Monthly Archives: November 2009

Subverting America; recommendations for Islamist Victory

Posted on by
3

Ever since Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR tipped me to their existence Heretics Crusade has been looking at the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association. Masking itself as a “moderate” voice to Congress for “Any Muslim Congressional employee …regardless of their level of participation or the degree that they publicly identify themselves as “Muslim” a quick look behind the curtain of the CMSA shows a face much less diverse than it seems.

The face that I found under the CMSA’s mask is one that shows kinship to the likes of CAIR, the MSA and the Muslim Brotherhood. From executive board members who are far from non-partisan, to sponsored speakers that advocate for an Islamist agenda, the CMSA may be many things; but a truly moderate voice for American Muslims is not among them. When we find that Pres. Obama has been working with them to hand-pick 45 Muslims to work at the White House the CMSA’s barely hidden agenda should be more than alarming.
My last piece about the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association was the beginning of a look at the resources linked to on the CMSA “resource links” page. The CMSA has the usual disclaimer at the top banishing any base suspicions that the information so linked might actually agree with the personal positions of the CMSA or its board. Taking that into account I chose to look at MAJOR REPORTS ON MUSLIMS: DOMESTIC & INTERNATIONAL of which there are only two; one on International Muslims and one on American Muslims. Call me rash but I will assume that since only one report is linked on each subject the CMSA board probably agrees with what those reports have to say.
The first part was an analysis of the executive summery for the report on American Muslims: Strengthening America: The Civic and Political Integration of Muslim Americans(The Chicago Council). In this part I will look at the recommendations the report makes, so put on your crazy glasses and hang on, if this part is anything like the summery it is going to get a bit psychotic.
The recommendations that follow call upon a wide range of institutions and leaders, Muslim and non-Muslim, to assist in speeding the Muslim American journey to full participation.

 Recommendation #1

 Expand and Recognize Muslim American Contributions to National Security

The horror of the September 11 attacks brought Americans together in their common humanity and a sense of purpose in countering the threat of terrorism. Many Muslim Americans shared in this reaction and commitment. A number of prominent Muslim American organizations condemned the attacks of September 11, reached out to help the victims, worked to raise awareness of the Quran’s teachings against violence, and cooperated with law enforcement agencies on antiterrorism efforts. While government officials have credited Muslim Americans for these and subsequent efforts, doubts about the efforts persist. The visibility and effectiveness of the Muslim American response to September 11 was limited in part by the lack of institutional capacity and recognizable voices in the community.

 It remains critical that Muslim Americans take more active steps to counter the threat of terror and that the government work more effectively to build trust and partnerships with the Muslim American community.

 Disavowing terrorism

 Many Muslim Americans have taken positive steps to denounce terrorism and differentiate their traditions from the beliefs of radical groups. It is crucial that they continue to focus on these positive steps as the danger of terrorism persists. While Muslim Americans question the fairness of holding all Muslim Americans responsible for constantly condemning the actions of a few extremists, the reality is that in the eyes of much of American society, the burden is still on Muslim Americans to respond. Muslim American leaders and organizations can amplify their condemnations of extremism and terrorist acts, strengthen their efforts to prevent radical activity within the Muslim American community, and find more effective ways to communicate these endeavors to the media and the public.

Expanding contributions to homeland security

 Successful partnerships between Muslim Americans and local law enforcement such as Southern California’s Muslim-American Homeland Security Congress should be expanded. A national network of such partnerships could play a vital role in the early detection of potential threats. Programs like the Muslim Public Affairs Council’s “National Grassroots Campaign to Fight Terrorism” can be extended to all U.S. mosques. Muslim leaders can do more to encourage young Muslim Americans to seek employment with the U.S. government and could work with relevant government agencies to create internships.

So far so good it seems. But the last couple sentences wrap a lot of taqqiya into a small space. This recommendation fails to mention that the majority of mosques are disseminating Islamist literature, instead it places the blame on Americans for expecting Muslims to be “constantly condemning the actions of a few extremists” and conflates “realty” with “in the eyes of much of American society“. A silent majority of “moderates” pretending that most of their mosques don’t spread hate and blaming society for expecting them to root out the “extremists” wholeheartedly becomes mainly the fault of American bias against Muslims.
 
Expanding contributions to homeland security
 
Successful partnerships between Muslim Americans and local law enforcement such as Southern California’s Muslim-American Homeland Security Congress should be expanded. A national network of such partnerships could play a vital role in the early detection of potential threats. Programs like the Muslim Public Affairs Council’s “National Grassroots Campaign to Fight Terrorism” can be extended to all U.S. mosques. Muslim leaders can do more to encourage young Muslim Americans to seek employment with the U.S. government and could work with relevant government agencies to create internships.
The U.S. government can do more to facilitate communication and cooperation with Muslim America. Public statements by senior officials acknowledging the significance of Muslim American contributions to national security and emphasizing the importance of not holding any group accountable for the actions of a few would help build public acceptance and understanding of the community. 
As we can see by following the links I have added, both the MPAC and MAHSC have less than sterling reputations themselves, unless of course we consider threats solely as they pertain to the Islamists! When it comes to detecting and dealing with those sorts of threats both groups appear expert.
Cultural sensitivity training for federal law enforcement officers would also increase the trust and communication necessary for fuller cooperation. A further vital step is to ensure that any investigations conducted by law enforcement be carried out in ways that do not violate U. S. laws and civil rights.
How about we give them “cultural awareness” training instead so they can do their jobs AWARE of the cultural prejudices of Muslims rather than teach them to be afraid to do their jobs lest their “sensitivity” be questioned?
Recommendation #2

 Improve Media Coverage and Public Understanding of Muslim Americans


In recent public opinion surveys, a sizable minority of Americans expressed fear and hostility toward Muslims and Islam, creating perceptions of a rising Islamophobia in the United States.

Media efforts to educate the public on Islam and the lives of Muslim Americans have been complicated by the spread of terrorist violence in the Middle East and elsewhere and by terrorists’ continuing claim that they are acting in the name of Islam.  

The language should be familiar by now; ignore all Islamist tendencies in the Muslim population and attack Americans for their rightful concerns by portraying them as “Islamophobes.” Forget about seeing any admission of extremist forces working freely in mosques across America in this recommendation.
While many major American newspapers and broadcast media have improved the quality of their coverage of Islam and Muslim societies since September 11, others have continued to present Islam as a monolith and to portray Muslims in stereotypical or biased ways that create an “us-versusthem” mentality.
Mostly complicated by the “moderate” Muslims being equivocal at best in their condemnations, and very quick to accuse the U.S. of racist bias after every arrest of an “extremist” Muslim.
Public opinion studies also show that Americans who are more familiar with Islam and know Muslim Americans personally are more likely to see them as being like other Americans.
Almost a complete lie; it only applies when speaking about the above mentioned cultural Muslims. The more contact Americans have with devout Muslims the more they are disquieted by their beliefs and practices.
Working with the media 
 
Media organizations and Muslim American groups could jointly sponsor seminars to address concerns on both sides and deepen relationships and understanding. 
 
Muslim organizations could train their leaders and spokespersons to communicate more effectively with the media and proactively pitch stories.
They could, and they have, but the most vocal of the “moderate” groups, such as CAIR, have routinely prevented anyone from speaking at these events that does not toe their line about cultural Muslims being representative of devout Muslims. They will even go so far as to cancel their entire participation rather than give objective views of Islam a platform.
The media can work to eliminate or clarify language that conflates Islam or Muslims with fascism or terrorism, strive for informed coverage of events—including Muslim American condemnations of violence and radicalism—and support the training of more Muslim American journalists.
This has certainly been implemented! The “moderate” Muslim organizations are masters at jumping on ANY story about Islamic extremists and branding all non-Muslims in sight racists and Islamophobes. The few Muslim leaders that speak the truth are branded traitors.
But, once again anyone with sense can see that as long as the terrorists themselves continue to use language that “conflates Islam or Muslims with fascism or terrorism” this self-censorship would only serve to give the Islamists an open playing field.
Al Haramain Islamic Foundation (AHIF), Armed Islamic Group (GIA), Islamic Resistance (IR), Islamic Struggle Movement (ISM), Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), Muslim Brotherhood (MB), Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Need I go on? I think the “Islamophobes” that feel reports like this one only seek to disarm the West, while allowing the Islamists free reign may be forgiven the Leftist media’s accusations of paranoia.
Creating an independent, national organization dedicated to public education
The creation of a new non-advocacy institution focused on educating the public about Muslim cultures and societies would help broaden American understanding. 
 
The institution would be non-ethnic, non-denominational, and non-political and would provide information on the rich and diverse heritage of the Muslim world through exhibitions, lectures, conferences, and publications. Over time, the organization could become a trusted, impartial source of information and expertise for the public, media, and government on the many facets of Muslim life throughout the world.
Theoretically, yes it could. If it actually was dedicated to the analysis of Islam in all its facets, and not simply apologizing for the religion while avoiding all criticism.
Undertaking a wide range of efforts to further public understanding

Demystifying Islam for the general public will require greater initiatives by many different Muslim American groups and other American organizations, working separately and in partnership.

I agree, Oh, I most certainly do! At least if that institution is based on reality and not taqqiya that serves the Jihadist cause. Given what we have seen so far is anyone willing to bet that this is the intent of the recommendation? 2 for 1? 5 for 1? How about 10 for 1? I thought you folks were smarter than that, thanks for proving me right! But each day media people and politicians read things like that and swallow the hook whole. Common sense still has not managed to become contagious.
Interfaith activities, cultural events, and educational initiatives at the primary, secondary, and university levels would all increase awareness of the community and its intellectual, scientific, and cultural achievements.
I agree, it is silly to be told by Muslims that “Islam is not monolithic” but that, “Islam is a religion of Peace” or that “Islam does not support terrorism” which certainly seem to be references to a monolithic faith. A little truth and clarity would go a long way toward building an effective response to Islamic Jihadist movements in the U.S. and elsewhere.
It is vital that non-Muslim religious and secular organizations take part in this work since they have the capacity to reach audiences that Muslim institutions cannot, and their participation would enhance the legitimacy and credibility of the message.
That last bit is certainly a no-brainer. Any group with such a transparent agenda would need lots of “useful idiots” to give them credibility. Witness the meltdown of CAIR as its agenda is exposed and its influence fades with the light.
Recommendation #3

Increase Civic Engagement among Muslim Americans

 Much of the groundwork for achieving increased civic and political integration is in place. Most Muslim Americans view the United States as their home. They see no contradiction between the moral teachings of Islam and the values that Americans hold dear.

Surprisingly enough this is not a false statement. However, it is merely a smokescreen meant to conceal instead of illuminate. By the numbers the majority of American Muslims do seem to believe that Islam does not contradict American values. The problem comes from that majority being more ignorant of the core teachings of Islam than they are about just what ideals like free speech and freedom of religion really mean.
A number of institutions and initiatives are already positioned to help. Speeding Muslim American integration is in the interest of all Americans, and success will involve building on these foundations and creating stronger ties between Muslim and non-Muslim groups.
All of which is totally meaningless if the groups refuse to set the “radicals” apart from them, and prove that the “tiny minority of extremists” did not receive the same teachings they did. Just as the report called new, moderate Muslim beliefs “traditions” and the traditional positions of the Islamists “beliefs”, this recommendation ignores the mainstream essence of the Islamist teachings: Pretend that modernist non-devout Muslims are representative of the mainstream of the devout. The problem is that it is be like Bishop Spong claiming to represent conservative Christians!
Expanding partnerships

 Encouraging Muslim Americans to play a greater part in civic life should be a high priority for Muslim organizations. Opportunities for engagement can be increased by expanding existing partnerships with non-Muslim groups and by forming new partnerships. Such activities create opportunities for Muslim leaders to frame public service in a Muslim context and make civic participation a fundamental element of Muslim American life.

To date all that has been accomplished on this head is for the Muslim elected officials to spout the same official “moderate” taqqiya as the usual suspects; CAIR and the MSA.
Forming a national leadership group of prominent Muslim Americans

 A leadership network of prominent Muslim Americans could strengthen Muslim American institutions and create new programs to encourage Muslim youth to enter public service. The enhanced communication among Muslim American leaders would help their organizations and the community at large respond more rapidly and effectively to public and media interest, especially in times of heightened concern. Members of the leadership group could also serve as “community ambassadors” to the U.S. government, offering informed perspectives on U.S. relations with Muslim societies, and as interlocutors between Muslim Americans and Muslim communities abroad.

All of this has been done and much has been accomplished for the stealth Jihad. How it has served to protect American values or the Constitution goes unsaid.
Building coalitions on important policy initiatives

 Muslim American organizations could make a valuable contribution to the American body politic by expanding their participation in coalitions concerned with issues such as immigration, public health, and the strengthening of democratic institutions. This will help other Americans understand that Muslims have great concern for a wide range of issues affecting the national well-being. It will also enable Muslims to expand their contributions to the larger society and increase the moral authority of Muslim leaders when they seek support on issues of particular interest to Muslim Americans.

While this HAS been done, the results seem to favor the Islamist expansion rather than the “assimilation” of American Muslims. Contrary to the claimed intent, it seems these organizations exist more for the purpose of creating and expanding alienation in the Muslim communities of America.
Bridging religious divides

 The country would benefit from greater cooperation among Muslim, Christian, and Jewish organizations. All three faiths share a deep spiritual connection to the Middle East, but their disagreements over U.S. foreign policy and events in the region have severely strained interfaith relations and hampered the dialogue and collaboration on numerous important domestic issues. Current conversations can be expanded to include an increasingly diverse group of organizations, becoming the basis of a national forum for interfaith discussions.

Oh that is a good one! Is this what passes for Islamist humor? “disagreements over U.S. foreign policy and events” in the Middle East have “severely strained interfaith relations and hampered the dialogue and collaboration.”
That mainstream Muslims claim Christianity and Judaism are working from corrupt Islamic texts has nothing to do with it? The increasing attacks on Jews and Christians anywhere Muslims hold even a little political power don’t make a difference? Nor is the rampant holocaust denial and fanatical hatred of Israel part of the issue? O.K., now that we have that out of our system can we get back to reality?
Recommendation #4

Build Stronger Muslim American Institutions

 Muslim American institutions do not have the range of opportunities for participation in the policy discourse to meet the community’s and the nation’s needs. Their limited role is partly attributable to the diversity of Muslim America, which complicates efforts to coalesce on issues or to create institutions that cross over among different Muslim American groups.

What #4 seems to be saying is that without Saudi financing it is hard to get actual main street American Muslims to give enough support to the Islamist taqqiya groups for them to pursue their agenda.
The capacity constraints typical of young ethnic and religious institutions have also been a handicap. In addition, some institutions have avoided foreign policy issues for fear of drawing unfavorable scrutiny or detracting from their work on civil rights. While the challenge of strengthening(sic) Muslim American institutions may appear daunting, similar challenges have been met time and again by other immigrant groups and minority communities. Many of the strategies used by these groups can be emulated by Muslim Americans.
True enough, but which strategies will they use? Will it be the strategy and morals of Martin Luther King or the strategy and lack of morals shown by the Black Panthers? Will they emulate Gandhi or will they follow the path laid out by Arafat?
Increasing institutional effectiveness and engagement

 It is critical that existing Muslim American organizations be strengthened further and that new ones be formed to help increase understanding of Muslim American life and facilitate participation in the civic and political discourse. Many existing institutions need to restructure, develop new strategies, and learn how to effectively deliver their messages.

With all the associations that have been revealed about the main “moderate” Muslim advocacy groups this can only be read as a call to retrench, regroup, and form new faces to continue the taqqiya and kitman of discredited groups like CAIR and the MSA.
They need to provide Muslim Americans with education on the workings of American civic and political life, and they need to improve dialogue and interaction across ethnic, sectarian, and generational lines within the Muslim American community.
Call me paranoid but I see this sentence as expressing a desire to educate and organize American Muslims for the purpose of subverting the system rather than participating in it. This tactic has already been used by many groups from the World Communist Party to radical Christians educating followers on how to take over local governments and establish “Biblical” legislation after running on moderate platforms.
As they build capacity, Muslim organizations will have more success in forming partnerships with non-Muslim organizations to address issues of common concern. American foundations should be encouraged to make a long-term commitment to helping these institutions become more effective.
This part ignores the fact that in America, the only non-Muslim groups that share concerns with devout Muslims on social issues (other than PC fools protecting minority religions from mainstream criticism)are on the fringes of mainstream society themselves. Think segregation of sexes and religions, think domination of the man over his family, think extreme angst and hostility toward homosexuals and ANY woman who is not under a man’s contro, think denial of service to those who “offend” against Islamic sensibilities. Headline: CAIR allies with Fred Phelps, news at eleven.
Broadening academic and policy initiatives

The engagement of more Muslim American scholars in the activities of think tanks, research institutes, and universities on issues related to Islam and Muslim societies would also be valuable. There is a need for endowed chairs, fellowships, centers for policy and area studies, and other structures to support the work of established and emerging Muslim and non-Muslim scholars of Islam. Postdoctoral fellowship programs in Islamic studies that are open to Americans of all religious backgrounds as well as fellowship programs for young Muslim American scholars studying important public policy issues of all types are also needed.

From this point on it is hard to pretend that this document is anything but a plan for setting the roots of the stealth Jihad in America firmly in the soil. It is already an open scandal that virtually all Islamic “Studies” scholars merely parrot the same nonsensical “party line” as this report, CAIR, and the Muslim Brotherhood. The last thing we need are more of these same dissembling “moderate” Muslims muddying the waters in the “activities of think tanks, research institutes, and universities on issues related to Islam and Muslim societies.”
Enlarging the scope and impact of academic and policy initiatives will require the strong commitment of American universities, think tanks, government agencies, and philanthropists.
More collaboration between Muslim American institutions and established think tanks and research institutes would also strengthen Muslim American integration into the policy discourse. There are few strong links between Muslim American institutions and leaders and think tanks and research institutes undertaking work related to Islam and Muslim communities. More joint efforts would help add new perspectives to the policy discussions of think tanks and research institutes.
Once again the authors remind us that without useful idiots their program is doomed to possible failure.
It would also help Muslim American institutions build their knowledge base by providing more exposure to policy analysis.
In other words it would help build an intelligence database on the deepest policies and capabilities of the enemy. Go back through this report and replace the word Muslim or Islam etc. with “Radical Christian Right” or “Nazi” equivalents. Would you let such groups have this kind of access as part of FIGHTING their radical agendas?
 
  This might have to do with the fact that their Imams keep telling them that America is trash, and that democracy is an evil inferior to the Shari’a.
Recommendation #5
Cultivate the Next Generation of Muslim American Leaders

 

 

Young Muslim Americans are also not as fully engaged as other American youth in U.S. political and civic life.
Developing the leadership potential and professional skills of young Muslim Americans is crucial to creating an informed, seasoned, and capable group of leaders who can contribute to the betterment of the nation as a whole. Engaging young Muslim Americans in civic life is also a critical factor in reducing the potential for alienation.

Making leadership development of young Muslim Americans a priority[,] Muslim American organizations could work with local, state, and federal government agencies to create internship programs for young Muslim Americans. Think tanks and universities based in Washington should be encouraged to create fellowship programs to increase understanding of the policy process. Muslim and non-Muslim institutions can also jointly sponsor speaking tours to encourage public service among young Muslim Americans.

Do I even need to analyze this part?

 Training young staff and new leaders

 Developing leaders and staff is essential if Muslim American organizations are to maximize their ability to contribute to the policy discourse. Young staff members need high-quality theoretical and practical training. Special attention should be given to leadership training for women.

Since most of the reasons Westerners are suspicious of Islam center around the mis-treatment of women, having a few Muslimahs trained to betray their sisters certainly would be useful!
Recommendation #6

Give Ongoing National Attention to Muslim American Integration

Establishing an American Diversity Dialogue

 The Task Force proposes that an ongoing American Diversity Dialogue among Muslim and non-Muslim leaders be established to examine critical issues related to Muslim civic and political integration in the United States. This would help give prominence to the issue and provide thoughtful and informed assessments of Muslim American civic and political integration over time. The American Diversity Dialogue would meet approximately three times a year in a rotating group of cities and would commission research to inform its discussions. It would issue an annual report on The State of Muslim America that would be widely disseminated to policymakers, the media, and the American public. Dialogue leadership and membership should be drawn from a group of highly respected public figures such as former government officials, business and civic leaders, and policy experts.

And why should we think that this ADD will be any more honest than any other Muslim “outreach” has been since 9/11? What will they do FOR America given their stated agenda of seizing control of the national dialogue concerning Islam for the benefit of Muslim Americans? Why should they be viewed with any less suspicion than any other religious, political, or racial group that sought the same kind of exclusive control on discussions of their ideology and methods?
Creating a national philanthropic initiative on American diversity

 A national philanthropic initiative on American diversity would expand financial support to nonprofit, nonpolitical educational, research, cultural, and civic organizations in order to deepen appreciation of diversity in America and strengthen its expression in society.

 The initiative would focus particularly on the Muslim American experience, strengthening public understanding of that experience and creating opportunities for greater Muslim American civic and political participation. Funding would come from foundations and individuals during a one-time capital campaign. The initiative’s corpus would be spent over a defined period of time such as ten years.

My response to this is simply: WHY? Why do we need to do anything other than promote the idea that anyone is entitled to their religion as long as they do not violate the law in its practice? Why do we need to hurry to appreciate something that can be good, bad or indifferent when we should wait to see which it is in each instance first? Lastly, why are all other “diversity” groups slighted in favor of promoting what has to be one of the smallest and certainly the most self-isolating of them all?
Conclusion

 The recommendations in this report are offered as a step toward strengthening the democracy entrusted to us by the founding fathers and the U.S. Constitution.

Excuse me while I go stop the Founding Fathers from spinning in their graves. The friction is about to set their coffins on fire.
The integration of minority groups, women, and immigrants into our civic and political processes has been slow, [ch]allenging work in the past. Yet its practical and symbolic importance cannot be underestimated. Muslims, like many other immigrant groups, came to the United States in search of religious and political freedom, in need of refuge, and in hopes of prosperity.
Many surely did, but many also came for the same reasons that the Puritans did, to have the freedom to bring their own religious prejudices to these shores and establish them as permanent institutions. Thankfully, all that the Puritans accomplished was to scare the rest of the colonies into agreeing inserting religious freedom into the Constitution! Let us hope these Muslim “pilgrims” are just as “fruitful” in their mission.
The tragic events of September 11 and their aftermath have challenged our security, put the dream of America to the test for Muslim Americans, and called our values as a nation into question.

 Yet with today’s critical foreign and domestic policy challenges, there is an urgent need for Muslim Americans to enter more fully into the national discourse. This is first and foremost the responsibility of Muslim Americans themselves, but also of the government, the policy establishment, the media, and other major American institutions.

By working together to ensure that Muslim American voices are heard, we will not only increase our own security, but make our foreign policy a truer expression of who we are as a nation and reaffirm our commitment to the ideal of E pluribus unum (one out of many).

I would have to agree with that last part, but, I don’t think the authors’ idea of what makes up the “Muslim American Voice” is an accurate picture of anything at all. Instead, it is the mask of a bandit who hopes to sneak past the guards by pretending to be “with the band.”

 

 

Link to this post!

Through the Eyes of a Muslimah: a Poem

Posted on by
1

I recently read a poem aboout women in Afghanistan that inspired me to write this one about all Muslim women under Shari’a law.

When the Shari’a is Law
(Through the eyes of a Muslimah)
Link to this post!

Back to CMSA: Assimilating American Muslims or Surrendering to Them?

Posted on by
4
.Today Heretics Crusade is going to be continuing to look at the Congressional Muslim Staffer’s Association (CMSA). In a series of changes CMSA made to their website there has been added new links to the Resources Page. Under Major Reports we find this document as the only report linked regarding Muslims in America.

 

Strengthening America: The Civic and Political Integration of Muslim Americans(The Chicago Council). It is this document that I will be analyzing. It is the sole document linked on the CMSA Resource Page regarding relations with American Muslims.
Despite the title there is little in this report designed to strengthen America. “Blaming America: Promoting Islamization Rather Than Integration” would be a better title in my opinion. Every word drips with a victim’s mentality, and the authors find many ways to blame America for every problem, real or imagined, experienced by American Muslims.
Meanwhile the document seems to be defining “real” Muslims as those who haven’t yet broken any laws to promote Islam no matter their ideology.
Hang on to your knickers Virginia, this is going to be a long strange trip.
Executive Summary
Muslim Americans were thrust into the spotlight by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, whose perpetrators claimed to be acting in the name of Islam.
From the first sentence the passive aggressiveness is apparent. M.A’s were “thrust” into the spotlight and the perpetrators only “claimed” Islamic imperative.
Many Americans, knowing little about Islam or about Muslims living in the United States, came to identify the terrorist threat with the Muslim community at large and to view Muslim Americans with deep suspicion and doubt.
This had nothing to do with the instances of “mainstream” Imam after Imam excusing attacks on non-Muslim civilians of course. It also had nothing to do with attack after unconstitutional attack in the courts on separation of church and state.  It CERTAINLY had nothing to do with the ideology demanded by the Shari’a; banish the thought.  It just “sort of happened” seems to be the theory, and a generous helping of Inherent American Racism And Xenophobia™ of course.
Nearly six years later, fears and suspicion remain. Terrorism remains an urgent threat, the terrorists continue to wrap themselves in the mantle of Islam, misunderstandings persist, and the ability of Muslim Americans to counter the rising tide of skepticism has been impeded, damaging the efforts of the many who are ardently trying to carve a constructive place in American society.
Interestingly, here we see a stark admission that “terrorism” and “the terrorists” are intimately linked with the “mantle of Islam.” It is not made clear just WHO is doing the “misunderstanding” however.  What we ARE assured of is that the faceless villains of this report are keeping the invisible (to non-Muslim eyes) proponents of “Muslim Americans” from carving out their piece of the American Dream.  From my reading of the news though, the biggest threat to moderate Muslim voices in America isn’t non-Muslims, it is the pretend “moderates” shilling for fundamentalist Islamist domination of Western Institutions who conspire to keep American Muslims from assimilating. Groups such as CAIR and the MSA.
…
Despite these limitations, many Muslim Americans joined with other Americans in responding to the September 11 attacks.  They volunteered time and money to relief efforts. Several leading national Muslim organizations came out immediately to condemn the attacks. Others have cooperated with law enforcement agencies to address homeland security challenges.
Forgotten here are the many “moderate” Imams and Islamic scholars who, at best equivocated on just who is “innocent” and just what is meant by “civilians.” We can also see better from two years later that the “cooperation” offered by these organizations has been lukewarm at best.
At the same time, extensive federal and other law enforcement investigations since September 11 have focused on Muslim Americans. These investigations have resulted in arrests and a small number of successful prsecutions on terrorism-related charges.

 

I think it would be better if the authors of this abortion manual just came out and admitted that they support global Islamization and stop with the transparent B.S. already.  Just a few paragraphs ago this very document admitted that “terrorists” used a “mantle of Islam.”.  Do the authors’ feel that it would be more productive to focus terrorism investigations on Lithuanian Jews?  Perhaps we could focus on Coptic Christians and gain Muslim trust by joining in on the accelerating genocide occurring in Egypt.
The worst bit though, is the downplaying of the charges and convictions resulting from terrorism investigations.  I must have missed the huge number of acquittals of accused plotters and abettors.  Or did I?  It certainly reads a little nonsensically; “a small number of successful prosecutions.” But, the report cannot feel the full number of prosecutions was excessive or surely it would have said so.  Would the authors have been happier if there had been a much larger number of charges and convictions?
Though any involvement of Muslim Americans with extremism raises strong concerns, independent studies have underscored that unlike in Europe, there is little, if any, publicly available evidence to date of widespread or entrenched extremist activity with links to al Qaeda or other global terrorist organizations.

 

More silliness that sounds like counsel from an enemy.  Are we to wait to be “concerned” about Muslim American “extremism” until AFTER global terrorists groups have “widespread or entrenched” cells in the U.S.”?  Are solo groups or individual extremists to be somehow off limits until that threshold is reached?  I think it is reasonable to start wondering by this point “whose side are they on anyway?”
Nevertheless, Muslim American efforts to dissociate themselves from the terrorist threat have not been fully effective for a number of reasons. The perception by many Americans that some Muslim American organizations and leaders have not fully and readily acknowledged the potential for radicalism within the community and the need for vigilance in countering it has been a barrier to understanding and dialogue.

 

My, isn’t the taqqiya getting thick now.  Note that it is the “perception by many Americans” of Muslim leaders not admitting potential radicalism or being vigilant in countering it that is the problem, NOT any actual failings by Muslim leaders.  Two years after the report was published this sentence is almost laughable in its transparent spin.  We do not have proper understanding and dialogue with Muslim Americans because non-Muslim Americans have stubbornly failed to see Muslim leaders doing something the report itself does not claim they actually DO.   We are probably also at fault when Muslim American children don’t floss.
Some Americans have continued to view Muslim Americans with suspicion because they question the compatibility of Islam with American values, focusing on issues such as the treatment of women and the separation of church and state.
This sentence actually is completely accurate, if you define the “they” as “Muslims Americans” and not “some Americans.” I would be willing to bet however, that this was NOT the authors’ intention. Americans are suspicious of Muslims regarding these matters because of the outspoken, anti-Western stand on them taken by MANY Muslim leaders claiming to be representatives of the mainstream.  The authors’ however seem to want us to believe that this suspicion is nothing but American Paranoia.
Many Muslim Americans and some other Americans believe that hostility toward Islam and Muslim Americans is preventing their voices from being heard and their contributions from being recognized.
Does your intelligence feel even a tad insulted yet?  No matter that every time a truly moderate Muslim voice speaks out CAIR and the other Taqqiya Moderates attack them for exposing Islam and Muslims to prejudice and potential violence, this report KNOWS that moderate Muslims are not heard because of non-Muslim hostility. They are not heard simply because the very people who sponsored this report work actively to suppress them and their voices.
Let us not forget that this report was prominently featured on the resources page of the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association!  We must assume that they carefully picked and chose just what links to include.  The disclaimer of association with the content is a tad disingenuous when there is but ONE link to ONE report on Muslim Americans provided.
The contention among some Americans that Islam is incompatible with American values is thought to fuel organized attempts to discredit Islam and exclude Muslims from the nation’s civic and political life. This has created fear and resentment among many Muslim Americans that has also contributed to an atmosphere of mistrust.

 

I like this one!  Another weasel word is introduced; contention. Forget about mentioning that ALL of the four main schools of Islamic thought agree that Islam is incompatible with ANY rule of law not based in Shari’a.  According to this eminent report it is merely the CONTENTION by evil Westerners that this is so that fuels the anti-Islamist tide that is rising in the West and in Islam itself.
Okaay. Are you still with us Virginia, you are looking a touch green about the gills.  Was it something you read?
…
The disengagement of Muslim Americans undermines American values, especially the conviction that the success of our nation relies on embracing our diversity and involving all our citizens in the public arena.

 

I wonder if anyone ever had the nerve to suggest to these people that “involving all our citizen’s…” means NOT treating Muslims ANY differently than anyone else in America?  That it means NO special enclaves, rules or accommodations out of line with those already afforded to other religions?  I for one would not put odds on it being likely they would listen.

 

The gathering climate of suspicion and mutual mistrust, exacerbated by the lack of engagement and dialogue, threatens to marginalize and alienate some Muslim Americans to the point where the danger of radicalization of a small minority could become a real possibility.

 

“Such a nice country you have, it would be SUCH a SHAME if anything were to happen to it!”

Is it a coincidence that the Mafia came from Sicily, where Islam just happened to have invaded and dominated the locals for a few hundred years immediately prior to their formation?  It must be. It just would not be PC to think otherwise, would it now?

It would take only a single, significant act of terrorism in the United States involving Muslim Americans to cement the impression that rampant radicalism has taken root within the community.

 

Really? Go tell that to CNN, CBS, ABC, FOX and all the other mainstream news channels that can’t seem to figure out why the Ft. Hood massacre happened.

 

Therefore, the Task Force believes that creating full and equal opportunities for civic and political participation of Muslim Americans is an urgent national need.

 

Who is it that is denying them these opportunities?  What I see are “mainstream” groups like CAIR telling the Muslim Americans to NOT act like they are fully American.  How else should we view CAIR’s instructions to Muslims residing in America to call a lawyer then notify CAIR if the FBI asks them about extremists in their community?

 

It is vital that Muslim Americans find ways to demonstrate visibly their commitment to America, its institutions, and its values. This well-educated, diverse group has the potential to make contributions to civic life and policy discourse as varied and numerous as those of any other group of Americans.

 

FINALLY, a statement that we can agree on without reservations!  It IS vital for Muslims in America to step up and be SEEN and HEARD supporting American values and institutions instead of demanding “respect” for practices outlawed long ago in the West for ALL peoples, religious or otherwise.

 

The Task Force prepared this report in order to present a balanced, nonpartisan assessment of the current Muslim American experience and recommendations for expediting the Muslim American journey to full civic and political integration. Many immigrant and minority groups have had to overcome suspicion and hostility in order to win full acceptance in the public sphere. While there is no doubt that Muslim Americans would in time achieve full integration in U.S. society, just as other groups have, the need to accelerate the process is urgent. The risks of inaction are substantial: further marginalization of Muslim Americans at best and serious alienation at worst.

 

Well we have seen how “balanced and non-partisan” first part of the executive summery is. Somehow I don’t think the recommendations will be any better.

 

The goal of bringing Muslim Americans into the fold of American life as quickly as possible is in the interest of all Americans. Muslim American leaders and organizations, government, the policy establishment, the media, and other major institutions all have significant roles to play in this process. The short-term need is critical, and the long-term gains cannot be overstated. The civic and political engagement of Muslim Americans will not only increase security, but enrich our policies, our society, and our standing as a nation that upholds basic human values of decency and fairness and that provides hope and opportunity for all.

 

So, once again we are assured that it is AMERICA that must adjust to Islam, not Islam to America.  Why do I get the feeling that the report’s idea of civic and political engagement for Muslims will not involve MUSLIMS giving up any of their non-Western ways?
Later I will look at the report’s six recommendations and the conclusion.  Right now I need a breath of fresh air.  I am feeling a bit nauseated by the smell of manure.
.
Link to this post!

Christians Endorse Disposable Humanity and Other Evil Oxymorons

Posted on by
2

I wanted to share something that I commented on over at NewsRealblog.com

The subject was the sentencing of a 13 year old and a 16 year old to life without parole. The comment thread was rife with the sentiment that any kid so heinous, even that young, should be shut away permanently for society’s own protection, Q.E.D.!
That got my dander up and I had to put in my own two cents:
Save us from those who destroy the very thing they are trying to protect!
To me the argument against executing or giving life without parole to minors has always been based in the simple Christian values of mercy, grace and redemption.
Poster after poster in this thread has hugged to their breast a concept of “disposable” individuals. People who, without Constitutional approval, “should” be balled up like trash and thrown into a secure oubliette to be forgotten. All in the name of protecting our “civil” society from the “irredeemable.”
I do not deny that there are pathological individuals that cannot be reformed or redeemed by any means known to man at this time. I do deny that even a majority of those so condemned fit that description however!
Just as the Leftist needs to be reminded that society MUST be protected even from those who are not solely responsible for their crimes, the “law and Order” worshipers need to realize that there is no justice in abusing a minority in order to preserve the tranquility of the majority.
It says something about that in the Constitution. Go look it up. Then go look up all the mainstream Christian tenets relating to guilt, punishment and reform.
The very idea of declaring a 13 year old permanently unable to be “Human” and sentencing that child to LIFE in a literal hell cannot POSSIBLY be reconciled with anything calling itself a Judeo-Christian value!
Argument can be made for the most disadvantaged adult that they knew what they were doing. That cannot be said of ANY 13 year old! How can hearts be complacent when a child who is mentally twisted is not confined to an institution to see if he can be healed but instead he is caged like an animal to suffer cumulatively for decades?
Show me where standing against life without parole or execution for minors automatically means standing for slapping murderers on the wrist and I will shut up.
Otherwise anyone who wants to think of themselves as “decent” needs to understand that “innocent until proven guilty” has no room in it for punishment of future crimes “likely” to be committed. And certainly not a punishment that starts at 13 and ends with death.
Link to this post!

Congressional Muslim Staffers Invite Knox Thames: Islamist or Moderate?

Posted on by
2

In Heretics Crusade’s latest look at the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association we examine their first published “event.”

 

As I showed in earlier articles, the CMSA requires attendance at their events and programs in order for its members to obtain voting rights. The rub was that until recently there were no events posted on the CMSA website. After I highlighted that omission several times the CMSA obliged with this:

 

Congressional Muslim Staffers Association
Public & International Affairs Briefing Series

U.S.C.I.R.F.
A Briefing on U.S. Monitoring of the International Status of
Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion or Belief

Presentation and Q&A with:

Knox Thames
Acting Executive Director
U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom

Friday, November 13, 2009
11:00AM to 12:00PM
2456 Rayburn H.O.B.
U.S. House of Representatives

Knox Thames? Who is he you ask? I would like to be able to report that Mr. Thames is an outspoken moderate who stands firmly against the Islamist mentality. We do not always get to do what we like. This is one of those times.

 

The Religious Liberty Dinner 2010 website says:

 

“H. Knox Thames, Esq.

 

Mr. Thames served as Counsel to the United States Helsinki Commission, a federal agency that works with Congress to monitor human rights within the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) region, from 2001 to 2007. Mr. Thames led the work of the Commission in monitoring religious freedom and issues concerning refugees and internally displaced persons in all 56 OSCE countries. He also served as a member of U.S. State Department delegations to numerous OSCE meetings, and has traveled on behalf of the Commission throughout Europe and Central Asia. The State Department also selected Mr. Thames to serve as one of the two U.S. appointees to the OSCE Panel of Experts on Freedom of Religion or Belief.”

 

In following Mr. Thames’ trail across the internet I have come to the opinion that he is like a very skilled doctor that calmly and accurately diagnoses an aggressive cancer and goes into detail about what is wrong and what the progress of the cancer will be… then tells the patient to continue with the aspirin their mother gave them; she knows best.

 

When it comes to Islam Mr. Thames shows even more double-think than the usual Leftist. He is interesting in that he goes into full detail in laying out a fairly objective view of a situation and then makes conclusions that come solely from his programmed ideology instead of the facts.
I could only find a couple of pieces that reflect Knox’s own views rather than a group consensus.
I will focus on one he wrote in 2005 titled Governmental Responses to Muslim Populations in Western Europe:

 

“Islam qua Islam is a religion of peace and not of violence. Muslims who pervert the teachings of Islam to justify terrorism are a small, radicalized minority of the faith.”

 

Here anyone who is familiar with the details of the Quran, Hadith and Shari ‘a can see that this statement is totally disingenuous. It may be that many Muslims wish to ignore Shari ‘a and re-edit the Hadith to support their own, personal urges toward a civil religion. It is false however to say that ISLAM is about peace and not violence.

 

At least to Western minds it is false. It is a habit with Muslim apologists to point out that Islam did not spread the religion by the sword. It merely conquered those evil non-Islamic governments so the people could be “free” to choose the “right” faith.” Then they had peace!

“Yet after the September 11th attacks in New York and the March 11th train bombings in Madrid [and London 4 months after this was written (GDW)], the threat of Islamist-based terrorism has loomed large in the minds of Europeans. European governments must now grapple with how to provide their citizens with security and effectively investigate leads, yet avoid painting all adherents of Islam as dangerous to society.”

I think that here he needs to define just what he means by “adherent” and, especially, “Islam” before we can accept this statement. The problem is the Shari‘a that “adherent” Muslims are supposed to follow. This religious law is based in the Quran and the Hadith; stories about the acts and words of Mohammed compiled two hundred years after his death. That compilation contains many tales justifying horrific cruelty and discrimination against women and non-Muslims, even children. Under Shari ‘a it is murder to kill someone unjustly, unless that person is your own child or grandchild, then the Islamic Law says it is not a crime at all. To an “adherent” Muslim an honor killing is not murder, it is more of a familial house cleaning in order to maintain rightness in the eyes of God.

 

Further the “adherent” Muslim is instructed by the Hadith and Shari ‘a to strictly avoid submitting to ANY secular laws that conflict with Shari ‘a. How far each individual Muslim takes this injunction is a personal matter. What is not personal is that virtually all “devout” Muslims accept this concept as a matter of course.

 

Also personal is how far each Muslim takes the injunction to spread Islam BY ANY MEANS. The injunction itself however, is not equivocal nor is it something that goes against “the grain” of Islamic ideology.

 

Add to this that it is a core teaching of all the major sects of Islam that Mohammed was as perfect as a human could be and that his acts and words form a template for the “ideal man.” As such anything that Mohammed did CANNOT be wrong and anything Mohammed disliked or put down is inherently evil.

 

The problem is that this man devout Muslims hold up to be imitated was a thin-skinned warlord who ordered people killed for insulting him and advised his followers to break any oath if “they find something better [to swear to]”, lied about what people said to sooth someone’s feelings, consummated a marriage with a nine year old and forced a Christian woman to marry him after he had killed her husband and father; so he could “protect” her of course.

 

This is not a figure that strikes a Westerner as ANY kind of role model but Muslims are taught from birth that he is the ONLY true role model. Cognitive dissonance is a polite term for what results when you take a devout Muslim and place them in a Western country.

 

The fact of the matter is that the “devout” Muslim is “peaceful” only when their religious supremacism is not challenged in a meaningful fashion. Muslims may choose to live lives of peace but Islam, an ideology that insists that the murder of a non-Muslim (criminal against God) is ALWAYS less evil than the OPPRESSION of a Muslim, clearly does not promote peace. At least not as Westerners think of it.

 

In witness of this observe how often a “devout” Muslim REFUSES to condemn any action by a Muslim to a non-Muslim NO MATTER THE RIGHTENESS OR WRONGNESS of the act!!! There can be no better indication than this of how the Islamic mindset DEMANDS a bi-polar view of humanity with non-Muslims occupying an eternally lower tier, in terms both of their rights, and worth in God’s eyes.

 

“Over the past several years, European governments have initiated efforts to engage their Muslim populations, while also monitoring them in an attempt to control perceived sources of instability, violence, and conflict. From an academic perspective, it has been interesting to observe the actions of governmental and political leaders in response to their large and marginalized Muslim communities. From a human rights and civil liberties perspective, it has also become increasingly troubling.”

 

Here we go again with the Leftist two-step of declaring actual sources of instability to be merely “perceived sources” followed by an appeal to victim status with the label “marginalized”. No effort is made by Mr. Thames to comment on the largely self inflicted nature of that marginalization.

 

“It is not difficult to see why Europe is concerned. Four of the 9/11 hijackers were students together in Hamburg, Germany. Richard Reid, the so-called “shoe bomber,” was born in London and carried a British passport. The perpetrators of the Madrid train bombings came from terrorist cells in Spain and possibly Italy.

 

 

 

“Yet it is here that the tension between respect for civil rights and effective security measures is felt. These realities present two questions with no easy answers. First, how strongly can a government legitimately push for assimilation of religious minorities before its actions unduly burden legitimate human rights? Second, how far can Western democracies reach in order to preempt Islamist-based terrorism, without further marginalizing their Muslim citizens?”

 

Here we first see Mr. Thames’ talent for stating an objective analysis and then homing in on the wrong issue. The line is bright and clear for all who do not seek to cross it; laws must be followed by all and all laws must by applied equally to any act “religious” or otherwise, no matter who “commits” it.
The only people who can’t seem to deal with those rules are the very people who seek to make THEIR religion master of all the other’s.

 

“In this article I will highlight several examples of where Western European governments are improperly limiting, or could potentially abridge, the civil liberties and basic rights of their Muslim populations. Government efforts to force assimilation, along with steps to combat terrorism, have in some cases unduly limited or vitiated the enjoyment of fundamental rights.”
Here genuflecting at the altar of Political Correctness, H. Knox shows how far he can go to ignore any obligations the “Muslim Populations” might have to assimilate and combat terrorism in their host’s land.
Granted that it is not good to “unduly limit or vitiate the enjoyment of fundamental rights” Mr. Thames says nothing about what constitutes “duly” when a population actively refuses to respect local laws.

 

“Policymakers must be mindful of the explosive confluence of a growing Muslim population, the events of 9/11 and 3/11, and increased government scrutiny of minorities. Infringements on civil liberties may well push Muslims further from the European community and only serve to alienate and radicalize them.”

 

I must say that Knox got plenty of bang for his bucks in his rhetoric classes. I count two implied threats followed by two direct threats, leading into a subtle but extortionate demand, followed by a final double threat. And he did it all in only two sentences!
The demand is basically to stop paying attention to what goes on in the Islamic community and to not interfere when local laws are violated by Muslims for “religious” reasons. The threat is obvious; 9/11 after 9/11 until the Muslim population is large enough and then…well, I think the message that Mr. Thames wants to convey is a twisted form of “what ye sow, so shall ye reap.” better phrased as “You let us sow your fields, now reap the whirlwind”!
 
“With deep historical roots in Europe, Islam is often cited as the fastest growing religion within the member countries of the European Union, with an estimated 12 million adherents living mostly in religious and ethnic enclaves throughout the continent. As a result of continued immigration and a decreasing birthrate among non-Muslim Europeans, Islam is increasing its representation. At the same time that “traditional” Europeans are declining in number due to changes in family size, the EU is continuing to expand into the former realms of the Ottoman Empire. Considering Turkey’s 68 million citizens, 99 percent of whom are Muslim, along with significant Muslim populations in Bulgaria and Bosnia, Islam’s demographic significance within the European Union will only continue to grow.”

It is growing harder and harder as we read this document to pretend that Mr. Thames is on the side of Western civilization against the Islamic Supremacists. “…deep historical roots…”? Is that what we now call centuries of invasion and cultural genocide by Muslims against European nations? The much gentler activity by the West toward non-European lands is called evil colonialism. Forgive me, but I think I see a double standard here.

In this paragraph we can see once again how many distortions and interpolations Mr. Thames can pack into his casual flow of words. He parrots the canard about Muslims growing faster, while avoiding admitting the draconian rules that force a maximum number of Muslims and prevent loss of “official” Muslims from the tally. Topping off the arrogance is his assumption of complete inevitability regarding Turkey being granted E.U. membership. He then uses that assumption as his trump card, saying (correctly) that when Turkey is a member resisting the Islamification of the E.U. will be completely useless.

 

“The changing demography has produced growing pains, as secular European governments struggle to adapt to their large and devout Muslim populations. … In addition to increasing numbers, Muslims are more devout than the average European. … In an age of religious skepticism and high regard for complete secularism, resolute adherence to the faith has caused further divisions between European Muslims and traditional Europeans.”

 

Bombing and riots and arson and rapes and “no-go zones” are a bit much to be called “growing pains in my book. In fact I find the term to be insulting to the intelligence of anyone aware of the facts. Also insulting is his triple assault on Western legal traditions (won with blood and suffering in our own religious wars) by claiming a greater “devoutness” as though this abrogates the 300 years of Enlightenment tradition that underlies European culture.

 

“…Just as European governments began to grapple and engage this oft-neglected community of immigrants and their progeny, the events of September 11 shocked the world. Distressed that several of the hijackers came from extremist Islamist cells within Europe, governments took resolute actions to apprehend criminals by looking for individuals hiding in Muslim communities. Scrutiny of Muslim communities also intensified because of the rise in anti-Semitic attacks in Europe. In the spring of 2002 Western Europe witnessed a profound spike in anti-Semitic acts unparalleled since the 1930s and 1940s. Many indicators suggest these incidents are not just examples of the “old” anti-Semitism of the far right, but also a new type of anti-Semitism, namely that stemming from disenfranchised European Muslim youth.”

 

At first glance the above bit is puzzling. Suddenly Knox seems to be looking at the situation from the other side. Fear not gentle reader, Mr. Thames’ taqqiya is intact if this is just another way for him to say “Nice little Europe you have here, shame if something happened to it…”!

 

“Searching for ways to engage their Muslim communities and protect their citizens from future attacks, some governments are increasing surveillance and restricting civil liberties, essentially forcing Muslims to assimilate to the traditional culture of their countries, rather than allowing them to organically integrate. The propinquity of these demographic realities with the “war on terror,” and the subsequent concerns about small, insular, and devout religious communities being sleeper cells within Europe, have left peaceful Muslim communities with a sense of isolation and often bewilderment.”

 

This is one of those paragraphs where you read it, shake your head, and read it again to see what it means, and then go back and SLOWLY read it a third time to try to figure out what it REALLY means.

 

Since there were few “anti-Muslim” laws back in ’05 I can only read this to mean “restricting civil liberties” is used instead of saying “making Muslims obey the laws relating to the human rights of family members, especially women and children.”

 

As nearly as my Accutron FanaticBabble 2.0 translator can tell, the last sentence in the paragraph means that the very real threat of sleeper cells in the Islamic communities of Europe makes those communities nervous. Given that their faith commands they not expose these (misguided but still Muslim) cells to authorities they regard as Satanic, it is not surprising that even the non-violent Muslims are “nervous.”

 

“.. They did so by limiting foreign influences and subsidizing mosques (and other religious communities) in an attempt to promote conformity with Spanish culture and limit Islamist rhetoric and extremist actions. Concerns about Saudi funding of the fundamentalist Wahabbi version of Islam are certainly justifiable, but Spanish efforts may only serve to interject the government into intra-religious discussions in which it does not belong.”

 

More stunning double-think from H. Knox. Mr. Thames admits that concerns about Saudi funded Wahabbi influence are “justifiable” but once again passes by that camel to strain at the gnat of government interference in “intra-religious” discussions. He ignores that Saudi Arabia is a massively oil rich country that is already interfering in that “discussion”. Mr. Thames certainly does not give an alternate solution to excessive Saudi influence.

The balance of his “report” is more of the same. Mr. Thames recognizes the threats that Islamists pose to European society but takes the view that a hybrid Eurabia culture will be the inevitable result. He completely ignores the actual history of Islamic groups in Europe, their aggression and disinclination to allow the non-Muslim majority to live THEIR lives in the manner they choose.

In the end I am afraid that the CMSA has produced exactly the sort of “event” that I expected. Mt Thames is a smooth speaker who shows that he is not ignorant of any facet of the situation… the problem is that he is wearing out colors but not playing on the Western team!

 

I urge every moderate and conservative employee of Congress to attend the meeting:

 

Friday, November 13, 2009
11:00AM to 12:00PM
2456 Rayburn H.O.B.
U.S. House of Representatives

 

Show up, listen, think, and question.

 

And please, write to me and let me know what is said. Audio, video or official transcripts would be fabulous!
Link to this post!

Ft. Hood Massacre: No Fault Treason PC Style

Posted on by
10

There is a sickness in American which needs to be cured. The body infected is Western Media across the political spectrum, and the bug in this case is the idea of “Political Correctness”, picked up by the American Left after being in bed with Stalin without protection. This contagious form of insanity requires a person to apply a layer of double-think to any event that even might have political ramifications and, since politics and morality are made one by the PC germ, that covers a lot of ground.
On Nov 5th 2009 at Fort Hood in Texas the virus of Political Correctness displayed its ravages for all to see. The blind refusal of the media to see what was before its eyes was a Leftist’s dream come true. The Orwellian brain-bug of the New Left called Political Correctness came into its own that day.
Those who succumb to Political Correctness simultaneously assume a posture of complete lack of discrimination while applying a finely tuned prejudice to virtually every subset of humanity they encounter.
First, the infected mind is compelled to politically define every person or event and apply an automatic interpretation based on that prejudged identity. There are rules for virtually every racial, ethnic, religious and political grouping that exists. The one theme that seems to run through them all is that everything is always the fault of Americans and Western Europeans, heterosexual males especially.
The Left has been using Political Correctness to program the media to ask only the wrong questions since they picked up the term in the 60’s. After the Tet Offensive the media asked how a winning side could let such an attack happen, but did not care who won the battle. After Columbine reporters asked how the children had been made into monsters, not what mental problems they might have had that made them kill. And after 9/11 PC adherents asked why we deserved it, instead of asking how the terrorists could believe it was an act of glory.

Today, the last people who witnessed WWII as adults are dying off, and the Leftists, remembering the significant contribution of the Jews to Western Civilization, have re-added anti-Semitism to their list of PC-condoned bigotries. In affirmation of this change Muslims have also been added to the PC lexicon of artificial responses; as a protected species.
On the morning of 9/11 when the Leftist leaders of the PC movement realized that Islam had a grudge against the West as large as their own they welcomed the Islamists as allies to their cause. From that day it has been a PC crime for anyone to objectively analyze any action by a Muslim, especially if that action is heinous or incomprehensible to Western minds.

Examples of Muslims, moderate or conservative, acting in ways inimical to Western civilization on Western soil are too numerous to list but the PC media is not able to analyze the data it has received. Their answers are all pre-loaded with the Politically Correct Viral Operating System. All the PC bug lets them do is the simple sorting of facts into their pre-assigned slots.
This latest atrocity at Ft. Hood should highlight just how dangerous the media’s ignorance of what motivated Maj. Hasan has become. How could anyone not blinded by a need to conform to some predefined “truth” fail to ask how the military allowed someone with such blatantly obvious motives to be a commissioned officer? Why do so few reporters question how Hasan was able to become a major in the U.S. Army with the associations and attitudes he had shown? Imagine the results if he had waited until he had deployed and had easier access to even deadlier weaponry. The answer is simple; PC thought demands that such considerations be completely beyond consideration for Muslims. The diseased truth is that those so blinded consider the question itself unthinkable in regards to non-Christians.

Does it take a genius to see that the PC mindset is toxic and from which the media must be inoculated? When someone as solidly Left of Center as Bill Maher is on record as being against the ban on profiling terrorists isn’t it past time to take the Muslims off the PC list and put them back on the one labeled “human: handle with caution”? Since the 5th of Nov I think the soldiers of Fort Hood, Texas would agree.
Link to this post!

Who is Anita Dunn?

Posted on by
2

Is Anita Dunn a space alien or maybe a foreign spy? Is she the product of a secret lab in the Nevada desert? Is she possibly even that worst of all things: a Canadian? Glenn Beck, amongst others is talking about what Dunn has said, but I don’t see anyone discussing who she is. All I do know is that information online about her life before 1977 is nonexistent.

The White House does not list any C.V. or bio for her. The Washington Post has a profile that lists her as 51 years old but gives no birth date. It is a cheering section for her professional career more than a bio.

Basic background information on White House Communications Director Anita Dunn starts with her plum job in the Carter White House, leaving her biography half missing. I might be naïve, but I thought that presidential appointees to White House positions were important public figures. From the reactions to Ms. Dunn in the media it seems that I was wrong.

I myself find it just a little distressing to learn that a major player in D.C. seems to have appeared out of nowhere to work for Jimmy Carter’s chief of staff. I find it even more disturbing that media outlets who go over judicial and cabinet appointments with a microscope don’t know if President Obama‘s Director of Communication went to college. But no one in the press seems to care about anything other than her comments attacking Fox News and her deep respect for Chairman Mao and his statement that “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”

In fact, other than the Fox comments and reactions to her praise of Mao, all I could find was this bit at WhoRunsGov.com:

Current Position: White House Communications Director (since May 2009)

Career History: Senior adviser for strategic communications (April 2008 to November 2008); Director of Hopefund (May 2006 to December 2006); Political adviser at Squier Knapp Dunn (1993 to 2009)

Birthday: N/A, Hometown: N/A, Alma Mater: N/A, Spouse: Robert Bauer, Religion: N/A, DC Office: N/A, Email N/A

I did find out that Ms. Dunn did not want a visible role in the Obama White House. Indeed, she had not wanted a White House job at all. Until her unfortunately public expression of reverence for Chairman Mao blipped the media’s radar, she had gotten her wish. Now, as the furor dies down the only one that has had little to say has been Ms. Dunn.

How old is she? Where was she born? Where did she grow up? What schooling and degrees does she have and from which institutions? What led her to be given a job in the White House by Jimmy Carter in the first place? As far as the internet is concerned, no one seems to know. There isn’t even a mention of what town she grew up in.

Color me stupid but should the media allow any president to hire without comment someone with no public history to be the director of White House Communications? Someone whose only public utterance of personal thought seems to be an admiration for Mao, the biggest mass murderer in history?

Why is it that the mainstream media have ignored the lack of even a hometown or a college degree in her public profiles? Do they know something I do not? Maybe I have the scoop this time and Glenn Beck is soon to break the story. Or Rush Limbaugh may seek Anita’s hand in marriage when her All-American background is revealed. Either way it turns out, I would like to know.

Instead of asking her who she’s kidding maybe the pundits should be asking her who she is.

Link to this post!