Steve A. Stone
Dear Friends and Patriots,
The following was written in response to a friend who sent a link to me. The link was to an article in The Federalist that examines the FBI's general ineptitude in preventing mass murders perpetrated by Muslim extremists, even when the shooter was already on the FBI's radar. It's just true, too. The FBI has largely been unable to prevent the attacks we've witnessed over the span of at least three decades. They say they've stopped mass shooting plots many times in the past, but do we know that's true? I have little faith in anything the FBI tells me anymore. What we do know is what we see, and we keep seeing people die at the hands of murderers who are already well-known to the FBI. I wrote the response below to delve into some of the reasons I believe we see the incidents we do. I think if I had to sum it up, I might
say – It's all unavoidable.
This is my response:
Starting with GHW Bush, our government actively encouraged Muslims to come into civil service. At first it seemed there was a logic to it. We "needed" Americans who understood both Arabic and Farsi, who understood the cultures of the various Muslim countries of the Near and Middle East, and who could decipher the complex scenes that presented themselves in the region that we seemed to always get just a bit wrong. Yes, that seemed logical enough, but what Muslim civil servants did was another thing.
Many, perhaps even most, of the Muslims all the Presidents between Reagan and Trump allowed to become part of our government were Muslim Brotherhood members. The Brotherhood has always pursued a Muslim-First, Islamist agenda. The background checks on them would have clearly indicated they were members of the Brotherhood, but we had no sanctions against the organization, even though our ally Egypt officially branded the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization and constantly arrested its adherents.
Over time, the numbers of Brotherhood members became significant. They didn't just work for the FBI, DIA, or CIA, either. They went far afield and were found in every branch of the government, constantly demanding they be treated as Muslims first. They would file complaint after complaint through their government workers' unions. I recall complaints about people eating pulled pork sandwiches in full view of a devout Muslim – such an insult! I recall a complaint over a ceramic pig one manager had in his office – another direct insult against the One True Faith and its adherents. I remember one Army Lt. Col. who was fired from a teaching position at a DoD graduate school because a Muslim student was offended at the way Muslims in Iraq were portrayed in a presentation on strategic and tactical considerations for those Army members in theater. Yes, that Lt. Col. was fired and had his career ended, even though he was assigned to teach that curriculum; it was a required course for all Army officers before they went to Iraq, and he didn't write the course. But a Muslim student was offended...so.
Remember the Ft. Hood shooter? He was an Army doctor and was well known for his Islamist sentiments. He was referred for psychiatric care on more than one occasion. But no actions were taken to curtail his behaviour because PC culture, even then, wouldn't allow it.
Think how many years have passed since this nonsense started. 1990 to today. Yes, over 30 years, and many of those Brotherhood people are still in the government, only now they're in senior positions. Many are in policy-making jobs where they get to decide what large segments of their agencies prioritize and do. If anyone wonders why the FBI seems totally inept to deal with Muslims who are obviously on their radar – all they have to do is understand the PC culture and the truth that there are Muslims high up in our government who use our laws, traditions, and Constitutional rights against us – every moment of every day.
Am I prejudiced against Muslims? Not all. But the only sect of the faith I know of that eschews violence is the Sufis, and all Sunnis and Shiites consider Sufis to be apostates. According to the Qur'an and most Hadiths, all apostates are to be considered even worse than infidels and have permanent fatwas that allow "righteous" Muslims to kill them. The Qur'an has many passages that admonish the faithful to "put the sword to the neck" of all infidels. I'm certain there are many Muslims who wouldn't harm a fly, but can you tell them apart? I know I can't. The Qur'an grants a Muslim the right to lie at will to any infidel – there is no sin attached to doing so, because, after all – we're INFIDELS! Who cares?
You will often hear Muslim apologists state the Qur'an and even the Hadiths should not be taken literally, "just as in your Holy Bible there are contradictory statements on a lot of critical issues." They will tell you intelligent Muslims pay attention to the last word on the subject and will consider all earlier admonitions to be evolutionary and not binding. That may sound good, but if you understand the Qur'an, you know several things about it. You know that it's not arranged in chronological order, but by the length of the book, with the shortest first and the longest last. You know that scholars have argued over chronology for centuries and there are many strong and differing opinions on that subject. You know that the parts of the Qur'an Muhammed supposedly wrote while in Mecca are very different from those from his time in Medina. It would be a modern reference if I stated that Muhammed was "radicalized" while in Medina. While much of his writings in Mecca dwelled on peaceful pursuits and everyday customs, those in Medina took on an increasingly warlike and bloody tone.
Understanding exactly what any Muslim believes is something no non-Muslim can do with any accuracy. There is only one Qur'an, but over 20 Hadiths. The customs, traditions, and rulings contained in the various Hadiths vary greatly. As far as I know, only three Hadiths have been completely translated to English with any acceptable degree of accuracy. What's in those others? There are fragments translated. The fidelity and completeness of those fragments varies widely. Who is reading what? See the problem I'm having?
Keep in mind the number of our people who have been assassinated in the Green Zone in Afghanistan. Many times the shooter was well known to the victim. One of the most famous incidents happened while a large contingent of Army people were assembled for an awards ceremony. For "security" reasons, all who went to the ceremony had to surrender their arms before entering the hall. The shooter was the one who was supposed to receive an award for his faithful assistance to the Army and our nation. The victim was not only the presenter, but the very man the shooter worked for every day as his interpreter. The victim had dined at the shooter's home just the evening before he died. But friendship with an infidel means little in Islam. Honor and obedience to the will of Allah means all. The imams and mullahs interpret that will. If the will is for a particular individual to die, then it's the duty of all who are faithful to ensure he/she dies. It's baked in the cake.
Muslims in America are a protected and nurtured species. We who have watched know ten years ago there were at least 16 Muslim training camps spread throughout the nation that did both religious and weapons training for their adherents. The sites are very well known. And they're equally as well protected. After all – there's the First Amendment and then there's the Second Amendment. They aren't doing anything wrong. What's the problem? "We're just studying our religion here and getting in a bit of target practice on the side. What's there for anyone to worry about?"
Now, let's discuss Sharia Law. There isn't one Sharia. There are dozens. It's not consistent anywhere, though in general the principles are based on the same
things – the Qur'an and whichever Hadith is being followed. All Muslims of faith will tell you the highest law is Sharia – not the U.S. Constitution or any other law made by any nation. Muslims often insist they be judged only by Sharia, not by the laws of the land. In some places, the local authorities or state have yielded and allowed Sharia courts to operate and to judge people who have broken the law. What law? Our law! But, if the crime isn't one that's considered a crime under Sharia, the defendant is most often found not guilty and sent home. Beating your wife is permissible under Sharia, as long as the husband uses a rod to beat her, not his hands, and as long as the rod is no thicker than his thumb. If I were a single Muslim woman, I'd be looking for a husband who either had really tiny thumbs or had lost them both in some industrial accident. That might be the only certain protection against a daily whipping.
Oh, and don't forget, Sharia supports honor killings. Remember the case of the Muslim taxi driver in Texas, Yaser Said? Somewhere near Dallas, I think. He killed both his daughters because they wanted to date, and wanted to date non-Muslim boys. He killed the older one because he found out she was slipping out of the house and meeting boys from her school. He killed the younger daughter because he was convinced she'd follow in her sister's footsteps and dishonor him – eventually. The Muslim community was in an uproar when the guy went on trial for murder – after evading arrest for 12 years. Why 12 years? Because the faithful kept him hidden that long.
Here's one last thing that needs to be understood – the faith rules by fear. Who wants to be considered an apostate? Who wants to be excommunicated and marked for death by an imam's fatwa? That's what happens to those who rat out their kind. So, instead of helping authorities when a fellow Muslim commits a crime, they're far more likely to keep silent. It's deadly silence, too.
Once in a while we find an imam who is different – who understands and appreciates America's ethos and will do what we call the right thing. But that imam is an anomaly. And, again – How do you know?
Unfortunately, when I contemplate the dilemma posed, I see no historical, logical, statistical, or mathematical rationale for considering Islam anything other than totally incompatible with American traditions. It's a holistic entity that might work in isolation, but not in combination with any western tradition. Wherever Islam co-exists with another religious, life, or legal tradition, it's almost always the other tradition that's expected to yield. To my mind, that's a road to cultural death.
To illustrate what I'm talking about, just look at France and Germany – all of Europe, really. Take a good look at those countries and understand their demographic realities and how the numbers alone indicate all of Europe will be majority Muslim within 15 years. France will be the first to disappear. Germany or Great Britain will be next. They will all fall like dominos. It's all there in the numbers, but it's not PC to point them out. It's not PC to care about it. If it was, do you think any decent Frenchman, Brit, or German wouldn't object to having to watch their national culture and its traditions disappear without even a whimper?
There are obvious questions here:
- Can a Muslim be true to his/her faith and still be an American patriot? (I think it depends on the teachings of the imam they follow. Maybe. But if they're a Brotherhood member – not likely!)
- Can you ever fully trust a Muslim? (Maybe. As long as every interaction you have doesn't violate any tenet of the Qur'an or the Hadith they follow. Try it. Let me know how it turns out.)
- Are Muslims intrinsically violent? (No, I think not. But, they are duty-bound by their faith to follow the exhortations of their imam and higher religious leaders. And there are those people we call Islamists. Violence is part of their creed.)
- Aren't the Sufi safe to trust? (Maybe. They are unlikely to inflict bodily harm on you. They don't believe in any form of violence. But they are first, last, and always Muslims, so you decide.)
- I have Muslim friends. They say this whole dialog is just racist and bigoted. How do you answer that? (Islam is not a race. Is it bigoted to not want to be killed because someone else considers you to be an infidel or an apostate and not worthy of life? Besides, I can't tell who is who. I can't tell who the good guys are or who aren't. Can you?)
Is that enough to answer your questions and concerns? I hope so.
Thanks for asking.
Steve© Steve A. Stone
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.