Muslim Promoters: It is all our fault!

Yes.  We have too much anti-Muslim bias.  Of course, it is not because of Islam.

Three Muslim academicians got together and conjured a study entitled “Anti-Terror Lessons of Muslim-Americans” that resides on our Justice Department website and has gained prominence in academia.  These deceivers for Islam are David Schanzezr, Charles Kurzman, and Ebrahim Moosa.

A better example of “taqiyya” (Islamic deception) I have not seen.  What they wrote and what they omitted are the definition of “dissembling”:   To disguise or conceal one's real nature, motives, or feelings behind a false appearance.

The findings of this study are these, in the order presented:

• Increased Anti-Muslim Bias [since 9-11]:  The authors noted the increased anti-Muslims bias since 9-11, and that such bias, if it continues, may further radicalize Muslims.  Therefore, the offending non-Muslims must learn more about Islam, and embrace Muslims into our political and social institutions. Yes, 9-11 has caused many Americans to discover what the Islamic ideology is all about:  an intolerant, fascist, supremacist anti-Semitic ideology that promotes Sharia law and an absolutely diametrically opposite view of morality, religion, and culture from that of the West.  We are at fault for expressing such “bias” after learning what Islam is all about.  So, now we need to embrace Islam.  So why shouldn’t we?  I don’t see any problem with that, do you?
• Low Numbers of Radicalized Muslim-Americans.  The authors suggest that “although the vast majority of Muslim-Americans reject radical extremist ideology and violence, a small number of Muslim-Americans have radicalized since 9/11.  They cite that only “139 Muslim-Americans committed acts or terrorism-related violence or were prosecuted” for such.  They fail to mention four important things about these numbers: 
  • One, the nature of the attempted acts would have killed thousands of Americans. 
  • Two, we don’t know how many more hundreds or thousands of Muslims are “waiting in the wings” to carry out similar attacks. 
  • Three, we DO know that classical Islam, promoted by Saudi-funded Wahabbi and Salafi Muslims, including Islamic supremacism, hatred of the West, and methods of promoting Sharia law, is being taught in Islamic mosques and Islamic schools throughout the United States.
  • Four, the ummah (the brotherhood of Muslims – the “moderate”, non-violent Muslim majority) stands in unity with those on the front lines of Islam privately cheering them on and doing whatever they can under the radar to support the cause.
•  Practices of Muslim-American Communities Prevent Radicalization.  This heading gets way ahead of their text which states:  “Our research shows that a variety of practices of Muslim-American communities may be helping to prevent and address instances of radicalization.”  [italics added]  And then again, there are likely many more practices that go in the opposite direction – promoting radicalization.  They claim “public and private denunciation of terrorism and violence.”  Granted, there are public denunciations.  That is a part of the taqiyya doctrine of Islam.  However, the private denunciations are more likely in the form of “those idiots, why did they allow themselves to be caught” or “let this be a lesson that we are not ready for that kind of fight yet.”  But the radicalization goes on.  Do not be deceived by the grand deceivers.
• Community-building.  Yes, this is a good one that brought a chuckle.  The authors express satisfaction that “the creation of robust Muslim-American communities may serve as a preventative measure against radicalization by reducing social isolation of individuals who may be at risk of becoming radicalized.”  Wow!  In fact, the opposite will occur.  Without being assimilated into the American mainstream, these “robust Muslim-American communities” will devolve into isolated purist Islamic ghettos that are will spawn radicalism in a protected environment.  Take a look at the Islamic communities of Detroit.  Take a look at the videos of Muslim radicals demonstrating with their anti-American and anti-Semitic signs in cities with “robust Muslim communities.” Avoidance of assimilation to avoid feeling disenfranchised?  They are making themselves “disenfranschised” by prolonging the differences and isolation.  And this is not due to oppression.  It is by design.  It is a strategic Islamic maneuver to use our insane embrace of “cultural diversity” to justify their differences, to promote their enclaves, foster divisiveness and achieve national weakness.  That is the Islamic agenda and hope for this nation.
• Political Engagement.  The authors state that “heightened political activity of Muslim-Americans since 9/11 is also a positive development for preventing radicalization.”  That is true.  The political process is a wonderful thing for accomplishing Islamic goals without the need to blow up people.  Not as messy.  And Muslims engaging in the political process is one of the tools of stealth Jihad, the topic Robert Spencer addresses in his book “Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs.”
• Identity Politics.  The authors believe that promoting an “Islamic-American” identity is a very good thing.    Muslims are piggy backing on our insane “cultural diversity” mantra that believes the opposite of our national motto of “E Pluribus Unum” - “out of many: one”.  That motto is rendered meaningless by the authors praise of Muslim identity.   Finally, the authors are promoting the idea that increased Muslim piety results not in increased radicalization, but will somehow “undercut the radical message that American values and practices are hostile to Islam.”  That is the greatest taqiyya (dissembling) message of all and could not be further from the truth.  Today’s Islam is classical Islam.  Classical Islam is not merely a religion, but an all encompassing political, military, religious, and cultural ideology that is diametrically opposed to every institution that has made our country the success it is.

Islamic expert Steve Emerson shares his opinions on this study HERE.  He calls the Study “flawed.”  I call it “purposefully deceitful.”

Why I am not “kinder” and “gentler” toward Islam

In a word:  “Truth.”  I admit it.  I have sacrificed “kinder and gentler” in exchange for conveying the objective reality of Islam.  In fact, I am not as concerned about Islam as much as I am concerned about the obliviousness (blindness, ignorance, gullibility) of the American people (in particular) toward the history, ideology, and aspirations of that ideology.

For reasons I only partially understand, most media and commentators insist on sugar-coating the Islamic ideology.  Certainly the mainstream media and most arms of our Federal Government do this.  And the White House goes several steps further by embracing, supporting, promoting, and giving preference to Muslims and Islamic nations over other faiths and over our non-Islamic allies.

The great majority of voices in the media and elsewhere are only repeating the Islamic story line.  So many reporters and government officials have taken the easy road by uncritically consuming the propaganda pumped out by CAIR and various Islamic leaders and promoters.  Most likely they are ignorant of “taqiyya”, the  sanctioned Islamic doctrine of purposeful deceit in defending or promoting Islam.  You would think that many of our politicians who are so practiced in this technique themselves would see through this.

Not many voices feel obligated to reveal the negatives of Islam.  Ignoring them will not make them go away.  One doesn’t have to read and become expert in the Qur’an to observe the widespread hate, violence, and immorality promoted by the adherents to Islamic Holy Books and associated ideology – the rampant hate, violence, and immorality carried out “in the name of Islam.” 

Whether the “radicals” are a minority of that “faith” or not is beside the point.  The point is that Islamic ideology breeds quantities of hatred and terror we see occur every day we don’t see coming from any other ideology on the face of the earth.  There are estimates that Islamic terrorists or “Jihadis” comprise only a small minority of all Muslims.  If only 10% are terrorists, 10% of all Muslims is 120 million.  So “only” 120 million Muslims are involved in terror against the infidel:  Jews, Christians, and the west.  And this is considered a conservative figure by many.  No one knows for sure how many Muslims are in various degrees of “practicing Jihad” as a means of promoting their ideology.

While the majority of Muslims may appear benign or friendly, under that veneer lies a variety of possibilities of levels of “devoutness” toward Islam, and varying stages of promoting the ideology, such as:

The most devout tend to be:

• Jihadi leaders and masterminds of terror
• Islamic leaders: Imams, etc.
• Those who plan and stage acts of terror
• Those who fund and overtly support acts of terror
• Those who actively promote hate and distrust toward the “infidel”, “the people of the book” (Jews and Christians), and the west generally.
• Those on the sidelines cheering on this effort.

The least devout tend to be:

• Those who appear to honestly condemn Islamic violence and supremacism (how many are these?)
• Those who are Muslim “in name only” because of their heritage but who are fully integrated into our western culture (how many are these?)
• Those in predominantly Muslim countries who are preoccupied with survival and who are most susceptible to the influences, threats, and coercion of the more devout (this is probably the majority).

So, how might the percentages line up for the 1.2 billion Muslims in the world based on the above breakdown?  It appears that while a minority are actual Jihadi terrorists, it is very likely a majority are supporters of their efforts against the west.

While Islam is not a monolithic faith, there is a common “brotherhood”  or “umma” that is shared among Muslims.  This explains in part why there was so little outcry against the acts of 9-11, even among those Muslims who are considered “moderate” by their neighbors.

I chalk up the gullibility of defenders of Islam by believing that they are simply not paying attention.  And by not paying attention they remain ignorant and accuse those of us who are paying attention of being mean spirited toward Muslims and Islam.  In practice, the gullible and ignorant non-Muslims have joined forces with CAIR and other Muslim deceivers in defaming those who are attempting to bring the reality of Islam to their attention.

It is interesting to note the definition of the word “bigotry”:  “Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.”  The “irrational” part of the definition is important.  Those who are paying attention to the nature of Islam and proclaim their informed rational understanding of that ideology are called “bigots” by those who insist on maintaining an uninformed irrational ignorance of Islam.  The “hatred” is maintained by the irrational against the rational.

For more on this topic, go to Islamic Threat Simplified.

My response to a clueless reporter about Islam…

An Orlando Sentinel reporter (Daryl) recently published the following request for insights on several subjects relating to the runaway Columbus, OH teen escaping from her Muslim parents.

Here is his request:

I'm seeking expert insight (e-mail observations are welcome) regarding an Ohio teenager who ran away to Florida, saying she was afraid her father would kill her for converting from Islam to Christianity. She had been living with a husband/wife pastor team, whom she met through a prayer group on Facebook. They took her in after she ran away, rode a bus from Ohio and popped up unannounced in Orlando. I'm looking to discuss the prevailing issues of sanctuary, religious freedom, anti-Muslim bias, honor killings, jurisdiction, propriety of clergy housing a teenage runaway, etc. The full story is found at: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-bk-rifqa-bary-ohio-teen-runaway-082109,0,2812365.story

Contact: Darryl Owens, dowens@orlandosentinel.com

Here you go, Daryl, from a mainstream American who is paying attention.

He said “I'm looking to discuss the prevailing issues of:”

(My responses follow each topic heading)

Sanctuary: Just as our various states establish wildlife sanctuaries for animals threatened by predators and excessive hunting, humans should have no less opportunity to find a sanctuary, a safe place where they are not threatened by predators, whatever the religious motive the predator might have. The duration of such sanctuary needs to be for at least the period of time necessary to assure the individual’s safety if she should return – even if that quest takes years. A life is at stake – Muslims who change their faith are not blowing smoke when they express concerns for their life.

Religious freedom: This is what this nation is all about. Liberty is what they call it. The liberty to choose one’s own faith and life path. The concept is complicated when the individual choosing to exercise her religious freedom – separate and apart from the influence of her parents - is a minor. But remember, in 99.999999% of the cases in this country, minors who decided they wanted to “change religions” have not changed from Islam to another religion. In such cases, the child is not in jeopardy of being terminated when possession and control is maintained by the parents.

Things get dicey when Islam is involved. There needs to be a whole new set of considerations. Islam is relatively new to this country. With its recent surge in numbers, there is a renewed boldness to invoke the more radical practices (from an American and Western European perspective) of fundamentalist Islam. It just so happens that one of those fundamentalist practices, clearly taught in the Quran, is killing the apostate family member. This places a whole new twist on the scenario where a minor (a late teen, in this case) overtly expresses her belief in a religion other than Islam and embarrasses her family. She clearly feels her life is threatened – and with legitimate reason. When threatened with death, religious freedom for a teen becomes very significant – a matter of life and death – the same as it was in 16^th century England.

Anti-Muslim bias: You need to make a distinction between a judgment based on fact and experience, and one based on misinformed fear or hatred. Those of us who have been paying attention to the resurgence of fundamentalist Islam – both in the middle east and in this nation – have made this distinction. Those who remain relatively ignorant of this resurgence view those who bring these radical Islamic teachings and practices to light as harboring an “anti-Muslim bias.” That is a dangerous accusation because it dismisses the truth. I personally do not understand how so many Americans can remain so blind to the literally thousands of malicious and inhumane actions against those with whom Muslims disagree. See this web site for examples that occur every day. How else do you explain the psychotic intolerance at the depiction of Muhammad cartoons, or toward an author critical of another’s religion (Rushdie) by Muslims. Sharia Law is not just another political party. It is a form of fascist suppression of the freedom and liberty that has been the basis of this nation’s founding and most of the wars we have fought. You need to know that a large majority of those practicing Islam in this nation would like to impose Sharia throughout this nation someday – the sooner the better.

Honor killings: See above and here and here. Granted, Pakistan is an Islamic nation and the practice of honor killings is much more common there. But wherever there is a concentration of Muslim population in this nation, such as in and around Columbus, OH, those folks are emboldened by their peers and numbers to practice the purer form of Islam, which includes honor killings. Where is the “moderate Muslim”, this article asks?

Jurisdiction: Consult your legal counsel who specializes in such matters.

Propriety of clergy housing a teenage runaway: If that teenager appeared on my doorstep, knowing what I know about the facts of this case thus far, she would have a place in our spare room. What would you do? One would be a perverse idiot to do otherwise. Because her protector happens to be “Christian clergy” somehow makes his actions suspect? Give me a break!

Etc: I am glad you are seeking an understanding of these issues. Hopefully you will not be deceived by the common Islamic practice of Taqiyya: The Islamic practice of lying and deceit for the sake of Allah. Muslim ”insight” will have this tendency.

Bush Ignorance and Islamic Deception

Following are two examples of propaganda about Islam: The first is misconception out of ignorance; the second is misdirection out of a desire to deceive. Both are dangerous.

First, the misconception – quoting what President Bush believes about Islam (the entire referenced article is here):

"Well, first of all, I believe in an Almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That's what I believe. I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren't religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that – we had a person blow up our – blow up a federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian, but that's not a Christian act to kill innocent people.
"And I just simply don't subscribe to the idea that murdering innocent men, women and children – particularly Muslim men, women and children in the Middle East – is an act of somebody who is a religious person.

Among the several serious problems I have with President Bush are these: First, his statement above reveals his ignorance of Islam, calling it “a religion of peace”. The facts speak otherwise, which he chooses to ignore. He embraces the deception (takiyya) as illustrated in the second example, following. For some inexplicable reason, he chooses to ignore these facts:

1) The hundreds of terrorist acts conducted monthly around the world by people calling themselves Muslim (see previous post).
2) Islamic doctrine of violence against the infidel (non-Muslims) based squarely on the content of the Koran. The so-called Islamic radicals (Islamists) properly interpret, teach and promote what the Koran teaches and what has historically been practiced.
3) The relative silence, the lack of outrage of so-called “moderate” Muslims against the teachings of their violent, hateful, intolerant brethren.

Bush is a useful idiot in regard to Islam. With regard to Christianity, he is willing to slander his professed faith by comparing one violent act of a so-called Christian with the continuing, almost countless, violent acts of Muslims around the world. This kind of ignorant spouting by our President should not be tolerated – he is a danger to our nation.

Mr. President is apparently ignorant of the basic doctrinal differences between Christianity and Islam. He is superimposing his peaceful, loving, tolerant Christian understanding of religion on a religion whose pure doctrine promotes violence, hate, and intolerance. Oh how I wish he would read Robert Spencer’s book, “Religion of Peace: Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn’t.” or Gregory Davis’ book “Religion of Peace?: Islam's War Against the World.”

Ok. Enough about our President. Now for our second example: Misdirection. This one is from a blog new to me called Muslims Against Sharia. “L.A.” from that blog site posted the following response to my previous post. He first highlighted this quote from another person who has observed a problem with Islam…

"Gradually--painfully gradually--people are beginning to see that Islam is the enemy. Period."

This is L.A.’s response…

The above quote is one of the milder examples of how many Westerners view Islam these days. This quote is a part of the comment to the article titled "Why We Cannot Rely on Moderate Muslims." posted on the Gates of Vienna blog. The article talks about radical Muslims in the West claiming to be moderates. It also brings up very interesting points. "[T]he government and media are avid to find moderate Muslims -- and as their desperation has increased, their standards have lowered.", "The situation is complicated by many factors, including, taqiyya and kitman", and "How can we ever trust assurances from self-proclaimed moderate Muslims when deception of non-Muslims is so widespread, and lying to infidels is an accepted and established way of hiding Islamic goals? The answer, with all its difficult implications, is: We can't."

But that's where the Gates of Vienna is wrong. The main problem is that the term 'Moderate Muslim' is poorly defined. There is a clear distinction between a 'Moderate Muslim' and an 'Islamist' and the distinction is in the ultimate goal. An Islamist believes in Islamic Supremacy. Islamist terrorists and their supporters want to achieve it by waging Jihad. Non-violent Islamists want to achieve it by peaceful and democratic means. The means are different, but the goals are the same: Islamic World Domination. Moderate Muslims do not believe in Islamic Supremacy. For someone not very familiar with the subject, the distinction may be subtle. But in reality, it is the most important, because everything that Democracies hold dear is based on this distinction. This is the Koran vs. the Constitution, Islamic State vs. Secular State, and ultimately, Dhimmitude (Subjugation to Islam) vs. Freedom. I cannot stress enough how important this distinction is!

Now, comes an uneasy task of weeding out false moderates. Hopefully, with a clear definition of a 'Moderate Muslim' that task could be a lot easier. Coming back to the title of this post. Muslim community as a whole is not the enemy. Part of it is. A large part. But not all of it. The next time you ask yourself a question "How can we ever trust assurances from self-proclaimed moderate Muslims?" don't trust their assurances; look at their record. No matter how well false-moderate Muslims such as CAIR or MPAC polished their facades, they have a record. Whether it is their support of terrorism or advocating Islamic supremacy, any Islamist group or figure who's been around long enough, at one time or another has shown its/his/her true face. Just because some government official or some talking head declares someone to be a moderate Muslim, it doesn't make it so. There are several counter-terrorism and Islam experts who keep track of Islamists. Most of these experts happen to be non-Muslim, but there is also a list of moderate Muslims who could be used as trusted sources for these inquiries. The list of those prominent Muslims is posted at the upper right corner of our blog. So now, my non-Muslim friends, when you have the tools to identify REAL moderate Muslims, you can no longer use your ignorance as an excuse to declare that Islam is the enemy. [bold added for emphasis.]

L.A.

As much as I would like to believe L.A. and what he represents, I can’t help but suspect the above statement may be a perfect example of misdirection, an application of the Islamic “Taqiyya” which is the Islamic practice of deceitfully concealing their faith or beliefs during periods of persecution.

The question remains, my Muslim friends, do we really have the tools to identify REAL moderate Muslims?

A question that non-ignorant, but alarmed Islamic scholars would pose: How can the REAL moderate Muslims remain Muslim when Islamic doctrine supports the Jihadists, the Islamists, both today and throughout most of Islamic history? Are REAL moderate Muslims equivalent to so-called “nominal Christians” who may attend church and call themselves "Christian" but really couldn’t care less about what their relgion teaches? Are REAL moderate Muslims "nominal" Muslims?

Until I get a believable answer to this Islamic doctrine question, my “crap detector” will continue to sound the alarm.

I do have to admit, their blog site is worth a look. There is some interesting, even humorous stuff on there.

The Challenge of Islam in America…

These comments are in response to those who wonder why some of us seem to be so concerned about the Muslim religion, including its’ practice in the United States. Let me explain my concern in a reasoned way – an argument other than “I’m not paranoid – they really are out to get us!!!!”

First, see if you agree with any of my opinions:

• Most Americans consider the great majority of Muslims to be moderate, benign, freedom-supporting people.

• The great majority of Americans don’t understand the basic doctrines of the Islamic faith nor the alignment of their “moral compass” as contrasted with that of practicing Christians.

• The great majority of Americans consider Islam through Christian-colored glasses, that is, from the religio-moral perspective of Christianity

• The great majority of Americans believe that most Muslims in the US are Americans first (believers in the values of freedom of expression, choice, etc.) and Muslims second.

• Most Americans greatly underestimate the Muslim threat in this nation.

Many Americans probably do not agree with the last bullet. So, I will especially focus on that issue: Why we are underestimating the Muslim threat in this nation.

Here is why I hold these opinions - based on the reality many do not yet understand.

Muslim growth and numbers:

Nothing is wrong with the growth of a benign group which has no intention of imposing its moral will and their form of government on me and my country.. I have no concern about the growth in numbers of Hindu’s, Buddhists, Shinto’s, Jews, or Baptists. It is the growth of an organization whose primary beliefs include coercion as the ultimate means of essential conversion and a highly repressive legal/moral code that is enforced by means that our culture believes is barbaric that is a problem. This spells trouble, especially for our culturally liberal friends (who are defenders of the Islamic faith) who hold the ability to do anything they please, no matter how morally outrageous or irresponsible, as their highest value. What an irony this will prove to be in the coming years! I almost wish I could be around to watch.

Back to the numbers. There are currently about 1.3 billion Muslim in the world and 3.9 million in the United States. The numbers of Christians is in decline in the world and in the United States. The rate of increase in the numbers of Muslims is increasing in both the world and in the United States.

Based on the rate of growth of Islam and the rate of decline of Christianity, in 2025 (18 years from now) Islam will be the majority religion in the world, with 30% (over 2.3 billion) versus 25% Christian. The number of Muslims in the United States will almost double, to over 7 million.

What difference do these numbers make? Let’s assume for a moment that the great majority of the 2.3 billion are “moderate” Muslim. Let’s say 90% are peaceloving and don’t really want to blow people up as an acceptable means of imposing their Sharia law and placating Allah. That leaves only 10% who tend toward the more literal version of Jihad…but how many constitute “only 10%.” Let’s see, that would be only 230,000,000 people that want to blow themselves up in our malls, restaurants, subways, and aircraft for their reward in heaven.

Muslim doctrine:

The point is, even 3, 4, or 5% who believe in and practice violent Jihad is a lot of folks creating a lot of trouble. But that is not my major concern. What exactly is a “moderate Muslim” and what does he believe?

Christianity went through a “reformation”, a return to traditional teachings of the faith, back in the 1500’s. These rebels against the Catholic church attempted to expunge the sectarian abuses and influences that crept into the Catholic church up till that time. They returned to the teachings of Christ, which centered on love, forgiveness, mercy, worship. The Catholic church itself instituted many reforms to correct the acknowledged abuses. In any event, neither coercion nor forced conversion were ever a teaching of Christ or of the early Church.

Many considered Islam a benign religion up until the last two or three decades. (Unfortunately, many still do.) A number of Muslim leaders themsleves have acknowledged that they have been a religion in decline in need of resurgence. Islam is felt to have strayed from its' roots, its' basic doctrinal teachings. That is why they have been benign until recently – they have not been practicing what their founder, Muhammad, has preached.

Islam is in a period of reformation – a return to their roots. Although unlike Christianity, their roots are not love, forgiveness, mercy, the sweet Christ-like attitudes that we take for granted. They are the attitudes of Muhammad. Let’s just say that they are the opposite of Christ. While during the early part of his life Muhammad practiced a degree of tolerance, during the latter part he practiced anything but. He taught war, he taught retribution, he taught conquest. He developed Sharia law (this is a whole topic unto itself). Let’s just say it involves the removal of various body parts for various infractions of the law. And oh yes, it does not involve freedom of expression, or religion, or women’s rights – take note, cultural liberals!

Those who point to portions of the Koran that sound peaceful and Kum Bay Yah-like…those are mostly in the early sections, the equivalent to the sequence of our Old Testament relative to the New Testament. The violent teachings occur in the latter portions of the Koran. And just as in Christianity where the later teachings of Christ supercede the teachings in the Old Testament (turn the other cheek, not eye for an eye), the Koran sequence is just the reverse. It started with turn the other cheek and later became “cut off the other cheek”. These later sections of the Koran supercede the earlier sections in this current Islamic “reformation.

So, who is a moderate Muslim? Who are the 90+% who are not involved in violent Jihad? What do they really believe? Are they the equivalent to the liberal Christians who doubt the literal messages and real significance of the New Testament? Are they in fact liberal Muslim who do not literally believe the teachings of Mohammad in his later life? Or are these “moderates” to some degree sympathetic to the recent Muslim reformation – the return to the glory days of the conquests of Muhammad? How many are sympathizers and in what ways are they lending support to the "reformed" core values of their faith?

Violent Jihad aside for the moment, there are several basic tenets of Islam. These deserve separate study apart from the space I want to allocate here for their understanding. But I will simply remind you what they are:

· The strictly narrow and subservient role of women
· Sharia law: Muslim law that takes precedence over all other forms of national government
· Dhimmitude: The second class and extra taxed condition of those who do not claim the Islamic faith.
· Taqiyya: The divine right to lie to advance the cause of Islam.. Examples of the use of this doctrine include Muslims deceptively pointing only to the early portions of the Koran to illustrate how peace-loving they are. A more outrageous example is the President of Iran claiming there was no holocaust and others claiming 9-11 was perpetrated by the United States or Israeli government to incite anti-Muslim outrage.
· Role of free choice in selecting a religion or no religion: None.

This latter tenet, the suppression of free choice, presents a real moral dilemma for this country. We cherish freedom and free choice as our highest value. Yet there is an organization out there (Islam) that wants to use our freedom of choice as a means to install their form of government and religious values that contends that free choice is evil.

Many of us question what business is it of ours to be concerned about a religion that does not share their values with most of us. How narrow minded and bigoted it is to be concerned about another religion in this manner.

Let’s pretend, for a moment, that Islam is not a religion, but is a political party. Let’s say that political party desires to overthrow our government by violent means and install an oppressive government that the political organization promotes? What would our attitude be toward that political party? Should such political group be outlawed?

This is exactly what is being taught in many of the Islamic schools within this nation, and certainly in most Muslim nations. Except for the fact of it being a “religion”, the resurgent “Islam” is another organization that desires to impose an oppressive form of government and faith on the people of the world and of this nation.

We are grossly and dangerously under prepared for the next jihadist event in this nation. Our national ignorance of the basics of the reformed Islamic faith are a big part of our problem. Blind tolerance and political correctness is another.

There are more Islamic jihadi sympathizers and helpers willing to assist in the next attack and the establishment of Sharia law in this nation than the public and possibly the federal government imagines.

For every example that can be shown of an American Muslim condemning terrorism or Jihadi terrorist acts by fellow Muslims, there are ten examples where they defend such actions, make excuses for such actions, or express outrage and offense that we are singling out Muslims for their terrorist acts. Nine out of ten times, Muslims express more concern over protecting their rights and privacy than they do over Islamic violence, murder, and terror.

I want to elaborate on this last point through the words of Brigitte Gabriel. She says it much better than I because she has lived through the Muslim torment.

Brigitte Gabriel is a Lebanese Catholic who, as a child in Lebanon experienced the Islamic revolution in her former Christian country. In her book “Because They Hate”, she ponders the "moderate" Muslim American…

“It is certain that there are genuinely moderate Muslims, perhaps a substantial number, who do not seek to impose Islam on this country and the world through violent jihad. However, they are conspicuous by their silence regarding the more problematic doctrines of Islam. To the extent that Muslim “leaders” and lobbying organizations in the United States even address the issue, they offer nothing more than vague, tepid condemnations of terrorist violence and heated denials that the behavior of Islamic terrorists has any connection with Islam.

Where is the Muslim outrage in this country over the supposed few who hijacked their religion? Where is the Million Muslim March on the Mall in Washington, D.C., sending a message to all Muslims in the Arabic world condemning the killing of human beings in the name of Allah? Where is the cry to raise the consciousness of the rest of the Muslim world about their hijacked religion? If something of yours had been stolen, wouldn’t you scream to the world that someone had hijacked it?

Where are the voices of Western Muslims, particularly the American Muslim community, sending a clear message to the Arabic world that we are American, and when you attack one of us you attack all of us? We condemn and consider the enemy Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, al Gamaat al Islamiya, and the rest of the collection of barbaric Islamic thugs and murderers who have neither conscience nor humanity. Where is the outrage of the Muslim community? Why aren’t the imams of every mosque holding press conferences, and inviting the media to tell the American public, “We are Americans first. Any enemy of America is our enemy. We will work to find, stop, arrest, turn in, and condemn anyone in our community who aspires to radicalize our religion and harm our country”?

Why do we not hear this condemnation? Because their allegiance is to their Muslim religion, not to America. They may be “moderate” Muslims. But that moderation is only an abstention from violent Jihad. They still maintain their allegiance, and it does not include us.”


Sources for further information:

http://jihadwatch.org/
http://jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/
“Because They Hate” by Brigitte Gabriel (book)
http://www.danielpipes.org/
http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/