Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sun 10/22/2006 View Sat 10/21/2006 View Fri 10/20/2006 View Thu 10/19/2006 View Wed 10/18/2006 View Tue 10/17/2006 View Mon 10/16/2006
1
2006-10-22 Home Front: Culture Wars
West Point opens Islamic worship space as Muslim cadets increase
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Fred 2006-10-22 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 It would be fine if we weren't at war with Islamist fascism.

But we are.

How can we be sure some of those muslims are not infiltrating for the purpose of Jihad?
Posted by anon1 2006-10-22 00:41||   2006-10-22 00:41|| Front Page Top

#2 Exactly, anon1. If they want a space to worship, fine, have a space. But they need to remember that this is OUR country, with OUR traditions, and OUR military acadamy. They are in OUR culture now. We better be damned vigilant. I would hate to give away the farm. We sure as sh*t bend over backwards to accommodate any sennnnnnsitivity that Islam has. Just ask any Air Force lassie that served in Saudi in GW1.
Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul  2006-10-22 03:03||   2006-10-22 03:03|| Front Page Top

#3 Seems to me like offering the virus a goat host. Or, since we're talking about WP, mebbe a mule.
Posted by .com 2006-10-22 04:26||   2006-10-22 04:26|| Front Page Top

#4 A perhaps less than charitable view of said scholorships ....
Posted by Adriane 2006-10-22 06:12||   2006-10-22 06:12|| Front Page Top

#5 I'd like to see the imam thoroughly vetted...
Posted by DanNY 2006-10-22 07:39||   2006-10-22 07:39|| Front Page Top

#6 He's not the only imam in the Army. They all need to be thoroughly vetted. But that's all. We do need to integrate and assimilate muzzies into America. All this is part of it. Note that the more one moves into orthodox Judaism in America, the greater the concern that their children will be so assimilated into America that they will lose their distinctive Jewish identity.

Yesterday I attended the wedding of the daughter of my 100% Jewish brother-in-law. There was absolutely no reference to Judaism in the white bread Protestant service or any of the reception festivities and no apparent concern on the part of the bride's second generation American grandparents.

That's how we make Americans over generations and we need to get started with the muzzies. It's how we'll get well trained loyal Amderican officers who understand Islam thoroughly. Failure to do so will only give us Euro-muzzies, not Americans.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-10-22 08:06||   2006-10-22 08:06|| Front Page Top

#7 I would hate to give away the farm. We sure as sh*t bend over backwards to accommodate any sennnnnnsitivity that Islam has.

Snort! Give away the Farm? We've already sold the damn thing to the Saudis'. Seriously, the destruction of America has already been decided upon, the deal has closed and the checks have been written.

#8 We do need to integrate and assimilate muzzies into America.

The ones that can be assimilated are considered apostate by their brethren. The majority will not be possible to assimilate. We need to stop ALL muslim immigration to this country and start working on ejecting the ones that are here.

I would be much happier if we would remove recognition of Islam as a legitimate religion, then proceed accordingly. Oh well, maybe after we've lost a city or three.



Posted by NoBeards 2006-10-22 08:24||   2006-10-22 08:24|| Front Page Top

#8 Adriane, if you're suggesting that the foreign cadets are there just to keep them safe, all I can say is that anyone the sponsoring country sends has to pass the acceptance criteria at the Academy.

So if they're there to be kept away from violence at home, they have to meet and continue to meet standards here. That includes the full military drill (being dressed down by upper classmen for tiny infractions -- nobody cares who your daddy is), physical program and academic program (which includes the calculus, physics, information technology and a lot of other mandatory classes).
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 08:30||   2006-10-22 08:30|| Front Page Top

#9 The majority will not be possible to assimilate.

So you say. I'd like to give them the choice and know for sure before we start adopting religious tests that are an anathema to everything my country stands for as you recommend. And that doesn't require losing a city or three; it requires treating them like any other American until they prove that as a group each individual deserves otherwise. And then I'd give each individual the chance to determine which group they wish to belong to. We are not going to succeed with Know-Nothingism.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-10-22 08:30||   2006-10-22 08:30|| Front Page Top

#10 How can we be sure some of those muslims are not infiltrating for the purpose of Jihad?

We can't, any more than we can be SURE that some other cadet won't decide to frag his buddies in combat or decide not to serve and start holding press conferences in Canada instead.

However,

the 4 years at the Academy are designed to wash out those kinds of people. Strong bonds are formed (and yes, some rivalries too) as they go through the pressure-filled years together. USMA has a pretty good history of either shaping people or having them leave.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 08:35||   2006-10-22 08:35|| Front Page Top

#11  they need to remember that this is OUR country, with OUR traditions, and OUR military acadamy. They are in OUR culture now

AP, a good number of the Muslims at USMA are citizens born here. So while I agree that I am unwilling to see us adopt sharia or distort the core of who we are to accomodate Islam, you'd better be having that debate WITHIN our culture, because people ARE either converting or being born into Islam here.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 08:37||   2006-10-22 08:37|| Front Page Top

#12 Islam is not a religion but a totalitarian death-cult.

Islam yearns for a world-wide Caliphate and total submission of all people, plus chattel status for women. Not to forget dhimittude, conversion, or death being offered to infidels. And death to apostates. (Talk about "crimes against humanity" -- there it is advocated on a massive scale.)

We will NOT win this war until the above is clear to a majority of key political, military, and intellectual figures in the West.

If we are to survive as a civilization, one day Moslem leaders will be hunted down and executed in their countries, or banned from the USA -- the same way Nazi leaders have been. The Caliphate is no more acceptable than the Third Reich.
Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2006-10-22 10:32||   2006-10-22 10:32|| Front Page Top

#13 The Caliphate is no more acceptable than the Third Reich.

Agreed on this. I disagree that Islam isn't a religion -- it is. It also happens to be one in which separation of church and state is NOT sought, but is rejected. Which is the danger.

But don't expect the leaders at West Point to run point on that issue by excluding Muslim citizens and visitors, or by refusing to offer appropriate space for worship. The Army will -- and SHOULD -- accomodate religious belief so long as the believers adhere to Army regs and the spirit behind them.

The fight is out in the culture. Or literally, on the ground in places like Iraq where the military is quite clear about the nature and ideology of the enemy.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 10:45||   2006-10-22 10:45|| Front Page Top

#14 Are Nazis and Communists welcome at West Point?
Posted by Kalle (kafir forever) 2006-10-22 10:50||   2006-10-22 10:50|| Front Page Top

#15 Actually it might prove useful to have the center on site so they can monitor things. They are STUPID if they don't watch the place.
Posted by Cyber Sarge 2006-10-22 11:42||   2006-10-22 11:42|| Front Page Top

#16 Kalle, much as you hate the fact, Islam is a religion.

National Socialism and Communism are not. They function in similar ways, but they're not.

And consider the fact that the sermons at this center can be attended by ANYONE on post. Without prior notice or the need for permission.

Yes, many muslims are radicalized. Yes, many mosques are politicized. But it is not automatically the case that the fundamentalist Islamacists define what Islam is everywhere and for all muslims -- despite the fact that they would like that to be true.

I have zero interest in Islam as a religion, personally. But I will not interfere with it, in those places where it does not:

* advocate death to Jews, apostates or infidels

* prevent anyone from leaving the religion if they choose

* forceably marry young females

* refuse to pledge allegiance to the civil authorities (or refuse to obey lawful orders if military)

and so on. In other words, the issue is the behavior. IF muslims can pursue their religion without these and similar behaviors, more power to them.

But if not, then the behavior needs to be confronted and stopped.

That's the basis of this country's approach to religion since before the Revolution here. I am not willing to change it without clear evidence that the majority of muslims are unwilling to abide by our rules.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 11:47||   2006-10-22 11:47|| Front Page Top

#17 So you say.

Yes. So I say, and so they demonstrate with their words and actions. Islam is NOT a religion, it pretends to be one, but that does not make it legitimate.

Do you consider Scientology to be a religion?

Islam is a death cult, it resembles no other religion currently practiced these days. In fact, it is the polar opposite, by design. Mo' was pretty ingenious when he cobbled together this abortion called Islam, he covered all the bases, of course it helps to have a bunch of ignorant, inbred primitives as your seedstock of faithful adherents.

Look at Europe, see what importing Muslims has brought them, by the time we realize that we have made a terrible mistake, it may be too late. I believe in what this country stands for as well, but I am unwilling to risk its demise for a group that has demonstrated time-and-time again for 1400 years that it is predatory. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Islam has got to go, and so do the Muslims.

Posted by NoBeards 2006-10-22 11:48||   2006-10-22 11:48|| Front Page Top

#18 Religion, floor cleaner, political system, dessert topping, cradle-to-grave ideology.

Quite the thing.
Posted by .com 2006-10-22 11:50||   2006-10-22 11:50|| Front Page Top

#19 Wikipedia's definition will do:

Religion is a system of social coherence based on a common group of beliefs or attitudes concerning an object, person, unseen being, or system of thought considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine or highest truth, and the moral codes, practices, values, institutions, and rituals associated with such belief or system of thought. It is sometimes used interchangeably with "faith" or "belief system"[1], but is more socially defined than that of personal convictions.

Islam is a religion. It posits a supreme being who places moral demands on followers.

Some followers of that religion are predatory, many are tribal and uncivilized. Those behaviors are totally unacceptable and must be stopped cold.

If muslims are willing to live and worship here while respecting our norms of behavior, that's fine by me.

I'm not naive, however. We have ample reason to monitor what is being spread through the Saudi funded mosques and STOP IT. We have ample reason to monitor the funds transfers, weapons practice etc. of a bunch of jihdis and STOP THEM.

Do it. But base it on the behavior. I will not be part of a movement that establishes a thought police. I'm happy to be part of a movement that comes down hard on destructive behavior, whether by the Nation of Islam, other converts, immigrants or the children of immigrants.

Or, for that matter, by leftists promulgating equally dangerous and destructive teachings.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 11:57||   2006-10-22 11:57|| Front Page Top

#20 Kalle, much as you hate the fact, Islam is a religion.

No. It is not! And no amount of insisting that it is will change the fact that it was cobbled together from half a dozen belief systems of the period, and then tailored to allow whatever vile and evil acts old Mo' felt like including.

Just because he was able to dupe a few desert nomads into following him, and then spread the sickness by deceit and bloodshed doesn't alter the fact that Islam is NOT a religion. If one examines Shar'ia in depth, you discover that it is nothing more than an enforcement mechanism to keep the conquered cowed and submissive.

You, and NS, each seem to have two alternating opinions vis-a-vis Islam that are 180 degrees out of sync with each other. The opinions that is.

Why is that?

Posted by NoBeards 2006-10-22 11:59||   2006-10-22 11:59|| Front Page Top

#21 Why would I know about NS' beliefs? S/he believes whatever s/he believes. I hold my own opinions.

Sorry, but by pretty much every definition, Islam is indeed a religion. Not a very attractive one to me, but a religion nonetheless.

And it is one that is at least nominally professed by 1.5 BILLION people. Any effective response to its (physical, cultural, legal, religious) aggression will need to begin by taking seriously the roles it plays for its adherents. Who, by the way, differ greatly in the degree and nature of that adherence.

Push back against that aggression -- yes!! But understand that you aren't going to get very far by deluding yourself that it is merely a "death cult" "cobbled together". Whatever YOU think of Islam, its adherents regard it as the true religion, and its teachings as the commands of God.

The danger to the West is much more serious and deep than any cobbled together death cult would pose.

One of those dangers is that there is a small but accelerating rate of conversion of westerners to Islam. Some of them are converting out of a need to be told exactly what to do with their lives. Others are converting out of a deep disgust with a pop culture that is crude, deeply sexualized and coarse. But they ARE converting, a few now but more than a couple years ago and -- I will lay odds -- more still in the future, unless those with other values lay claim to the mantle of reforming our culture AND defending it against the "anyone but the West" crowd.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 12:52||   2006-10-22 12:52|| Front Page Top

#22 Some people are just stubborn to the point of being irrational. That is why sometimes I think Islam won't have to raise a finger to destroy your country. You'll do it yourselves.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 13:15||   2006-10-22 13:15|| Front Page Top

#23 I don't see the need to be in synch with lotp nor she with me. I do see the need to obey the law, which you do not. We aren't at the point where we as a society have refused to classify Islam as a religion. Personally I think most religions, Islam, as well as Mormonism, Christian Science, Scientology, Branch Davidianism, and Roman Catholocism provide assurance, comfort spiritual and moral guidance to the vast majority of their followers. They also have, to greater and lesser extents at various times, numbers of really wacko followers who think they've found the one true path to the ultimate truth. Doesn't mean we then get to line them all up and ship them out of the country to whereever they or their forebearers came from regardless of what they've done as individuals. It may prove inconvenient, it may prove dangerous, But it is the law many are sworn to uphold. If you don't like it, change the law. But don't expect a lot of support from all those whose religions have their share of wacko fringe elements.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-10-22 13:22||   2006-10-22 13:22|| Front Page Top

#24 Islam won't have to raise a finger to destroy your country. You'll do it yourselves.

I'm quite confident neither Islam nor any other earthly power can destroy America. We're too strong and getyting stronger by the day. Only we are strong enough to do it.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-10-22 13:25||   2006-10-22 13:25|| Front Page Top

#25 Well said, LOTP. I lived in Morocco for six months in 1976. I thought the people were really friendly and nice. Some of the very poor people were very generous, even to 'wealthy' Americans. A guy came out of a shack while several of us were waiting for our driver and insisted we have tea with him. We obliged, and he was quite pleased.

Some of 'em went to Spain and blew stuff up, but I didn't know those guys. Many of them just want to live their lives and be left alone, and are not interested in jihad. Whether those folks comprise 88% or 0.88% is a matter of some debate.

I never went to Saudi Arabia; I imagine it's different.

Living among them, for six months, 30 years ago - I was impressed by their religion. Now I am depressed by the radicals who use it as an excuse to take power and control of others.
Posted by Bobby 2006-10-22 13:31||   2006-10-22 13:31|| Front Page Top

#26 We're too strong and getyting stronger by the day.

I'd argue the exact opposite. You are divided, and if some commentators here had their way, you'd be divided even further. (Which brings up an interesting question, namely, where would this division stop?)
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 14:20||   2006-10-22 14:20|| Front Page Top

#27  You are divided, and if some commentators here had their way, you'd be divided even further

Unlike, say, Canada???
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 14:28||   2006-10-22 14:28|| Front Page Top

#28 Yes, quite unlike Canada.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 14:38||   2006-10-22 14:38|| Front Page Top

#29 Lol. It's a doodle.
Posted by .com 2006-10-22 14:41||   2006-10-22 14:41|| Front Page Top

#30 Islam is a religion. Deal with it. Billions of people take great comfort in it and have embraced it with deep conviction from cradle to grave. What is the point of squabbling over the semantics of the absolute technical meaning of religion. It is what it is. If you call a dog a duck, it's still a dog. What is your point?
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 14:46||   2006-10-22 14:46|| Front Page Top

#31 Or, for that matter, by leftists promulgating equally dangerous and destructive teachings.

Can you give some examples? What things promulgated by leftists are in your opinion equally dangerous and destructive?
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 15:15||   2006-10-22 15:15|| Front Page Top

#32 Oh goodie a troll. Yippee.

Posted by anon 2006-10-22 15:19||   2006-10-22 15:19|| Front Page Top

#33 So true, anon. Usually you can ID them by their chosen nym, and this one does not disappoint.

So far, I've seen nothing but sniping, maybe one complete sentence, but unsubstantive across the board. A contrary little babblemonkey.

You want dialog, verba non facta? Then pin the target on yourself and post some substance.

You've justified nothing you've "asserted" - provided no facts or analysis, intelligent or otherwise - so your babble doesn't actually qualify for the term. Earn your right to question others and expect the investment of thought and effort.

Failing that, piss off. But please, HAND.
Posted by .com 2006-10-22 15:32||   2006-10-22 15:32|| Front Page Top

#34 Usually you can ID them by their chosen nym, and this one does not disappoint. heh.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 15:33||   2006-10-22 15:33|| Front Page Top

#35 Oh goodie a troll.

Well if you say so...
I agreed with most of what lotp said, except that that last statement seemed like an odd thing to throw in there at the last minute.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 15:34||   2006-10-22 15:34|| Front Page Top

#36 If one examines Shar'ia in depth, you discover that it is nothing more than an enforcement mechanism to keep the conquered cowed and submissive.

Put it that way, the reason Judeo/Christianity is a religion today is that the Pharohs of Egypt recognized a perfect Slave Religion when they saw it.
Think from a Pharohs viewpoint, "Do not strike back, turn the other cheek, do not combat "False Gods" God will do it for you, and you should work really hard to get your reward, which you only get after you're safely dead so you can't tell anyone you've been lied to.

The Pharohs must have been laughing their asses off. Free slave labor with a religion that actively helps the entrenched Rulers.
Posted by Redneck Jim 2006-10-22 15:49||   2006-10-22 15:49|| Front Page Top

#37 What things promulgated by leftists are in your opinion equally dangerous and destructive?

Let's see ....

* abrogation of national identity and borders

* empowerment of government by UN / EU / similar unaccountable bureaucracies in place of representative government of accountable elected officials; i.e. deep dislike of the marketplace of ideas and a desire to control things "for peoples' own good"

* state control of firearms and a state monopoly on the possession/potential defensive use of them

* deep dislike of free market economies

* desire to destroy Western civilization and culture and a desire to impose as an alternative a coercive regime "for peoples' good"

That will do for a start ....
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 15:50||   2006-10-22 15:50|| Front Page Top

#38 Usually you can ID them by their chosen nym, and this one does not disappoint.

It comes from this emblem, actually. You don't have to like it. I see that you are equally as creative with nym picking.

So far, I've seen nothing but sniping, maybe one complete sentence, but unsubstantive across the board...You've justified nothing you've "asserted" - provided no facts or analysis

I simply made an observation: There are some of you who would like to exclude Muslims from your military. I don't see this as anything other than an admission that Muslims cannot be true Americans. This is indeed divisive. And I cannot see how dividing yourself is supposed to make you stronger.

As to Canada, I don't think we are divided in the same manner that you appear to be in the U.S. In fact, we're too polite to do anything other than adopt lotp's point of view....most of it anyway.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 16:18||   2006-10-22 16:18|| Front Page Top

#39 Well I'd love to be able to look at iit like lotp does, but I just can't. As much as it nauseates me harshness is called for.
As long as M ILLIONS support a jihad against our lifestyle society and culture and do so expressly in the name of "the ummah" of ISlam in toto, and are only rebuked in this by a small minority (who all need bodygguards and frequent relocation) I have no choice but to look askance at all things Islam.
It is undoubtedly a hardsip for patriotic muslim-americans joining the US military.
Posted by J.D. Lux 2006-10-22 16:53||   2006-10-22 16:53|| Front Page Top

#40 Tell the Quebeçois that Canada is not divided. Or the Albertans! LOL

Re: muslims in the US military, the question in my mind isn't whether we should exclude them, but whether they will adopt and abide by our norms. Those norms include loyalty to the country and to the military oath.

If one says, "My religion prohibits me from swearing and maintaining allegiance to any secular authority", then I can respect that -- but I won't allow that person to serve in uniform or become a citizen.

What worries many here is the sanctioned practice of taqiyya - deliberate and strategic lying in order to deceive and lull the enemy who is too strong to be taken on directly. As you no doubt are aware, taqiyya is encouraged by many muslim religious leaders and has certainly be practiced to devastating effect recently, as in the numerous faked videos that were used to justify the latest decade of intifada in Palestine, that were promulgated out of Lebanon this past summer and in a lot of other documented cases.

Those who belong to a community which sanctions and encourages taqiyya cannot be trusted even if they do swear allegiance. Unfortunately, while a few muslims have spoken out to decry the effects of taqiyya on public perception of muslims, the voices have been few and weak.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 16:55||   2006-10-22 16:55|| Front Page Top

#41 I can't believe I'm saying this, but considering what we know now, I have wonder if we can allow them to serve in the military like we would just any other American citizen. You have verbalized it well, lopt. It's not that there are not Muslim Americans who make great patriotic soldiers - but that as a group, they have clearly shown that their allegiance lies with their religion which shows no loyalty to country or their neighbors. Their religion swears their loyalty to killing infidels.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 17:33||   2006-10-22 17:33|| Front Page Top

#42 One more thought. It is not a right to be allowed to serve in our military. You are selected as being worthy.

We do not openly gay men. We do not allow people who are too short, too tall, too dumb, too crazy, or who have made life choices that show a lack of good judgement, etc. We are in a war against militant Islam. I don't think they should be allowed to serve without quite a bit of thought going into their potential for sabotage.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 17:38||   2006-10-22 17:38|| Front Page Top

#43 You don't have to like it.

Lol, no that's true - it's simply pretentious, just as it was meant to be.

.com is as anonymous as anonymous, so you're implication is asinine and absurd.

I simply made an observation

No, you didn't say that, or anything near to that. You came in with your tiny stick and poked - and you manners sucked. Who knows what you expected, but I don't much care.

Regards what follows, I use "we" here and there. Anyone who wants to disassociate themselves are perfectly free to do so.

As for Muslims who do not assimilate or even try, who continue to put their "religion" above all else (Rule 1: Muzzy First), who isolate and segregate themselves by manner, by complaints about free speech, by dress - and then whine about it, and who practice a host of other cancerous tumor behavior, the fact is that they have chosen divisive behavior. I, and many others, don't welcome them anymore. We will not be weaker for their loss, we will simply lose an irritant (at best) or implacable foes (at worst). Who cares? We don't want their cultural baggage - it has been examined, weighed, and found not only wanting, but brutal and barbaric.

Thanks for playing.
Posted by .com 2006-10-22 17:47||   2006-10-22 17:47|| Front Page Top

#44 Tell the Quebeçois that Canada is not divided. Or the Albertans! LOL

Touché. Nothing more I can say on that.

the question in my mind isn't whether we should exclude them, but whether they will adopt and abide by our norms....What worries many here is the sanctioned practice of taqiyya

That's a tough nut to crack isn't it. How do you solve this problem so that at the same time you stay true to your values and all that you stand for? My personal preference would be to first give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but at the same time provide ample opportunity for anyone to demonstrate their allegiance (a way to probe for conflicting values). In other words, be inclusive and not exclusive. That way, should a conflict in values emerge, you have all the justification in the world to do what you want with that person.

The granting of Canadian citizenship takes full advantage of this, as an example (and this is only a recent change post 9/11). To be granted citizenship you must sign an agreement and affirm that you will indeed adopt and abide by our norms. Should you be discovered to support terrorism, your citizenship will be taken away and you will be booted out. This is just an example, but it demonstrates a reasonable approach, I think.

Unfortunately, while a few muslims have spoken out to decry the effects of taqiyya on public perception of muslims, the voices have been few and weak.

All the more reason to welcome and extoll those few, rather than toss them out with the rest.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 18:05||   2006-10-22 18:05|| Front Page Top

#45 fnv - you're hopelessly naive. You'll always be reacting and NEVER proactive. Trust all muzzies when their leaders actively advocate lying? I don't think soooooo. I'll take the proactive means - demonstrate your loyalty and we'll talk, otherwise, by your loyalty to the ummah, you're a second-class citizen here - and should be quarantined. I foresee Relocation camps. Any propert equal in size to Dearborn, Lodi, and Lackawanna available?
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 18:36||   2006-10-22 18:36|| Front Page Top

#46 you're hopelessly naive

No, you just have different values. Like I said, you're dividing yourselves even further. First it's the Muslims, then it's people like me who don't agree with you (and I'm not a Liberal, pacifist, or <insert label here>). You sure you have the numbers? Where will it stop?
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 18:45||   2006-10-22 18:45|| Front Page Top

#47 when will it stop? When we're (western society and culture)secure. Whether you support the Islamists or not (I don't think you do), or simply facilitate their infiltration and acceptance, you then become an accomplice. I have no issue with including you in the enemy. Naivety is no excuse on your part - you've said as much.
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 18:51||   2006-10-22 18:51|| Front Page Top

#48 demonstrate your loyalty and we'll talk

For a Muslim, that would be impossible in your world. Joining the army would be a good way, but apparently they shouldn't be allowed in.

And what about Americans with dual-citizenships? Their loyalty could be questioned as well. Oops, here comes another group of second class citizens.

And don't even mention Mexican-Americans. They could have illegal aliens amongst their families. Should they be trusted?
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 18:51||   2006-10-22 18:51|| Front Page Top

#49 dual citizenship shouldn't be allowed - take a position and defend it. Illegals should be deported and NO anchor babies. I live in San Diego, what do you know about it? Muslims can prove their loyalty. Let them demonstrate how...and watch em. Trust, but verify. Their own religion's members have made them complicit. I'm Roman Catholic, and even though I'm only 47, I remember when the Pope's control was an issue. Why should Muslims be given a pass?
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 19:00||   2006-10-22 19:00|| Front Page Top

#50 simply facilitate their infiltration and acceptance, you then become an accomplice.

Slippery slope, Frank. Do you believe in being assumed innocent until proven guilty or don't you? If you don't, then you keep bad company, sir. Say hello to your friend Hugo, Fidel, Kim, Hu, and a bunch of others.

But go ahead and change if you want to.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 19:01||   2006-10-22 19:01|| Front Page Top

#51 wow! nice company! Surprised Adolph wasn't there?
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 19:17||   2006-10-22 19:17|| Front Page Top

#52 My bad: Adolf...but you knew that, didn't you?
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 19:22||   2006-10-22 19:22|| Front Page Top

#53 dual citizenship shouldn't be allowed - take a position and defend it.

Dual citizenships are moot. People can renounce their other citizenship for the sake of conveniance and still have divided loyalties. Oops, another group of second class citizens: immigrants.

wow! nice company!

It's true though. If that's what you believe.
Alright then...make it only Pat Buchanan.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 19:25||   2006-10-22 19:25|| Front Page Top

#54 should I have to write /sarc?

you DO NOT want to pursue this logic. It will confirm your status. Dual Citizenships are unacceptable. Anchor babies are a confirmed goal for illegals to appeal their status/deportation.

The Buchanon reference is a punkass lite version of Godwin's Law for those (you) too cowardly to offer alternatives that ACTUALLY work. As .com noted, you have not offered EFFECTIVE alternatives. Until then, good day to you.
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 19:57||   2006-10-22 19:57|| Front Page Top

#55 Dual Citizenships are unacceptable.

I didn't say they were or were not. I make the claim that getting into a fit about it is useless. The only way to prevent fear of divided loyalties is to stop immigration altogether. In the context of lotp's mentioning taqiyya, you should understand why that is true. If you can accept lotp's argument, you should have no problems with mine (regarding citizenships and immigration).

you have not offered EFFECTIVE alternatives

It seems that way to you because you have a different value system, it appears. In that case, nothing I say will ever be acceptable to you. I'm against relocation camps, you're not, end of story.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 20:28||   2006-10-22 20:28|| Front Page Top

#56 Put it that way, the reason Judeo/Christianity is a religion today is that the Pharohs of Egypt recognized a perfect Slave Religion when they saw it.

Think from a Pharohs viewpoint, "Do not strike back, turn the other cheek, do not combat "False Gods" God will do it for you, and you should work really hard to get your reward, which you only get after you're safely dead so you can't tell anyone you've been lied to.

You are an idiot. The age of the Pharohs was over before the emergence of Christianity. Of course Judaism was around, and the exodus out of Egypt is well documented in the scriptures. Those people were Jews, and were all over the Middle East LONG before Mo' crawled out of the desert with his made up religion.

As for all the, "turn the other cheek" stuff, it doesn't mean what you think it does.

Personally, I'm not very religious, having rejected Catholicism at an early age, along with all forms of organized religion. Say, just what was your point, anyway?

Posted by NoBeards 2006-10-22 20:35||   2006-10-22 20:35|| Front Page Top

#57 I'm not against - I only look at them as an acceptable last alternative. Realism - Catch It©
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 20:36||   2006-10-22 20:36|| Front Page Top

#58 fnv -- There are few absolute guarantees short of extreme measures (relocate all muslims etc.) But that doesn't mean we should sit back, find everything hunky dory and be surprised by a major attack from within or a major act of betrayal.

I made the point earlier that the 4 year cadet experience at West Point is deliberately intense and rigorous. It's also rather competitive, while inherently demanding a lot of teamwork. Along the way, cadets are challenged to be very clear about their moral compass.

Certainly it's conceivable that some young person would be sufficiently motivated and able to hide true allegiances the whole time he or she was there. BUT ... it's not likely. Going for days on too little sleep tends to make people say what they're really thinking, for instance, and at USMA there is no such thing as skipping class to sleep in. Class attendance is a mandatory military duty as are the other aspects of the program.

On the other hand, people reconsider and change their opinions based on experience. Many here have concluded that many muslims are not to be trusted and that the risks involved are sufficiently pressing and sufficiently high that it warrants actions that will regretably harm some who are innocent. That's a conclusion based on experience via the news and in some cases personal experience as well.

Experience goes both ways. Being respected, but also challenged, in a diverse environment that places teamwork above differences is a pretty powerful experience for 18-22 year olds.

Coming to a foreign culture you've steeled yourself to find hostile and discovering that you can practice your religion without fear or disdain -- and also finding that you are respected enough that they challenge you the way they challenge their own -- can be especially formative for the foreign cadets at the Academy.

And so I am not particularly bothered by this new worship space. But that's because I know the context within which it exists. What is going on in Saudi-funded mosques in some places in the US is a very different matter and one that appropriately calls for a different response IMO.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 20:41||   2006-10-22 20:41|| Front Page Top

#59 The granting of Canadian citizenship takes full advantage of this, as an example (and this is only a recent change post 9/11). To be granted citizenship you must sign an agreement and affirm that you will indeed adopt and abide by our norms. Should you be discovered to support terrorism, your citizenship will be taken away and you will be booted out.

WELL, fnv ..... Canada has been home to a number of jihadis known to have trained in the Qaida camps etc. How many have lost their citizenship? How many have been booted out?

Perhaps there's a whole trend I've missed ....
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 20:57||   2006-10-22 20:57|| Front Page Top

#60 Many here have concluded that many muslims are not to be trusted and that the risks involved are sufficiently pressing and sufficiently high that it warrants actions that will regretably harm some who are innocent.

And some may see that as an overreaction by those who would revert to nothing more than a gut feeling. Fair enough. But remember that there are consequences for everything, some that are not readily apparent.

I would prefer to adopt the approach that leaves no doubt as to who is right and who is wrong. You tend not to lose allies that way.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 21:14||   2006-10-22 21:14|| Front Page Top

#61 So long as you don't lose cities along the way.
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 21:16||   2006-10-22 21:16|| Front Page Top

#62 Canada has been home to a number of jihadis known to have trained in the Qaida camps etc. How many have lost their citizenship? How many have been booted out?

The change to the immigration act was done AFTER 9/11. It's a recent change. Anyone who obtained citizenship previously under the old Act has nothing to fear, unfortunately. Rest assured, it's different now.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 21:18||   2006-10-22 21:18|| Front Page Top

#63 fortunately, those who haven't paid a cent into our conuntry are free to come here and bitch about the security delay in their FBI background check leading to benefits they haven't earned f*ckers
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 21:19||   2006-10-22 21:19|| Front Page Top

#64 It's a recent change.

Whose application by the courts therefore has not been tested, I take it?

It sounds great in theory but before you go boasting about how much better it is than our approach, I would like to see how it actually is interpreted and used. There's a bit of history to be overcome, I'm afraid ....
Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 21:20||   2006-10-22 21:20|| Front Page Top

#65 So long as you don't lose cities along the way

...something that's not guaranteed either way.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 21:21||   2006-10-22 21:21|| Front Page Top

#66 Whose application by the courts therefore has not been tested, I take it?

It will be when the Toronto 17 have their day in court.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 21:22||   2006-10-22 21:22|| Front Page Top

#67 Toronto isn't the US, BTW - thank God. Good reason to screen more heavily entrants from the North, thanks, FNV
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 21:32||   2006-10-22 21:32|| Front Page Top

#68 If it makes you feel safer, you're welcome.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 21:35||   2006-10-22 21:35|| Front Page Top

#69 How is it that such pride is found in preening about how much better you are than Americans? That accomplishes what? Does it ever occur to you that we aren't going start blowing up in your busses and towns yet there are people among you plotting right now to do just that?

I guess it's so much easier to keep the discussion on how Americans aren't perfect than it is to talk about real solutions to real problems that you face.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 21:40||   2006-10-22 21:40|| Front Page Top

#70 It'll help to cite when we appeal for stricter border/immigration controls on the North border, thanks :-)
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 21:40||   2006-10-22 21:40|| Front Page Top

#71 How is it that such pride is found in preening about how much better you are than Americans?

Kindly cite where I said Canadians are better than Americans. The Canadian immigration example I gave is just that, an example of what I thought was a reasonable approach to the original problem under discussion.

(BTW, stop being such cry babies. Why can't you just enjoy a good ol' fashioned cross-border mud-slinging?)

It'll help to cite when we appeal for stricter border/immigration controls on the North border

LOL :-) Dreeeeam on. We're #2 behind Mexico, and if you can't even control that part of your border, well.... Besides, there's the November 8th hurdle you gotta get over first.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 21:54||   2006-10-22 21:54|| Front Page Top

#72 :-) meow.....
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-10-22 21:54||   2006-10-22 21:54|| Front Page Top

#73 So then, what is your point exactly? Do you have one?
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 21:58||   2006-10-22 21:58|| Front Page Top

#74 And some may see that as an overreaction by those who would revert to nothing more than a gut feeling. Fair enough. But remember that there are consequences for everything, some that are not readily apparent.

I would prefer to adopt the approach that leaves no doubt as to who is right and who is wrong. You tend not to lose allies that way.

To demand that the USA be morally pure is a bar intentionally set impossibly high by the Left. There will never be a case where there is no doubt about who is right and who is wrong except in the LLL. They know that the USA is always wrong. Canadian and EU smugness fails to teach anything again. Sad really. The USA is going to end up standing alone.

Islam is an alien creed that cannot co-exist with western rationalism. Islam is either at your throat or at you feet. .com called it a virus. Anon called it a Borg religion. It is disingenuous at best and lying at worst to say that the jihadis are outside the mainstream of Islam. The Koran, the Hadith, and all of the major jurisprudence schools define violent jihad as a duty. Taqiyya and kitman are further problems. I don't see a solution. Exclusion of Muslims is not a new "further" division. They have already accomplished this themselves.
Posted by SR-71 2006-10-22 22:04||   2006-10-22 22:04|| Front Page Top

#75 What worries many here is the sanctioned practice of taqiyya - deliberate and strategic lying in order to deceive and lull the enemy who is too strong to be taken on directly. As you no doubt are aware, taqiyya is encouraged by many muslim religious leaders and has certainly be practiced to devastating effect recently, as in the numerous faked videos that were used to justify the latest decade of intifada in Palestine, that were promulgated out of Lebanon this past summer and in a lot of other documented cases.

Those who belong to a community which sanctions and encourages taqiyya cannot be trusted even if they do swear allegiance. Unfortunately, while a few muslims have spoken out to decry the effects of taqiyya on public perception of muslims, the voices have been few and weak.

lotp, I am at a loss in reconciling how you manage to continue in your defense of Muslims while knowing the above. I do not have the time to address all of the topics previously discussed over in the "Al-Qaeda is winning the war of ideas" thread in this one as well and therefore hope that you will address them, and my additional comments, over there.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2006-10-22 22:10||   2006-10-22 22:10|| Front Page Top

#76 SR71 Anon called it a Borg religion

different anon. Probably anon1.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 22:16||   2006-10-22 22:16|| Front Page Top

#77 So then, what is your point exactly? Do you have one?

Why, yes:

Listen to your heartwhen he's calling for youListen to your heart here's nothing else you can doI don't know where you're goingand I don't know whyut listen to your heartefore you tell him [the Muslim] goodbye

(Sorry, I don't know how else to answer your question, without repeating the entire thread.)

To demand that the USA be morally pure is a bar intentionally set impossibly high by the Left.

But to ask that you maintain your current self (as much as is possible) is not.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 22:18||   2006-10-22 22:18|| Front Page Top

#78 Sorry anon.
Posted by SR-71 2006-10-22 22:31||   2006-10-22 22:31|| Front Page Top

#79 No problem SR17 :-) Good comments.

facta Ok. So I'll assume for a moment that your comment is heartfelt. That's nice. It's always nice to be the one who points out that there are many good Muslim people. I do it all the time. Not to make myself feel special, but because I believe it. It's nice to be the one who points out that the bully is just a scared little boy masking his insecurities. Nice and heartfelt and worth considering when trying to deal with the bully. yep. Yep.

But given that we all know that many Muslim people want to live their lives in peace - I ask you - so what? They aren't the problem that we face. The problem that we face are the percentage that are crazed killers plotting to blow YOU up on the bus and yet there seems to be absolutely zero way for us to tell the difference between Mohammed the student and Mohammed the psycho.

So I guess my point is that your point nice. Worth repeating so that we remember it. But absolutely meaningless in the battle against militant Islam.

Posted by anon 2006-10-22 22:52||   2006-10-22 22:52|| Front Page Top

#80  your point is nice.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 22:53||   2006-10-22 22:53|| Front Page Top

#81 Frank G, regarding the situation cited in that article....trust me, those stats that they give regarding immigration background checks are pure crap. No farking way do they get 99 percent done in six months. Try like 2 percent get done, and that's if they are rushing right along.

We are still waiting for the FBI to finally get around to verifying the Tsar's fingerprints, and we finished all of the requirements that ICE had for issuing a green card well over a year ago. It's not that they need to double check the results of a questionable nature, either. They just haven't gotten around to it, and probably won't until our newborn gets to kindergarten, either. Or maybe high school, considering how (in)efficient they are.

His case, unfortunately, is typical. I know several immigrants (not Arabic in origin, mainly Russian and Oriental) who have had to wait five years or more to get that done. Hell, if he was Arabic, it probably would have been done by now....must be politically correct, after all.

Quite frankly, the only way to get the FBI to do anything is to sue them. Again, we know people who had no other choice. They have previously asked for help from local congresscritters, and the FBI blatantly lied and said they would get right on it....after having been lied to by our government, yes, they have no other choice but to sue to force the issue.

If Ms Dirir is in the same boat, I wish her and her fellow plaintiffs success.
Posted by Swamp Blondie 2006-10-22 22:54|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-10-22 22:54|| Front Page Top

#82 Ok, I can't take facta non verba seriously after he/she/it paraphrased an 80's Swedish pop group in post #77.

Pardon my French, but WTF??
Posted by Swamp Blondie 2006-10-22 23:00|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-10-22 23:00|| Front Page Top

#83 Re-mixed by D.H.T. Made it into a dance tune. Good for those cardio workouts.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 23:09||   2006-10-22 23:09|| Front Page Top

#84 Good for those cardio workouts.

ah, thus it explains why your heart is in such a superior condition. Might want to also work on the brain a bit as well.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 23:14||   2006-10-22 23:14|| Front Page Top

#85 there seems to be absolutely zero way for us to tell the difference between Mohammed the student and Mohammed the psycho

True. And I don't have the solution to this that is also consistent with my values. I merely suggested an approach that is inclusive and not exclusive, one which is admittedly based on the concept of the benefit of the doubt. This doesn't mean you have to give up on the WOT, btw.

The reason I'm so adamant is that I don't believe this would stop at Muslims, and as Liberalhawk once suggested, this kind of thing tends to attract all sorts of truly undesirable characters. Set the precedent and all bets are off.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 23:24||   2006-10-22 23:24|| Front Page Top

#86 yeah well ok. You seem like a nice guy and all. Big heart and such. But if you ask me your point deserves the Master of the Obvious graphic. It's like I say, "you need to have a heart to deal with the problem of teenage pregnancy, but you need more than heart, you need to address the problem in a kind and heartful manner." Well then, problem solved! Thanks for the cutting edge emotions that will help get the problem solved!
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 23:32||   2006-10-22 23:32|| Front Page Top

#87 I give up. You win.
Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 23:44||   2006-10-22 23:44|| Front Page Top

#88 hey, but you got heart, buddy. That's all that matters.
Posted by anon 2006-10-22 23:45||   2006-10-22 23:45|| Front Page Top

#89 #36: If one examines Shar'ia in depth, you discover that it is nothing more than an enforcement mechanism to keep the conquered cowed and submissive.

Put it that way, the reason Judeo/Christianity is a religion today is that the Pharohs of Egypt recognized a perfect Slave Religion when they saw it.
Think from a Pharohs viewpoint, "Do not strike back, turn the other cheek, do not combat "False Gods" God will do it for you, and you should work really hard to get your reward, which you only get after you're safely dead so you can't tell anyone you've been lied to.

The Pharohs must have been laughing their asses off. Free slave labor with a religion that actively helps the entrenched Rulers.

Historically inaccurate I'm afraid, RD. "Turn the other cheek" is a Christian thing, not a Jewish one. In fact, that the Hebrew slaves clung to their god even when enslaved was revolutionary for the time. The Pharohs apparently felt threatened by this, finding it necessary to kill off male Hebrew infants to reduce the threat. In those days it was assumed that if a group was conquered or enslaved it was because their god was not strong enough to protect them, so they went over to the god of the people that ruled over them. This, indeed, is assumed to be what happened to the Israelites of the Ten Lost Tribes, when the Kingdom of Israel was conquered and its inhabitants carried off into exile.

Nor has concern about the rewards/punishments of the afterlife ever much concerned the Jews, being much more interested in achieving the maximum of justice and mercy in this life... hence the disproportionate Jewish representation in both Law and Medicine.
Posted by trailing wife 2006-10-22 23:54||   2006-10-22 23:54|| Front Page Top

23:56 Zenster
23:56 djh_usmc
23:54 trailing wife
23:53 Zenster
23:51 gromky
23:50 Slutch Thraviper4354
23:46 Zenster
23:45 anon
23:44 facta non verba
23:44 anonymous2u
23:42 anon
23:41 JohnQC
23:37 Hyper
23:34 Zenster
23:32 anon
23:31 SwissTex
23:31 facta non verba
23:30 gorb
23:24 Zenster
23:24 facta non verba
23:20 JohnQC
23:17 trailing wife
23:14 anon
23:09 facta non verba









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com