The Army has had a love affair with Muslims for years now. Personally, I blame Bush and his unwillingness to set the tone that “Islam is our enemy.” He made sure that was never the case, the command climate was set, and here we are carrying it out to its logical conclusion. I could be wrong on my timeline (maybe it goes back further in time?), but this is sadly not atypical.
Example: my unit is an intel-related and we have a lot of civilians working there as analysts and God-knows-what else. We had to do our annual training which included the standard EO circle-jerk we’ve been doing for many years. Usually there is a vignette or two involved, and this time it involved a Muslim who became “closer to his faith” during an Iraq deployment who was also preaching Islam more and declaring people who were not of Islam were going to hell. “Is this guy a problem?” was the discussion question. I was literally the only one in the entire theater full of people, Soldiers or civilians, who said “Yes.” The guy running the discussion asked me if I would think the same way if this guy was a Catholic, and I told him no. After a few questions, he determined that my main issue with this guy was that he was a Muslim saying these things. “Yes.” All the “tsk-tsk” and “tut-tut” crap I heard coming from those around me was amazing to me. I’ve seen Muslim violence up close and personal on many occasions. To these analysts, it’s just a series of paper reports, I guess. Multiculturalism still reigns supreme in their minds. Sad and scary.
Do these people have any idea of the doctrines of Islam - and especally the doctrine of abrogation, which means that later texts supercede earlier texts? Mohammed started out thinking that people would convert to Islam through reasoning. When that didn’t work he turned to conversion by the sword. The quotes to make Islam sound peaceful are taken from Mohammed’s early years, but those texts have been abrogated by the later commands to kill the infidels.
A Muslim getting “closer to his faith” means he gets past the fluff that is intended to make the world think well of Islam and is getting down to the actual binding (non-abrogated) texts, which command violence against non-Muslims.
I remember reading an article about a meeting that Prince Charles tried to have with “moderate Muslims”. He wanted them to condemn the “extremist” phenomenon of killing infidels. He could not find one “moderate Muslim” who was willing to condemn the practice because they all said it was commanded by Islam. And these are the “moderates”.
Had I been at the theater with you, you would not have been alone.
Add my name to those who would have stood with you in that theater the day you said a fervent Muslim in the ranks preaching Islam & death to “infidels” constituted a threat.
We’ve already got one of those - Nidal Hasan who I would love to have dissed in person before I retired (that would have been worth a court-martial!). Look how he is coddled (yes, that’s the term) because of his religion and unlikely to ever face justice.
“I have a dream” - and that’s all it is - that there are underground groups forming in the military made up of those who are fed up with the pro-muzzie PC infecting the chain of command. Were it to become a movement with a name, I’d call it “CHRISTIAN RESPONSE”.
Anybody game?
Dang, just by your single experience, I would say that we are getting hung by our own rope. I have a quote from my profile page by Gertt Wilders that I like to re-post:
Multiculturalism made us tolerate the intolerant, and now intolerance is annihilating tolerance. -Gertt Wilders
I would have told the guy running the discussion,
“Let me know when 19 Catholics hijack commercial airliners and fly them into the Pentagon and tall skyscrapers in lower Manhattan.”