Fort Hood Denial – by Jamie Glazov


quran_gun


[Editor's note: This article is reprinted from City Journal]

As the United States prepares to try Nidal Malik Hasan for 13 counts of murder and 32 counts of attempted murder at Fort Hood last month, few question the suspect’s guilt, but many disagree about his motives. Yet the evidence is now conclusive: the Fort Hood massacre was an act of Islamic terror. Before his shooting spree, Hasan told colleagues that non-Muslims were infidels condemned to hell and that they should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats. Hasan traded 18 e-mails with Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Qaida recruiter. On the morning of the massacre, he gave his neighbor a Koran as he was departing for the base, telling her that he was going to do “good work for God.” Wearing Pakistani garb, Hasan shouted “Allahu akbar” as he began firing at U.S. troops.

Despite the plentiful evidence, however, leftists refuse to accept Hasan’s Islamic inspiration. We’ve heard the rationalizations: Hasan was a nut; the stresses of serving in the military drove him crazy; he experienced anti-Islamic discrimination; anyone is capable of “losing it” under such stressful conditions; and so on. These reflexive denials are a logical continuation of the Left’s long tradition of denying the evil of our totalitarian enemies—or, when forced to acknowledge them, blaming them on the United States. This was the pattern throughout the Cold War, and it’s continued during the War on Terror.

When it’s proven beyond reasonable doubt that jihadism was in fact Hasan’s motive, here’s a prediction: leftists will either fall into apathetic silence or respond that it was American racism, oppression, and Islamophobia that forced Hasan’s hand. To recognize the evil of Nidal Hasan and his ideology, to admit the existence of pernicious enemies, is to concede that there are societies, cultures, and systems that are much more unjust than ours. This is an untenable step for leftists to take, because it means acknowledging that there is something superior about our civilization that’s worth saving and defending.

The notion that his own society is evil and unjust is the bedrock of the leftist’s vision. Wicked capitalists trample on the poor, the oppressed, and the downtrodden; the leftist appoints himself to rescue these victims. He is a self-styled social redeemer, leading a movement to liberate the masses, even if it results in the destruction of his own society. This political mission provides him with immense moral indignation and, therefore, moral superiority, dispositions from which, in turn, he derives emotional self-gratification. His whole belief system provides him with a sense of belonging; he joins other social redeemers, as well as the victims, real or imagined, who wait for him to break their chains.

Thus, the leftist’s political disposition is a faith that reinforces his personal identity and sense of belonging. Admitting that Hasan is a jihadist would undermine that faith. It would also expose the leftist to potential excommunication from his social community. He’d become politically suspect to his peers, perhaps even accused of becoming a reactionary right-winger. That’s why we will continue to witness more Fort Hood denial from the Left, with all of its irrationality and disregard for human life.

*

To get the whole story on the Left’s Jihad Denial, read Jamie Glazov’s new book, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror.

united

  • Robert Bernier

    Wow! Read this one. It is really good. And this gentleman says it just like it is.

    This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii
    for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now. He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president. Consult : http://xrl.us/bgeewc

  • Robert Bernier

    Every American should know the truth

    No one should miss this video:

    http://xrl.us/bf29mb

    Look to the end ( 10 min.)

  • goosebumps

    I think the problem is that they DO know his actions were caused by his religion. It is the denial of the Left – just another form of Taqqiya. The left has been using taqqiya for a long, long time. Just as they “ignore” the fact that we don't want their frigging ObamaCare they “ignore” Islam. The Left believes it can control Islam, Islam believes it can ride the coattails of the Left until they are strong enough to take over. It's not that they don't get it. It just happens to be useful to them for the time being. If we buy into the “They don't get it” business, we're deceiving ourselves as to what they are really up to. Starting reading, “they get it” into everything they do and quit wasting your time trying to make them see. What the people on the sane side of the aisle need to do is wake up and watch how we are being slowly led to the slaughter.

    It was a real wake up call for me when someone I knew admitted that they just don't care how they do it, as long as they do it. You know all the stuff about “social justice” and “the vision” and trusting your fellow man, which they do not do themselves. They really are people full of jealousy of others, and feeling life is unfair because they don't have what other people have. if they can't have it then they are going to take it away from you. That's social justice. We'll all be equally miserable. Misery loves company and hey guess what – they're moving in.

  • Proxywar

    When the left does it's not “taqqiya” it is simplely “lying”.
    ie. The means justify the ends.

    I agree we should stop trying to convince them because like you said they get it, but they just don't want to get it. We are the same way only there's rational merit and facts to back up what we think. One thing the left has to learn about conservatives is we are a group of varied individuals with different throught processes that deviate from Bush, et als. Some of us might even agree (say like on same-sex marriage) when they happen to be correct. As I always say, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    One thing you got 100% correct is social justice. The problem with morals is they differ. It seems liberals forget all about morals differing when someone even mentions the word CONSERVATIVE, RIGHTWINGER, REPUBLICAN. However, they quickly remember morals differ when it comes to Islam, et al, cultures practice of FGM. Then like moral-crack-heads, they look for their moral relativist fix, inject it and allow the world to deteriorate into primitive barbarism which us realists then have to clean up. We are forever the adults cleaning up after the adult-children.

    We try to tell them how to fix the economy (by not acting like bush) and like teenagers they call us old and tell us we don't know anything. Oh, the Irony is bitter sweet here indeed.

    http://newsrealblog.com/2009/08/30/newsreal-sun

    We try to explain our morals, rationale, and our plans behind the healthcare debate but we are just old fascists who want people do die quickly. Once again the Teenager is not listening to the adult because the adult is to never be listen too.
    They are taught everything the adult says to them is a lie. Bill Ayers: Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's at. Of course, I take this methoprically today though without question he was being literal when he said it.
    ie. What he is saying is kill every moral and rationale that does not agree with the revolution. Without thought just kill it were it stands because it's not apart of the revolution. Thus, skepticism simplely does not exist for a majorty of progressive-liberals.

  • USMCSniper

    From Jihad Watch:

    Stated taht a top representative of the Muslim Brotherhood arm known as the Islamic Society of North America — Louay Safi — is at Fort Hood this week training the army brigade getting ready to deploy to Afghanistan. At about 1800 EST today, Safi gave a check to families of the victims of the Major Hasan jihad killings.

    The Fort Hood leadership was overheard commenting that Safi was “really nice.”

    The Muslim Brotherhood is dedicated in its own words to “a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands”? The rest of that passage, of course, is: “…and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions.” That's from “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America,” by Mohamed Akram, way back to May 19, 1991. ISNA is a Brotherhood entity, and an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case.

    This is criminal and the base commander should be court martialed right now

  • ACSial

    Yes, the 'left' is guilty of lionizing thugs and Islamic fundamentalists…but so was the 'right'. The Memory Hole never swallowed things like this:

    http://politicalinquirer.com/2007/12/31/ronald-

    There is a straight line from the Reagan Administration's support for the Mujaheddin-cum-Taliban and 9/11. Also, read the glowing, philo-Islamist propaganda of conservative rags and columnists, like The National Review and P.J. O'Rourke, during the Afghan-Soviet war years, and puke. Who took their shoes off, waltzed into a mosque, quoted the Qur'an and pleaded for 'tolerance' after 9/11? Dubya. The hire-a-Muslim 'diversity' policies that lead to the Nadal Hasan murder spree were the work of EIGHT YEARS of the Bush Administration. And supporters of the War on Ba'athism have to come clean with the fact that removing Saddam Hussein did nothing but make the Middle East a safer place for Islamic fundamentalism (something the secular, Christian-friendly Ba'athist regime RUTHLESSLY suppressed) and the Iranian theocracy.

    Whatever the motivations for aiding Afghan insurgents, or deposing Saddam Hussein (likely, trying to curry favour with Saudi oil barrons), the Reagan and Bush I-II Administrations' policies helped lay the groundwork for our current Muslim terrorist problem. You can call 'leftists', 'enablers', but many on the 'right' casting stones are guilty of the same sin of Dhimmitude.

  • Len Powder

    I find it easier to understand the Left by what it HATES. Whatever the left opposes or supports derives from its hatred for the following:
    1. Corporations – in its view they exist to plunder the world's resources and to endanger its environment
    2. Wars – all wars are unjust and are waged to plunder resources, in the process destroying innocent lives and the environment
    3. Military – the military loves wars and killing and supports the goal of corporations as stated above
    4. Exceptionalism – they prefer the 'noble savage' who is eco-friendly and opposed to wars and human suffering
    5. Government – when in the hands of Republicans it supports all of the above, which the Leftists hate

  • Proxywar

    “As for your nonesense about the Reagan and Bush I-II Administrations' policies helped lay the groundwork for our current Muslim terrorist problem. “

    Sir, the mujahideen existed before Carter, Reagan, and Bush I-II. Why don't you blame ISLAM? Why don't you blame the USSR? Instead you attack your own country when our involvement in the Afghan/USSR war was only funding and suppling weapons via of ISI to the native Afghan mujahideen being genocided by scorched earth tactics. I agree we probably should of stayed out of it becuase people who follow islam can't really be trusted, but then you would of made crys about Afghan back then like you do today about Darfur. Besides, we primarily worked with the northern alliance during the 80's war and in the 2001 war. They're leader Massoud did not attack us on 9/11 infact he warned us that Al-qaeda was planning something big for us. (not enough details to stop it from happening but he warned us nonetheless.) He also supported the idea of democracy in Afghanistan. It was his dream and Al-qaeda killed him because they knew after they attacked us Massoud would try to make his dream into a reality.

    “And supporters of the War on Ba'athism have to come clean with the fact that removing Saddam Hussein did nothing but make the Middle East a safer place for Islamic fundamentalism.”

    Sir, this is completely untrue.

    http://www.amazon.com/Saddams-Ties-Queda-Sam-Pe

    You need to read this book and brush up on the actual truth of the matter.

  • Len Powder

    The Muslim terrorist problem was not founded by Bush but by (1) Mohammed, once he created Islam, and (2) the Muslim Brotherhood, established in Egypt in the 1920's. These are facts, easily verifiable. Muslims, courtesy of CAIR and the like, are portraying themselves as 'victims', especially evidenced by the Palestinians, but not limited to them by any means. When presented the truth Muslims cry “foul, bigot, Islamophobe, racist, slanderer, etc.” If not for 'political correctness' the hypocrisy and lies of Islam would have been exposed to everyone long before now. PC is a serious illness from which we need to cure ourselves quickly.

  • ACSial

    First of all, I'm Canadian. Like Canada, America is equally capable of putting putzes in office (Kennedy, Trudeau, Carter, Mulroney, Reagan, Chretien…).

    “…we knew nothing of Islams true nature back then…”

    Sure 'you' did. The Muslim Brotherhood in the Arabia, the wretched pederastic, misogynistic culture of Islam in Afghanistan–these were ALL there. The Qur'an–and Qur'an thumpers–existed before the Bolshevik Revolution, with their dirty works a matter of historical record. Although the Carter Administration started liason work with the Mujaheddin, Ronnie 'poop pants' Reagan's administration dramatically ramped up support for the ragheaded MUSLIM nutjobs wanting to overthrow the icky, girl-schooling Commie heatherns, so they could go back to raping little boys and making women wear bags over their heads. Claiming ignorance is as lame an excuse as lefties saying that they never knew the Russian and Chinese commies starved millions of people to death. Like the left, in the case of the Ukranian and Chinese famines, Ronnie lovers have to accept the fact that their dementia-addled hero helped create the political infrastructure that lead to the murder of 3,000 people on American soil. Also, running up a staggering debt that put your country's balls (i.e., trillions in T-Bills) in the hands of the Bank of China, but that's another story.

    And as far as Saddam Hussein goes–yes, he was a scumbag. Just ask all those dead Kurds and Shi'a. However, there are plenty of other despots (the Burmese Junta, the PRC) that Bush I-II pussy-footed around. Before he was elected, Dubya made a biiig stink about how Clinton-style things like halting the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo (a GOOD thing, BTW) wasn't really the U.S.'s business. Then, his administration faked–that's right, FAKED–'WMDs', to justify deposing a SECULAR government (which included Christians and athiests), leaving a massive vaccum for Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq AND give the Iranian Islamic Republic one less thing to worry about. Oh, and leaving fewer troops to deploy in Afghanistan. You can't claim this was defensible.

    Again, there never were WMDs in Iraq, but there're still boy-raping, woman-hating Qur'an-thumpers in Saudi Arabia, funneling oil money to terrorists in Waziristan and post-Ba'athist Iraq. Rather than invade Iraq, the Bush Administration should have deposed the Saudi royal family and their Wahhabi clerics–the REAL masterminds behind 9/11. B.O. may have bowed to Abdullah, but the Bushes went one better, by getting rid of that scary, secularist bogeyman Saddam on the Saudis' and Kuwaitis' doorstep.

  • ACSial

    Again, the Bush Administration bent over backwards to appease Muslims. The hiring of people like Nidal Hasan happened UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S hug-a-Muzzie 'diversity' policies. Remember, this was going on for EIGHT YEARS before Obama took office. For all the whining of Democrats, Dubya was very nice to Muslims. CAIR, the Muslim Students' Associations (also a malignancy up here in Canada, including my Alma Mater) and other jihadi-front organisations lived unmolested by the FBI, NSA and DHS, during the Bush years. Bush's Administration even made the staggeringly idiotic decision to hire Muslim Arabic and Urdu translators for intel, who ended up being moles en masse.

    As far as PC dhimmitude goes, the Democrats certainly talk the talk, but the Republicans walked the walk. Obama has certainly been making a dhimmwit of himself (bowing to the Guardian of Mecca and Medina, &c.), but the Bush administration was absurdly accomodating to Muslim sensitivities, both in terms of public statements (that post 9/11 photo-op at the mosque) and affirmative action programmes (hiring card-carrying Soldiers of Allah, like Maj. Hasan). Political correctness is as much a matter of deeds, as words.

  • ACSial

    There are two possibilities, here:

    *Obama IS a closet Muslim, but a 'liberal' one (he drinks beer and eats pork, his leggy wife and beautiful daughters don't wear bags on their heads), or

    *Obama–like Ronnie 'Alzheimer's-in-Chief' Reagan–is so lost without his teleprompter that he verbally bumbles through speeches in a panic. Like Reagan, he may have a cerebral disorder, maybe transient ischemic attacks (past cocaine use, smoking, that come-and-go purple colouration about the lips) that causes moments of stupidity. Like Ronnie, Obama is an intelligent man who is occasionally an idiot. Saying he's a “Muslim” is probably a goof, like that “57 states” 'sode he had.

    The problem with Number Two is that Obama isn't winning any Muslim friends by being an apostate. Obama Sr. was a 'Muslim' in name only (he was an agnostic who liked haram things like Booze, puffing pipes and banging Christian women), but still conferred Islam on his son via patrilineality. Apostacy is punishable by death in Islam; natural-born Christian dhimmis like the Bushes and Reagan just have to pay a tax.

  • Proxywar

    “the Carter Administration started liason work with the Mujaheddin, Ronnie 'poop pants' Reagan's administration dramatically ramped up support for the ragheaded MUSLIM nutjobs”

    The Muslims Carter and Reagan funded via ISI were not the ones who attacked us on 9/11.

    “Claiming ignorance is as lame an excuse as lefties saying that they never knew the Russian and Chinese commies starved millions of people to death. Like the left, in the case of the Ukranian and Chinese famines, Ronnie lovers have to accept the fact that their dementia-addled hero helped create the political infrastructure that lead to the murder of 3,000 people on American soil.”

    Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush 1 and 2 are not responsible for 3,000 deaths. The only thing responsible for those 3,000 deaths is the literalist interpretation of Islam. The only ones responsible for those 3,000 deaths are Muhammad, Bakar, Ali, Omar, Uthman, Sayyid Qutb, Osama bin laden, and the rest of Al-qaeda. You come off sounding like a masochist. The presidents were not theologians in islam. They did not study the quran, hadith, sirat, islamic sociology, or history. Their goal was to stop the red menance. Why not blame the 3,000 deaths on the USSR for awaking the politically already active jihadist movement? No, I don't have to admit to what you want me to admit to because the Muslims who attacked us on 9/11 were not funded or supplied via Ronnie or Carter. As you said before… “The Muslim Brotherhood in the Arabia, the wretched pederastic, misogynistic culture of Islam in Afghanistan–these were ALL there. The Qur'an–and Qur'an thumpers–existed before the Bolshevik Revolution, with their dirty works a matter of historical record.” The only real thing that created it was the literalist interpretation of ISLAM. You contradicted yourself here.

    “there are plenty of other despots (the Burmese Junta, the PRC) that Bush I-II pussy-footed around.”

    Did Bush have a cease-fire treaty with them? If so, did these despots break this cease fire treaty? Because that is what Saddam did. Which is why he was the most logical choice.

    “Dubya made a biiig stink about how Clinton-style things like halting the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo (a GOOD thing, BTW) wasn't really the U.S.'s business.”

    I seriously doubt he did this. However, if he did (so what?) people are allowed to change their minds. Not to mention, he probably would of said it before 9/11. Once agian that hindsight fallacy is the death of your arguments.

    “Then, his administration faked–that's right, FAKED–'WMDs', to justify deposing a SECULAR government (which included Christians and athiests), leaving a massive vaccum for Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq AND give the Iranian Islamic Republic one less thing to worry about.”

    This is just yet another lie produced by the left. Bush did not fake the WMD. Independent studies have proven other wise. Not to mention, Saddam wanted everyone to think he still had WMD including exspecially Iran. If Bush faked WMD then every other intelligence agency in the world did also. Your claim is ludacris. Nothing more than Bush derangment syndrome. He disposes of a secular government by implamenting christians and “atheists” into his new one? That's a nonsensical theory with a counterintuitive proposition, if you ask me. Lastly, stop trying to play nostradamus with Iraq's future because you just might end up as wrong about everything as he was. The rational thing to say would be we just don't really know at this point and time. Especially when articles like this disagree with your concerns: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/… It's important to remember the literalist interpretation of ISLAM is the root to all of this evil, but that doesn't mean every muslim is a nutjob. Learn to compartmentalize pal.

    “there never were WMDs in Iraq.”

    I must invoke the hindsight fallacy on your argument once again. While this is true, we did not know this back then. Everyone thought they actually did have them.

    “there're still boy-raping, woman-hating Qur'an-thumpers in Saudi Arabia, funneling oil money to terrorists in Waziristan and post-Ba'athist Iraq.”

    So let me get this straight we're suppose to correct centuries of this learned behavior in a matter of 8 years? I wish the world was that simple and perfect. However, the reality is it is not. It will take time. Going green is one thing America is trying to do to stop the flow of petro-dollars. Again, these things take time, I know the reality of this situation is kryptonite to your self gratification close minded world view but at least try to comprehend what i'm spitting out your noodle.

    “Rather than invade Iraq, the Bush Administration should have deposed the Saudi royal family and their Wahhabi clerics–the REAL masterminds behind 9/11.”

    First off, there is zero evidence the Sadui Royal family had anything to do with 9/11. No where in the 9/11 comission will you find any evidence for your factless world view. Not to mention, unlike with Saudi Arabia America actually had more cause to enter Iraq because under saddam's tutelage he broke the 90's cease-fire agreement. A Despot gone is a despot gone. Iraq's geology also made access to logistics much easier. Moreover, we knew the Iraqi terrain was easier terrain to fight in compared to Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. Thus, we drew all of the Jihadist into a terrain we knew we would have the best chance of defeating them in. If the Ummah were pissed about Iraq they would of really been pissed off about Saudi Arabia. In which case, more Muslims might of raised up and joined Al-qaeda's Muhammadian revolution.

    “Bushes went one better, by getting rid of that scary, secularist bogeyman Saddam on the Saudis' and Kuwaitis' doorstep.”

    Bush actually made the right choice because the Saudi Royal Family and the Kuwaiti government have problems with the Jihadists. They are a threat to them just as much as they are to us. The Jihadist see them as hypocrites. ie. apostates. (FYI: Sadam after the Iran/Iraq war claimed to be the new Saladin. He even had a quran written in his own blood. He also tried to prove his lineage stretched all the way back to Muhammad.)

  • Proxywar

    “Again, the Bush Administration bent over backwards to appease Muslims. The hiring of people like Nidal Hasan happened UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S hug-a-Muzzie 'diversity' policies.”

    Yet Obama doesn't deserve blame for being just as ignorant? Or should I say being just as Edward-Said-tized?

    “As far as PC dhimmitude goes, the Democrats certainly talk the talk, but the Republicans walked the walk.”

    At least Bush took it to the muslim enemy. When democrats were doing nothing but trying to via de-facto aid and abet the enemy with their comforting complete dhimmitude lies. Republicans are only partial dhimmies in this regard.

  • SteveNVicki

    Right on Sniper! I feel better knowing folks like you are out there and see the truth! I know you're agnostic but…Merry Christmas Bro!

  • ACSial

    “The Muslims Carter and Reagan funded via ISI were not the ones who attacked us on 9/11.”

    The Mujaheddin insurgents' big turd, Mullah Omar, created the Taliban Salafi raghead republic, which–along with Waziristan–served as a safe-haven for al Qaeda's camps. No Mujaheddin, no Mujaheddin warlords fighting over some preteen bum-boy, not leading to Mullah Omar taking control and letting bin Laden set up shop, so he could murder 3,000 people in the U.S. Also, no U.S.-supported Mujaheddin means women not being forced to wear bags on their heads, no Man Love Thursdays, and all the other nice cultural things those creepy commies didn't allow.

    “For fuck sake, Bush thought Islam meant PEACE.”

    For fuck's sake, I thought Jessica Alba was going to marry ME, not Cash Warren! Get real. Contrary to the Democrat's propaganda, Dubya isn't that stupid. There is a historical record of Islamic atrocities, antisemitism and anti-Western sentiment. The Qur'an has been republished in numerous English 'interpretations'. Neither bush, nor his fans (presumably, you) can use the naivette defense.

    “Bush did not fake the WMD.”
    Well, SOMEBODY did. And Saddam's swagger means nothing: many a man pretends he has a Wiener of Massive Dimensions, whilst putting it away at a urinal. The fact remains that those alleged WMDs were as big a fraud as that Dan Rather National Guard letter.

    By helping to put an Islamist government in power in Afghanistan, creating the 'diversity' affirmative action hiring policies that hired and kept a raving Qur'an-thumper like Maj. Hasan on an UNARMED forces base, and failing to liquidate jihadi-front organisations like CAIR and the MSAs, or tighten immigration policies, the Reagan and Bush administrations were accessories to the murder of their countrymen.

    People try to spin the Saudi governent as under the thrall of the Wahhabi establishment, and the Wahhabis as not supporting Jihad. Funny thing, when most of the jihadi Salafi mosques in the West (like that one in Hamburg) are funded by Saudis, stocked with Saudi antisemitic hate literature and staffed by Saudi-funded madrassa-trained Imams.

    Like the Aum Shinryko and Thugee cults, Salafi/Wahhabi Islam has to be wiped off the earth. This is doable, by deposing the Saudi, Kuwati and Emirati governments. First of all, STOP SELLING THEM WEAPONS! Secondly, make them capitulate, with an 'oil-for-food' programme: no oil, no food. (A blockade would involve blasting food-carrying merchant ships out of the water and bombing land convoys.) Gulf States' troop strengths are a FRACTION of what Iraq's were. In the West, liquidate Salafi organisations (CAIR, MSAs) and mosques, deport, or jail Salafi Imams and charge people who do business with countries like Saudi Arabia and Sudan with treason (forefiture of assets, jail, or death). The West has to stop its limp-wristed approach to dealing with Islamism, and follow the example of Lord Kitchener.

  • ACSial

    “At least Bush took it to the muslim enemy.”

    Well, sort of…mostly to the wrong one. There was no need to piss away human and materiel resources in Iraq. Afghanistan should have been THE priority, followed by Sodomy Arserapia, which is literally the Mecca of jihadism.

    During the Afghan-Soviet war, the conservative media made much of how, unlike the Commies, the Qur'an-thumpers were 'God-fearing' and, hence, deserved the U.S.'s support. Then, there was that 'Rambutt' movie… However, the dhimmitude flows from money. In the case of the Repugnants, it's oil-drilling concessions; in the case of the Dumbcracks, it's construction and development contracts (e.g., Bill 'Peyronies' Disease' Clinton's lobby work for Dubai's ports industry). Playing nice and tolerant to towelheads reflects the fact that both Democratic and Republican politicians will sell their country for a buck.

  • Gordon

    Hassan was an ISLAMIC TERRORIST. That is the Reality.
    Will all Muslims move to Jihad????? That is the question.
    All of the research shows that all Muslims will eventually move to killing Christians as a way of life.

  • elizabethwerner

    EXCELLENT article Jamie! It should be REQUIRED reading for high-school students – Daily!

    Thank you Jamie – I hope (and pray) that your words will make a difference for the future of my children.

    Bless you

  • elizabethwerner

    americaF1rst said….

    “FrontPage Magazine is a radical Zionist web site that not only considers all Arabs/Muslims likely terrorists”

    americaF1rst?…with a name like that? ponder the following:

    THE CONSTITUTION OF AMIERCA…

    We the people of the United States…

    In Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    Article. IV. Section. 4.

    The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

    The 'constitution' that Muslims hold higher than the Constitution of the U.S. is their Koran – which states:

    004.100 He who forsakes his home in the cause of Allah, finds in the earth Many a refuge, wide and spacious.

    004.094 O ye who believe! When ye ''''go abroad'''' in the cause of Allah, investigate carefully, and say not to any one who offers you a salutation: “Thou art none of a believer!” Therefore carefully investigate. {They are to hide their intentions

    003.028 Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless it be that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking as it were security. {Telling lies to non-Muslims is permissible in Islam!

    033.061 They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy. {Mass Murder!

    033.052 It is not lawful for thee to marry more women after this, nor to change them for other wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess as handmaidens.

    They are permitted to '''trade back and forth''' the women that they take as prisoners of war [after killing their men] Rape of the 'female captives' – a Most Violent act! and a clear violation of Article. IV. of the U.S. Constitution

    008.074 Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of Allah as well as those who give them asylum and aid, – these are all in very truth the Believers. {Treason!

    004.101 When ye travel – through the earth – there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear the Unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.

    009.029 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission – and feel themselves subdued.

    008.067 It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war [slay them first] until he hath thoroughly subdued the land. {Treason! – on a level that a child can understand

    Treason:

    1. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.

    2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

    In the United States, treason is confined to the actual levying of war against the United States, or to an adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

    Article. III. Section. 3.

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

    It doesn't take a 'team of scholars' to understand the teachings of the Koran.

    The Koran calls all 'moderate' Muslims liars. And no matter how much they deny – or how sophisticated their explanations may appear – the Koran still Trumps any and all Muslim claims – because it comes from their own god.

    004.095 Not equal are those believers who sit at home and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit at home. But – those who strive and fight – hath He distinguished above those who sit at home by a special reward.

    002.216 Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing [war] which is good for you and that ye love a thing [peace] which is bad for you?

    009.039 Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.

    The Koran does not preach peace – it preaches war!

    Jam 3:11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?

    Jam 3:12 No fountain both yield salt water and fresh.

    Article. VII

    Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven {that year signifies only one possible Lord for this Constitution] and of the Independence of the United States of America. The Son of God is an abomination in Islam 019.088 and Muslims are commanded to slay His followers:

    005.051 O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors {authorities]: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them for friendship is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

    009.030 The Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what ''the unbelievers'' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them – how they are deluded away from the Truth!

    047.004 Therefore, when ye meet ''the Unbelievers'' in fight, smite at their necks. Behead them! And they are commanded to initiate the fight} 002.216 009.039

    You will know the heart by the words that come from the mouth

    SHAME on you …..americaF1rst (yeah…Right)

    What exactly is it, that….makes you an American?

    If you love Islam so much…there's a great place for you to live………..Mecca. If you don't like mecca …there's medina.

    Goodbye…and good riddens!!!!

  • Len Powder

    Great presentation Elizabeth. Unfortunately it's probably wasted on America1st, whose real moniker is probably AmericaLast. He/She represents that portion of the population, unfortunately, which makes sacrifices on the altar of Political Correctness. I'd offer him/her several other destinations almost as bad as Mecca & Medina – Londonistan, Paristan, or Amsterdamstan. The Mulsims there WILL OPEN his/her eyes beyond any doubt!