happen.

ok what didn't happen?

I am currently viewing video of the press conference, where the father of one of the fallen soldiers takes to task the administration and military brass for the rules of engagement. The families of the fallen soldiers have a list of several complaints, and the nutty rules of engagement is one of them and cited as being part of the reason the helicopter was shot down. Another one is outdated military equipment.

Michael Savage also took this administration to task on the rules of engagement in his book, "Trickle Up Poverty".

Of course Savage is not the only one to report on the stupid ways Obama is trying to fight a war

www.breitbart.com...

Allen West was reportedly in the audience of the press conference, along with some other military experts.

If It hasn't happened already I am calling early BS on this report and while I am not into any sky god religion the opposite might be true,then again this is one of Rupert's publications basically FOX news in print.

reply to post by Spider879


Young Turks? He's claiming that a woman was "cleansed" from the military just for being a muslim(not for proselytizing or sharing her faith). If that is the case, then why wasn't the Ft Hood shooter "cleansed" for being muslim?

You're right this report is bs from Young Turks. I wouldn't expect anything less from him.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Spider879

 

Young Turks? He's claiming that a woman was "cleansed" from the military just for being a muslim(not for proselytizing or sharing her faith). If that is the case, then why wasn't the Ft Hood shooter "cleansed" for being muslim?

You're right this report is bs from Young Turks. I wouldn't expect anything less from him.

edit on 11-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

She is not a Muslim she is a Catholic she have a Muslim sounding name but keep going with faux news they are fair and balanced as always..

reply to post by SeenMyShare



Well done!

YOU have either become a pawn or are in cahoots with the ones who have put this together.

Think why?

Only to build hatred, mistrust and anger.

People who in a state like this cant think straight or objectively and can be easily manipulated.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by Battleline

 

Muslims want to install sharia law in every country in the world and if you don't agree then you will be enslaved or killed.

Well, the Muslims also believe that America wants to invade every muslim country and install western democracy and establish military bases. They also believe that if they disagree, they will be shot or bombed by the invading western forces.

edit on 10-5-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

Well then I guess two wrongs make the insanity right in your way of thinking.

If what you say is true then why is this administration giving money and arm's to Egypt and the same to Saudi Arabia, it would also seem we are about to free Syria once again to the benefit of the Muslim Brotherhood so It would seem that some Muslims like us for the fools we can be.

So who are THEY that think if they disagree THEY will be shot or bombed????

Originally posted by Battleline

The fact you say your not a very nice guy and you have references for that makes me feel you are also full of your self and nothing I say will matter, you will always have another redundant comment.

Oddly, I get the same feeling about you. It appears that your mind is made up in the matter, and at this stage you don't want to be confused by facts. I'll leave you to it, then. It's not my job to force you to not live in fear of what you do not know.

I don't need to tell you who I am talking about, again you answered that in your last statement. Muslims want to install sharia law in every country in the world and if you don't agree then you will be enslaved or killed. I'm sure if you have read the Qur'an you can reference that.

Well, my last statement was concerning "they", and specified that there were also a number of Christians included in that "they". How odd that you fail to mention them, and yet continue to hammer at the Muslims. You seem to not be very well acquainted with many Muslims, going by your statements here, and so appear to be guided by an abject fear of the unknown. What you are claiming here is nothing more than a stock fear-mongering charge, probably taken from somewhere on the internet, that is being spread around to foster that fear of the unknown in the unknowing.

I have actually been told by "A" Muslim that he wanted me dead (but the context for that is irrelevant, and I won't tell you why), have you ever been told that, face to face? I did not start living in fear of ALL Muslims because of that, yet you seem to have done exactly that, even in the ABSENCE of such immediate threat. In spite of that threat, I've had more ACTUAL trouble out of Christians than I have Muslims, in spite of all the fear people have tried to throw on me concerning Muslims.

I've actually had the "do you want sharia law in the US?" discussion with a number of Muslims face to face - have you? It doesn't sound like it. it sounds more like you are getting your talking points from internet fear mongering sites.

Yes, I've read the Qur'an. No, I can't reference what you claim without taking isolated words out of context and changing their meaning. There is a historical context, which you seem unaware of.

You don't have to buy into anything I say, research it with an open mind, if you chose not to believe it then that is your choice.

Sound advice! I sometimes wonder if you hear what you yourself say.

sometimes the way a person says something says it all and further debate is useless, you just have to agree to disagree.

Agreed.

there are no moderate Muslims, just those that don't understand the implications of there own religion..............point being Muslims people that don't join the jihad when the radicals tell them to will be shown no mercy..........I know Muslim people and they worry a lot more then I do about the future.

I dislike the phrase "moderate Muslims", but sometimes use it myself to get a point across to people who understand nothing else. I don't believe there is such a thing, there are only "Muslims" and "people who want you to THINK they are Muslims" in the Islamic camp. Let's take the Muslim Brotherhood as an example - they build the world "Muslim" right into their organizational title, to mislead people into thinking they are a religious organization, when they are in all reality a political one. Using your religion to achieve political goals would appear to disqualify it as a real religion - some Christians do that, too, in spite of the prohibition that Jesus himself placed upon such activity - "render unto Caesar the things belonging to Caesar, and unto God those things which belong to God".

My point here is that just because someone tells you they are something, that doesn't mean they really ARE. Some times, it's just a case of wolves in sheep clothing. If you want to know what they really are, look to see what fruit they bear. That is Christianity 101, so often forgotten by alleged Christians. Muslims are no different - ANY tree can be identified by the fruit it bears. If it bears political fruit, it's not a religious tree.

If you actually DO know any Muslims who fear for the future as you claim, ask THEM what the difference is between themselves and, for example, Wahabbis. Once you know the difference, you will hopefully be less likely to lump them all into the same basket.

reply to post by Battleline

If what you say is true then why is this administration giving money and arm's to Egypt and the same to Saudi Arabia, it would also seem we are about to free Syria once again to the benefit of the Muslim Brotherhood....

I was just giving you a perspective. To the middle east, the Americans and its allies are the biggest terrorists they've known.

And if what you said about Muslims wanting to install Shariah in every country is true.... why is it that we have Muslim countries living alongside minority populations of Jews or Christians... WITHOUT forcefully converting them to Islam or forcing them to obey Shariah?

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by nenothtu
If I answer "yes" to any of the above (because I honestly can answer yes to some of it), are we going to try and raise the bar again, and keep doing that until we finally reach impossible qualifications?

I might ask the same of you - are you any of those things? If not, is there some particular reason we should accept your interpretation over that of a Muslim who lives the religion?

I didn't offer an interpretation or translation of the verse.

I did question the reliability of a translation by someone with a dog in the race.

Well then, this is where the debate ends, before it goes off into uncharted and angry territory. It's more than just a matter of implying that I or my wife are agenda-driven liars, in spite of the fact that there are several hundred million people all around the planet who can check the veracity of the translations. It's the fact that you are pushing a particular interpretation of Islam against all available facts, and using manipulated statistical data to support an otherwise insupportable argument.

This is where that debate ends.

My wife says "To you be your religion and to me mine. Go in peace."

I really can't add much more to that.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by MaxSteiner

 

What is a proper translation? I read the two which were provided by the Blaze article someone posted. Then I read the partial translation of someone here.

Is there another "proper" translation you know of?

There are several translations available on the internet. I'm not finding any so far that agree with the one presented in the blogosphere, EXCEPT the ones found in the blogosphere. They all seems to agree fairly well with one another, and to be at radical odds with the ones in the independent sources or the ones in the Islamic sources.

What the cleric recited, which seems to be the bone of contention, was verses 59:20 and 59:21 of the Qur'an. What appears to have been presented by the lawyer to the families as a "translation of what the cleric said" was actually a translation of those verses, BUT with the inclusion of Wahabbist exegetical material, not found in the Qur'an, and not actually recited by the cleric. It appears to me that the non-Qur'anic, exegetical material was interspersed within the actual verses with intent to mislead and stir contention. In other words, they salted Wahabbist opinion into the actual verses of the Qur'an, then made the claim that the cleric SPOKE THOSE WORDS, when he did not.

In order to get a "proper translation", all you have to do is go to any Qur'an translation online and search for verses 59:20 and 59:21. You would have to go to an Arabic speaker and have them listen to what the cleric said in order to confirm that he was actually doing what clerics do, reciting the Qur'an verbatim, rather than including the exegesis. Of course, for that to work, you would have to trust the Arabic speaker, which is a quality that seems to be in short supply in this thread. It does no good to do it if one goes into it with the preconceived notion that the Arabic speaker is going to lie about the translation. if you have already determined not to trust the Arab because they might be a Muslim with an agenda, there is really no point in asking them to listen.

Of course, if you feel you can't trust the Muslim because they are a Muslim, then you are doomed to be led around by the nose and believe what you are being told to believe by people who DON'T speak Arabic, but who DO have an agenda.

If I have a question about mechanical engineering, I go to a mechanical engineer, not a used car salesman. I do not go in assuming that I can't trust the mechanical engineer to know his subject.

If I have a question about botany, I go to a botanist, not a washing machine repairman. I do not go in assuming I cannot trust the botanist to know his subject.

Likewise, if I have a question about Islam, I go to a Muslim, not a lawyer. I do not go in assuming I cannot trust the Muslim to know his subject.