The disturbing view of Muslims in the US

[Slyhunter]

Are you saying Amal Clooney is responsible for other Muslims....

Are you white... Are you responsible for other White people... What every religion or atheist, are you responsible for others apart of your faith...

Nope, you just generalise and say all muslims are bad because there is a few bad muslims...

REMEMBER THE WESTERN WORLD STARTED INTERFERING WITH THE MIDDLE EAST FIRST....

Did we?

When was the first 'Interference'?

And please... be as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

I believe it was the brits and their attempts to spread christianity.
Before that it was the Romans.

LOL!

I see... and what year was that? Just put a pin in it for me.

Want me to jump through a hoop burning in flames too or can you figure it out for yourself?

You've been inflames since ya advanced that nonsense.

Islam is built entirely, solely, utterly and exclusively upon WAR. No War... No islam.

Since the 2nd Decade of the Existence of Islam, Islam has been murdering innocents as a means to acquire political power... and spent 700 years raiding, murdering and raping its way across North Africa, the Mediterranean, across southern Europe eventually causing what is otherwise known as the Dark Ages... as Islam shut down the means of Europe to access the International Trade routes... and sending such into the darkness intrinsic to the common siege.

ok, you're right, you won.

 

[CowboyTed]

Muslims, like blacks, are responsible for the image the US has of them.
Not to say that's justified in all cases but that is reality.

Well that's the racist bigot view....

Can you tell me how Amal Cooney (George Clooney's wife) the Human Rights lawyer is responsible for what is going on in the Middle East.

But hey you christian are the same as Fred Phelps and Jim Jones... You must be a piece of scum... Generalising is great...

Explain to me how Muslims are not responsible for the image they put forth.

And I'm not a Christian.

Are you saying Amal Clooney is responsible for other Muslims....

Are you white... Are you responsible for other White people... What every religion or atheist, are you responsible for others apart of your faith...

Nope, you just generalise and say all muslims are bad because there is a few bad muslims...

REMEMBER THE WESTERN WORLD STARTED INTERFERING WITH THE MIDDLE EAST FIRST....

Did we?

When was the first 'Interference'?

And please... be as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

Who supported and sold arms to the Shah and propted up he evil regime?

Who has Millitary bases in Saudi Arabia keeping a dictator protected...

 

[Flopper]

If you look at what ISIS is doing, they are killing the faithful along with the not so faithful and the infidels. Essential anyone who is not a supporter is their enemy.

The Organization Of Islamic Cooperation which represents 1.4 billion Muslims in 57 nations say, The Islamic State Has "Nothing To Do With Islam," Has Committed Crimes "That Cannot Be Tolerated."

Al-Azhar, the Grand Mufti Shawqi Allam, Egypt's highest religious authority: "Islamic State Is Corrupt And A Danger To Islam."

Arab League: "Strongly Denounced" The "Crimes Against Humanity" Carried Out By The Islamic State.

Turkey's Top Cleric: Islamic State's Threats Are "Hugely Damaging," "Truly Awful."

CAIR Repeatedly Condemned The Islamic State As "Un-Islamic And Morally Repugnant."

The Muslim Council Of Great Britain: "Violence Has No Place In Religion."

The Islamic Society of North America: The Islamic State's Actions "Are To Be Denounced And Are In No Way Representative Of What Islam Actually Teaches."

100 Sunni And Shiite U.K. Imams: The Islamic State Is An "Illegitimate, Vicious Group."

Saudi Arabia's Highest Religious Authority: Terrorists Like The Islamic State Is The "Number One Enemy Of Islam."

Muslim Public Affairs Council: Condemned The Islamic State And Called For "Stand Against Extremism."

Muslim Leaders Have Roundly Denounced Islamic State, But Conservative Media Won't Tell You That

that's all great but its just talk. no action.

Talk is about all religious leaders can do. Islam like Christianity is compose of a number secs (denominations). which have different interpretations of the Quran. Within the sects their are branches, some being strict fundamentalist others more secular. Just as the beliefs of Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses vary so do the beliefs of various branches of Islam.

ISIS and Al Qaeda are sects of Islam, they have certainly done more than just talk.

My point is that the "normal" muslims that you quoted have done nothing th stop the radicals except talk. That makes me question their credibility.

Muslims just like Christians, and Jews, have jobs, families, and participate in activities that have nothing to do with their religion. There are some that are religious zealots and their are some that don't event practice their religion. They do exactly what you do, talk. Like you, they aren't fighting ISIS in Syria, or joining anti-terrorist groups because it has nothing to do with them and their lives.

I am talking about Muslim leaders, not the guy who owns the convenience store around the corner.

The guy that owns the convince store, sells rugs, or drives a taxi constitute about 99.99% of all Muslims.

I assume by leaders you mean those that can actually take direct action to fight ISIS. The fact is that almost all the fighters that are engaging ISIS are Iraqis, Kurds, Syrians, and Iranians, nearly all Muslims. Air and logistical support and training has been provided by Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon in addition to the United States, Britain, France, Canada, and Australia. Also in July the Iranian ambassador announced that Iran would issue a blank check to fight ISIS.

Most of the deaths due to Islamic terrorism are Muslims. Al-Qaida has killed 8 times as many Muslims as non-Muslims. Muslims suffered between 82 and 97 percent of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years. And since 911, there has not been a single civilian in the US killed in an Islamic terrorist attack. ISIS, Al-Qaida, and other Islamic terrorist organization are a danger to everyone, but those in most danger are Muslims.

Iran Offered Iraq 'Open Check' in ISIS Fight, Official Says
Military intervention against ISIL - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.nctc.gov/docs/2011_NCTC_Annual_Report_Final.pdf

 

[Pogo]

Muslim countries are taking few if any Muslim refugees. Don't lay this all at our feet.

Do you not see how fallacious that is? Look around this board for how many of your ilk are wailing about
"taking" Mexicans, or even deporting them. Those are Christians, are they not?

Why the fuck would some country take or not take refugees on the basis of what their religion is?

Then there's Hungary, getting applauded by the same wags for the same isolationism.

Now think real hard and see if you can figure out what your "Muslim countries", whoever they may be, and Hungary --- might have in common.

 

[Coyote]

What's life like in Muslim countries?

What's the point here?

I don't like Islam. I also don't like Christianity. Doesn't mean I wouldn't stand up for people from both religions to have freedoms, rights, and the chance to just get on with their life.

Muslim countries are taking few if any Muslim refugees. Don't lay this all at our feet.

Really?

Turkey: 1.9 million
Lebanon: 1.1 million
Jordan: 629,000
Iraq: 249,000
Egypt: 132,000

Next largest: Germany, 98,000....

 

[Pogo]

What I'm waiting for are the Muslim leaders in high positions around the world to come out and denounce terrorist attacks AND groups like ISIS.

The thing is, when you're going as they do so you tend not to hear them. And if your usual sources are Pam Geller and JizzHandWash, well they're gonna be filtered out.

But by all means feel free to link a negative.

And it'll have to make all those statements in post 257 go away.

Say what you want about Catholics, Jews, Protestants, etc., but if a terrorist group that associated themselves with the Catholic church did an attack like the Boston Marathon-the pope would IMMEDIATELY denounce it.

Bullshittio. Why would he do that? It would make for a very busy day.

Eric Rudolph bombed the Olympics, bombed an abortion clinic, killed a guard, maimed a nurse and bombed a lesbian bar. And then he lived as a fugitive here (near me).

Eric Rudolph is a Catholic. Were you part of the outcry against "Catholic extremism"? Were you out here calling for the Pope to denounce Eric Rudolph?

No, didn't think so.

The fact that some element does something and is simultaneously affiliated with Group X --- DOES NOT MAKE GROUP X THE PERPETRATOR.

It's funny how the left bashes the GOP for not wanting women to have equal rights, yet it's wrong to say that many Muslim countries are barbaric for the way they treat women in their culture? I think being stoned for cheating on your husband, not being able to get an education/vote, not choosing who you can marry, etc. is worse than not getting paid the same amount of money (which btw I do think is wrong).

All that is fucked up.
But they're also aspects of culture. You don't find the same social hierarchy bullshit going on in, say Saudi Arabia and Tunisia. Yet they're both also Muslim.

Again -- plug that into the bold sentence above, then look around and see where you are.

Composition Fallacy

This really really really ain't rocket surgery.

Did he do it in the name of Catholicism? Was he a part of a well organized group?

He certainly did so in the name of his religious views, yes. And I'd say the Catholic Church is a fairly well organized group, yes again.

That's not the point. All this accomplishes is to continue your own fallacy. The point would be that he didn't go out and take a vote of all the Catholics in the world as a massive plebiscite to give himself permission -- nor did they tell him to do it -- nor did he seek the approval or advice of the Church hierarchy -- nor did THEY tell him to do it.

That's why we call BOTH of these bogus arguments "Composition Fallacies". As we've pointed out about 634 times.

Again --- guess I should post this over and over until the day it sinks in --- if a drunk gets into a Toyota and runs someody over ..... that does not mean Toyota did it.

SMFH

edit: When you have to cite Saudi Arabia as an example of a high morality...you know your argument is weak.

Ummm... the "high morality in that analogy is Tunisia there, Sparky. Another point sails over another head.

 

[Pop23]

What's life like in Muslim countries?

What's the point here?

I don't like Islam. I also don't like Christianity. Doesn't mean I wouldn't stand up for people from both religions to have freedoms, rights, and the chance to just get on with their life.

Muslim countries are taking few if any Muslim refugees. Don't lay this all at our feet.

Really?

Turkey: 1.9 million
Lebanon: 1.1 million
Jordan: 629,000
Iraq: 249,000
Egypt: 132,000

Next largest: Germany, 98,000....

Now the numbers for the uber rich Muslim nations.

How many more "immigrants" can our wallets support?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Who supported and sold arms to the Shah and propted up he evil regime?

ROFL... there was nothing evil about the Shah.

He crushed Leftist and Islamic uprisings. As we saw in the wake of his departure, there is no downside to crushing that evil. The only potential downside is in allowing it to fester, as we are witnessing, today.

 

[Redfish]

Who supported and sold arms to the Shah and propted up he evil regime?

ROFL... there was nothing evil about the Shah.

He crushed Leftist and Islamic uprisings. As we saw in the wake of his departure, there is no downside to crushing that evil. The only potential downside is in allowing it to fester, as we are witnessing, today.

Correct, Iran under the Shah was a modern successful country that was using its oil resources to better the lives of its people. Then the radical element of islam took over and it reverted to a 17th century shithole.

 

[Redfish]

What I'm waiting for are the Muslim leaders in high positions around the world to come out and denounce terrorist attacks AND groups like ISIS.

The thing is, when you're going as they do so you tend not to hear them. And if your usual sources are Pam Geller and JizzHandWash, well they're gonna be filtered out.

But by all means feel free to link a negative.

And it'll have to make all those statements in post 257 go away.

Say what you want about Catholics, Jews, Protestants, etc., but if a terrorist group that associated themselves with the Catholic church did an attack like the Boston Marathon-the pope would IMMEDIATELY denounce it.

Bullshittio. Why would he do that? It would make for a very busy day.

Eric Rudolph bombed the Olympics, bombed an abortion clinic, killed a guard, maimed a nurse and bombed a lesbian bar. And then he lived as a fugitive here (near me).

Eric Rudolph is a Catholic. Were you part of the outcry against "Catholic extremism"? Were you out here calling for the Pope to denounce Eric Rudolph?

No, didn't think so.

The fact that some element does something and is simultaneously affiliated with Group X --- DOES NOT MAKE GROUP X THE PERPETRATOR.

It's funny how the left bashes the GOP for not wanting women to have equal rights, yet it's wrong to say that many Muslim countries are barbaric for the way they treat women in their culture? I think being stoned for cheating on your husband, not being able to get an education/vote, not choosing who you can marry, etc. is worse than not getting paid the same amount of money (which btw I do think is wrong).

All that is fucked up.
But they're also aspects of culture. You don't find the same social hierarchy bullshit going on in, say Saudi Arabia and Tunisia. Yet they're both also Muslim.

Again -- plug that into the bold sentence above, then look around and see where you are.

Composition Fallacy

This really really really ain't rocket surgery.

Did he do it in the name of Catholicism? Was he a part of a well organized group?

He certainly did so in the name of his religious views, yes. And I'd say the Catholic Church is a fairly well organized group, yes again.

That's not the point. All this accomplishes is to continue your own fallacy. The point would be that he didn't go out and take a vote of all the Catholics in the world as a massive plebiscite to give himself permission -- nor did they tell him to do it -- nor did he seek the approval or advice of the Church hierarchy -- nor did THEY tell him to do it.

That's why we call BOTH of these bogus arguments "Composition Fallacies". As we've pointed out about 634 times.

Again --- guess I should post this over and over until the day it sinks in --- if a drunk gets into a Toyota and runs someody over ..... that does not mean Toyota did it.

SMFH

edit: When you have to cite Saudi Arabia as an example of a high morality...you know your argument is weak.

Ummm... the "high morality in that analogy is Tunisia there, Sparky. Another point sails over another head.

when a radical muslim terrorist screams "allah hu akbar" just before blowing up innocent people, is he doing it in the name of his religion? yes or no.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

--- guess I should post this over and over until the day it sinks in --- if the product of Left-think grabs a gun and shoots someody ..... that does not mean The Gun did it.

SMFH

Again --- guess I should post this over and over until the day it sinks in --- if a drunk gets into a Toyota and runs someody over ..... that does not mean Toyota did it.

SMFH

Both are valid... but the above cited would-be 'contributor', only believes that the second is true.

ROFLMNAO! True story...

 

[frigidweirdo]

What did BUSH do to cause this image? Not all Muslims are terrorist but damn near all terrorists are Muslim, today.

Consider Obama's drone program against brown Muslims, does he get a bit of responisbility.

The left wing whined that after 9/11 there would be riots and persecution of Muslims, never happened. Even after the Boston bombing very little. The left did inflate the ground zero Mosque BS into a racist thing but that is just what liberals do.

The image Muslims have is well earned and them really doing very little about those Muslims who preach hate only adds to the image.

Yeah, many terrorists are Muslims. Hardly surprising really. There are lots of Muslim places that have suffered from invasions from the west. If it were Americans fighting back, you'd say they have balls, but Muslims fight back and... oh, they're just bad. It's all how you want to perceive something really.

Obama is president of the US. He takes responsibility for what has happened, however he didn't start the whole thing and her certainly didn't escalate things like Bush did.

And then you go and expect Muslims to be in the news every day condemning every Muslim terrorist act, but Christians don't have to excuse all the crap that Bush pulled huh?

Osama was unhappy that there were American soldiers in Saudi Arabia to PROTECT them from an invasion, that was one of his big "reasons" for his terrorism.

Afghanistan was invaded from the North by the East. They suffered oppression and genocide and their only friends were the Evul West, especially Reagan.

How did they repay US?

Bin Laden probably hated the US and the west for many reasons, it's not hard to find reasons for Arabs to hate the west to be honest. US troops in Saudi Arabia was probably just irritating, and he was irritated because of what had happened before.

Afghanistan turned to the US because they knew the US would help them because their enemy was the same as the US's enemy. For the US to think that the Mujaheddin would be in any way grateful, is rather naive.

 

[Misty]

Muslims, like blacks, are responsible for the image the US has of them.
Not to say that's justified in all cases but that is reality.

Firstly. Your point.

Muslims are responsible for the image the US has of them. Yes, in part this is true. However not ALL MUSLIMS are responsible for this. Some Muslims are. Why should ALL Muslims be responsible for this image that some have made.

Secondly, Bush helped to make this image, he helped to spread this image.

The United States has had problems with Muslims since Thomas Jefferson. It's not a new thing.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Muslims, like blacks, are responsible for the image the US has of them.
Not to say that's justified in all cases but that is reality.

Firstly. Your point.

Muslims are responsible for the image the US has of them. Yes, in part this is true. However not ALL MUSLIMS are responsible for this. Some Muslims are. Why should ALL Muslims be responsible for this image that some have made.

Secondly, Bush helped to make this image, he helped to spread this image.

The United States has had problems with Muslims since Thomas Jefferson. It's not a new thing.

And Muslims have had problems with the west since the west (mostly Britain and France) invaded Africa, India and many other places. No, wait, since the Crusades when Christians marched across (or sailed to) the Middle East and fought people like Saladin.

What's your point?

 

[frigidweirdo]

If you look at what ISIS is doing, they are killing the faithful along with the not so faithful and the infidels. Essential anyone who is not a supporter is their enemy.

The Organization Of Islamic Cooperation which represents 1.4 billion Muslims in 57 nations say, The Islamic State Has "Nothing To Do With Islam," Has Committed Crimes "That Cannot Be Tolerated."

Al-Azhar, the Grand Mufti Shawqi Allam, Egypt's highest religious authority: "Islamic State Is Corrupt And A Danger To Islam."

Arab League: "Strongly Denounced" The "Crimes Against Humanity" Carried Out By The Islamic State.

Turkey's Top Cleric: Islamic State's Threats Are "Hugely Damaging," "Truly Awful."

CAIR Repeatedly Condemned The Islamic State As "Un-Islamic And Morally Repugnant."

The Muslim Council Of Great Britain: "Violence Has No Place In Religion."

The Islamic Society of North America: The Islamic State's Actions "Are To Be Denounced And Are In No Way Representative Of What Islam Actually Teaches."

100 Sunni And Shiite U.K. Imams: The Islamic State Is An "Illegitimate, Vicious Group."

Saudi Arabia's Highest Religious Authority: Terrorists Like The Islamic State Is The "Number One Enemy Of Islam."

Muslim Public Affairs Council: Condemned The Islamic State And Called For "Stand Against Extremism."

Muslim Leaders Have Roundly Denounced Islamic State, But Conservative Media Won't Tell You That

that's all great but its just talk. no action.

Talk is about all religious leaders can do. Islam like Christianity is compose of a number secs (denominations). which have different interpretations of the Quran. Within the sects their are branches, some being strict fundamentalist others more secular. Just as the beliefs of Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses vary so do the beliefs of various branches of Islam.

ISIS and Al Qaeda are sects of Islam, they have certainly done more than just talk.

My point is that the "normal" muslims that you quoted have done nothing th stop the radicals except talk. That makes me question their credibility.

And what have YOU done to stop them? Nothing? So then we can question your credibility too?

I am not in a position of power or authority over any religious group. So your question is basically---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------stupid

And a peaceful Muslim in say North Dakota is in a position of power to do anything against the nutters in ISIS? I don't.... think.... so.....

So basically your answer is "stupid"....

 

[Misty]

Muslims, like blacks, are responsible for the image the US has of them.
Not to say that's justified in all cases but that is reality.

Firstly. Your point.

Muslims are responsible for the image the US has of them. Yes, in part this is true. However not ALL MUSLIMS are responsible for this. Some Muslims are. Why should ALL Muslims be responsible for this image that some have made.

Secondly, Bush helped to make this image, he helped to spread this image.

The United States has had problems with Muslims since Thomas Jefferson. It's not a new thing.

And Muslims have had problems with the west since the west (mostly Britain and France) invaded Africa, India and many other places. No, wait, since the Crusades when Christians marched across (or sailed to) the Middle East and fought people like Saladin.

What's your point?

Yes and Christians are still vilified for it.

You blamed Bush. My point is this has been going on for centuries.

Except when the pope said he believed in global warming then the left suddenly became Catholics. Lol

 

[Misty]

that's all great but its just talk. no action.

Talk is about all religious leaders can do. Islam like Christianity is compose of a number secs (denominations). which have different interpretations of the Quran. Within the sects their are branches, some being strict fundamentalist others more secular. Just as the beliefs of Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses vary so do the beliefs of various branches of Islam.

ISIS and Al Qaeda are sects of Islam, they have certainly done more than just talk.

My point is that the "normal" muslims that you quoted have done nothing th stop the radicals except talk. That makes me question their credibility.

And what have YOU done to stop them? Nothing? So then we can question your credibility too?

I am not in a position of power or authority over any religious group. So your question is basically---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------stupid

And a peaceful Muslim in say North Dakota is in a position of power to do anything against the nutters in ISIS? I don't.... think.... so.....

So basically your answer is "stupid"....

Did you see the video of the "peaceful" Muslims having a meltdown because the public school wouldn't honor a Muslim holiday? "We will soon out number you" was their chant.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Muslims, like blacks, are responsible for the image the US has of them.
Not to say that's justified in all cases but that is reality.

Firstly. Your point.

Muslims are responsible for the image the US has of them. Yes, in part this is true. However not ALL MUSLIMS are responsible for this. Some Muslims are. Why should ALL Muslims be responsible for this image that some have made.

Secondly, Bush helped to make this image, he helped to spread this image.

The United States has had problems with Muslims since Thomas Jefferson. It's not a new thing.

And Muslims have had problems with the west since the west (mostly Britain and France) invaded Africa, India and many other places. No, wait, since the Crusades when Christians marched across (or sailed to) the Middle East and fought people like Saladin.

What's your point?

Yes and Christians are still vilified for it.

You blamed Bush. My point is this has been going on for centuries.

Except when the pope said he believed in global warming then the left suddenly became Catholics. Lol

I blame Bush for massively intensifying the whole thing. Yes, it's been going on for ages, but the difference between 2000 and 2009 when Bush left office are massive. The view of Muslims is incredibly bad after what Bush did.

As for your Pope comment, what?????

 

[frigidweirdo]

Talk is about all religious leaders can do. Islam like Christianity is compose of a number secs (denominations). which have different interpretations of the Quran. Within the sects their are branches, some being strict fundamentalist others more secular. Just as the beliefs of Unitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses vary so do the beliefs of various branches of Islam.

ISIS and Al Qaeda are sects of Islam, they have certainly done more than just talk.

My point is that the "normal" muslims that you quoted have done nothing th stop the radicals except talk. That makes me question their credibility.

And what have YOU done to stop them? Nothing? So then we can question your credibility too?

I am not in a position of power or authority over any religious group. So your question is basically---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------stupid

And a peaceful Muslim in say North Dakota is in a position of power to do anything against the nutters in ISIS? I don't.... think.... so.....

So basically your answer is "stupid"....

Did you see the video of the "peaceful" Muslims having a meltdown because the public school wouldn't honor a Muslim holiday? "We will soon out number you" was their chant.

Not all Muslims are peaceful, not all Christians are either. So..... what?

 

[Correll]

What did BUSH do to cause this image? Not all Muslims are terrorist but damn near all terrorists are Muslim, today.

Consider Obama's drone program against brown Muslims, does he get a bit of responisbility.

The left wing whined that after 9/11 there would be riots and persecution of Muslims, never happened. Even after the Boston bombing very little. The left did inflate the ground zero Mosque BS into a racist thing but that is just what liberals do.

The image Muslims have is well earned and them really doing very little about those Muslims who preach hate only adds to the image.

Yeah, many terrorists are Muslims. Hardly surprising really. There are lots of Muslim places that have suffered from invasions from the west. If it were Americans fighting back, you'd say they have balls, but Muslims fight back and... oh, they're just bad. It's all how you want to perceive something really.

Obama is president of the US. He takes responsibility for what has happened, however he didn't start the whole thing and her certainly didn't escalate things like Bush did.

And then you go and expect Muslims to be in the news every day condemning every Muslim terrorist act, but Christians don't have to excuse all the crap that Bush pulled huh?

Osama was unhappy that there were American soldiers in Saudi Arabia to PROTECT them from an invasion, that was one of his big "reasons" for his terrorism.

Afghanistan was invaded from the North by the East. They suffered oppression and genocide and their only friends were the Evul West, especially Reagan.

How did they repay US?

Bin Laden probably hated the US and the west for many reasons, it's not hard to find reasons for Arabs to hate the west to be honest. US troops in Saudi Arabia was probably just irritating, and he was irritated because of what had happened before.

Afghanistan turned to the US because they knew the US would help them because their enemy was the same as the US's enemy. For the US to think that the Mujaheddin would be in any way grateful, is rather naive.

You stated invasions was one of the reasons that Muslims are pissed off at the West. I pointed out, correctly that US troops PROTECTING his homeland was one of the issues that Osama was pissed off.

His words.

"(e) Your forces occupy our countries; you spread your military bases throughout them; you corrupt our lands, and you besiege our sanctities, to protect the security of the Jews and to ensure the continuity of your pillage of our treasures."

And again with Afghanistan. We were HELPING them against an Invasion and an Occupation and Genocide. That is hardly cause to hate US, as you suggested with your "invasion" reason.