Skip to comments.Minnesota Somalis fear backlash after Kenya mall attack [Waah]
Posted on 09/24/2013 5:05:37 PM PDT by markomalley
Members of the largest ethnic Somali community in the United States expressed frustration on Tuesday, fearing a backlash after the attack on a Kenya shopping mall by a Somalia-based Islamic group that has recruited fighters in Minnesota.
It was unclear whether any of the attackers were connected to Minnesota's Somali community. But Somali-American leaders in Minneapolis were quick to condemn the assault after early unconfirmed reports identified one or more of the attacking al Shabaab rebels as recruits from the United States.
At least 20 young ethnic Somali men have left Minnesota since 2007 to join al Shabaab in Somalia, some dying there, U.S. authorities have said. The Minnesota Somali community has been the focus of a federal investigation since then.
An affiliate of al Qaeda, al Shabaab has been designated a terror organization by the United States. At least 67 people were killed in Nairobi's Westgate Mall, along with five of the attackers.
"This attack has generated a real concern among the Somali communities and fear of backlash," said Omar Jamal, a community activist and former head of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Then they better get their asses out in front of cameras and start denouncing violence in the name of islam. Otherwise they are complicit and deserve backlash.
I’ve been sick of these formulaic ‘backlash’ stories since 9/11.
The MSM are happy to practice guilt by association when it comes to the Tea Party or gun ownership but demonstrably violent Muslims get a pass.
We are always quick to here from the leaders. Haven’t seen any Somali on the street interviews.
Also a month from now, after there has been absolutely NO backlash, I’d like to have these leaders apologize to the people of Minnesota for the slander they dropped on us today.
MN Somalis? Aren’t these the guys who refuse to transport seeing-eye dogs in their cabs?
I am in favor of sending them home, they have not assimilated and continue with their 7th century mindset including FMG!
I Scarcely Give A Sh..
These are the same Somalis that sucker punch developmentally disabled people on bicycles in the Twin Cities,
So sorry. Better hop the next flight back to Mogadishu where you and your families can feel safe.
Somali muzz in Minnesota are a huge problem, but the Democrats invited them here and rolled out the red carpet for them. So now we all suffer.
The MSM and leftists are always more concerned with backlash than the actual terror attacks
Exactly. I’d like to hear a little outrage from the supposedly peaceful Muslims. Occasionally one hears a little fear (of “reprisals”) from them, but never any rejection of the hideous things their coreligionists have done in their name.
They’re Somali’s now, but the press called them Americans when they were committing the atrocity in Kenya.
Why the Hell are we letting these scumbags in here when white South Africans need a home?
along with all other Mohammedans in the 50 States. We are not speaking of Freedom of Religion here. Moslems have proclaimed themselves the enemies of the United States and are an irredeemably hostile ideology that should be expelled.
“An affiliate of al Qaeda, al Shabaab has been designated a terror organization by the United States. “
Obviously didn’t contribute to the Obama campaign. That was their first mistake.
Apparently (real reason) liberal churches decided Minnesota was too white, too blond, too Christian, too Eurocentric.
So they financed the mass importation of the worst, most unassimilable muzzies on the planet as a “correction”.
Wonder how many Somalis voted for Al Franken?
If there were a bunch of AMERICANS with roots in somali that had some concerns over being targeted because of those ties that would be one thing. But those madmoafrosomaliminnecans can KISS MY SHINY METAL ***
They fear “backlash”? If only... I’d be a bit more sympathetic if they had takeen a firm stand and denounced the actions of their brothers-in-arms. They’ve never criticized the terrorism we’ve suffered by their brothers-in-arms. I hope there’s severe backlash. (But there won’t be. Sadly.)
Big mistake to ever let these people in our country. We have paid for them to grow well-nourished terrorists. They should all be invited to return to their beloved native hell hole, where I am sure they will be safe from “backlash.”
Because the Afrikaaners are just a bunch of evil white people who deserve to be brutally killed in their homes?
Just thinking out loud here in Obamaland....
Don’t start none, won’t be none.
And you might want to denounce these animals, publicly.
It seems two members of there mosque participated in the slaughter. None of them noticed those two radicals were preparing to slaughter people which I can somewhat understand. What I cannot understand is why those people have yet to condemn those involved in the slaughter who were members of their mosque. Their silence speaks volumes.
The American founding fathers and early scholars since the 18th century were aware of deeply-rooted Islamic violence, terrorism, intolerance and hatred toward other Muslims, as well as non-Muslims.
Early American leaders and thinkers were endowed with deep appreciation and unique knowledge of global history, international relations, ancient cultures, ideologies and religions. They spoke and wrote candidly about global threats, including the Islamic threat.
In 1830, New York University Prof. George Bush, the great-granduncle of G.H.W. Bush, considered one of the most profound American scholars of the mid-19th century, published The Life of Mohammed. He was not concerned about political correctness, was low on delusion and top heavy on realism. His 1830 reference to the Islamic threat was consistent with the 2012 state of intra-Muslim atrocities, hate-education, tyranny, anti-US stormy Arab winter, intolerance of criticism, global Islamic terrorism in general and suicide bombing in particular.
According to Prof. Bush, [Mohammed] promised robes of silks, marble palaces, groves and fountains and beautiful virgins to those who fought for the faith offering his enemies the alternative; the Koran or the sword . It was inflamed by zeal for a religion which assured the soldier of victory now and paradise hereafter. The permanence of this religion is now apparently secured by education in regions where freedom of thought is unknown (p. 155-6) .
O prophet of God, I will beat out the teeth, pull out the eyes, rip open the bellies and cut off the legs of all who shall dare to oppose thee (pp. 36-37) . [Muhammed] was cruel on principle. He did deliberately what other men do from impulse . The ambition which tramples on the right of men to think or to live is the greatest of human crimes . The sword is the key of heaven and hell. A drop of blood shed in the cause of God is of more avail than two months of fast and prayers. Whosoever falls in the battle his sins are forgiven and the loss of his limbs shall be replaced by the wing of angels (103-4) . Hatred of Christians and Jews is rooted in their hearts from childhood (p. 137) .
John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist church (1703-1791) preferred clarity over ambiguity when describing Islam: Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws . Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind.
Thomas Jefferson studied the Koran, to become more knowledgeable about a chief enemy the Moslem Barbary pirates, who plundered American ships, enslaving Americans, demanding protection money and ransom for their release. During 1784-1789, while Jefferson (the 3rd US President) was ambassador to France and John Adams (the 2nd US President) was ambassador to England, they met with the Barbary Ambassador to London, in an attempt to stop the anti-US piracy. Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman told them: [Piracy] was founded on the laws of the Prophet, as it was written in the Koran; that all nations which had not acknowledged [Islams] authority were sinners; that it was [the Moslems] right and duty to make war upon them and enslave them as prisoners, and that every Muslim slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
John Quincy Adams, sixth US President (1825-1829), wrote after his presidency and before his election to Congress in 1830: The precept of the Koran is perpetual war against all who deny that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. [Mohamet] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind . Between [Christianity and Islam], thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant . (Blunt, 29:274).
In 1916, Teddy Roosevelt observed: Wherever the Mohammedans have had a complete sway, wherever the Christians have been unable to resist them by the sword, Christianity has ultimately disappeared (ditto, Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism ).
In 2012, US policy-makers should benefit from the experience of early US leaders and thinkers whose observations have been vindicated by the recent turmoil in Arab lands avoiding the lethal trap of political correctness in their assessment of the Islamic threat.
The pain you have brought against innocent people requires for you a death that never ends.
You have made your bed, now lie in it and burn forever. No power can save you.
Up to three American teenager were among the terrorists who attacked the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya’s foreign minister Amina Mohamed confirmed on Monday.
The Americans, aged between 18 and 19, of Somali or Arab origin, lived in Minnesota and one other place in the U.S, she said in an interview with the PBS NewsHour. One Brit was also believed to be involved.
The revelation would support other information posted on Twitter, which suggested the Somali terror cell which carried out the attack was 15-strong and contained many nationalities, including citizens of the United States.
Won’t mean a thing. Taquiya.
The US Somalis especially in Mionnesota have done nothing to drive the radicals from their mosques or denounce terrorism. They are content to separate themselves from mainstream America, live by sharia law and accept any government handouts they can get. If Somali linked terrorists strike in the US, the the US Somalis deserve backlash and should be lucky we don’t put them all in internment camps or deport them en masse.
If there are Americans among the muslim terrorists and they survive, can they be extradited? And could we execute them in Minn.? Or where in the US would they be tried?
That may explain Minnesota's decades long love affair with the very European ideology of Marxism.
Here in the South we aren't as white, but we're much more conservative.
Here in the South we are armed to the frigging teeth which the culture both allows & encourages, and as a result our local muzzies tend to keep vewy vewy quiet.
From where I live the city `Islamic center’ can be seen swarming with dishdashas & hijabs on Friday “Jumma”, but they don’t inflict muzzie in-your-face in public places (cursing summer-clad women, throwing stones at black dogs, demanding demanding demanding, etc.) like in some northern cities.
Angry minorities prop up white liberal elites... that's why the MSM supports them - even when they're violent.
I believe the acronym is DYTIGAS (Do You Think I Give A Sh...).
Oh noes, the dreaded “backlash” again. Somehow that never happens.
I wasn’t referring to the moslem presence but to ideology in general. The Upper Midwest is ethnically a Nazi’s paradise, but it’s been far left politically since the days of Populism. Meanwhile, the “Black Belt” is much more politically conservative (no thanks to its Blacks, unfortunately).
::Slaps face:: I just realized that the South was populist for a very long time, from William Jennings Bryan to “Alfalfa Bill” Murray. But for some reason Midwestern populism is left wing and Southern populism is right wing.
Hmmm.....food for thought, the different strains of populism.
The Mid Western form often called Prairie Populism evokes Robert Lafollette, Hubert Humphrey, & George McGovern (he & I were in Vietnam in 1972; solve that little puzzle). Nazi strongholds like Coeur D’Alene are indeed quite rare. The region was the recipient of huge amounts of New Deal largesse monumented by the enormous dams built during that time. Both the dams & the ideology surrounding them remain.
Southern populism was admittedly racist when its proponents were Eugene Talmadge & Lester Maddox, less so during the candidacies of George Wallace. Southern blacks, for whom FDR’s New Deal had done little to help as he needed those white Southern Democrat votes, were suddenly “weaponized” by the first civil rights movement & perceived as a threat to the established order of every white Southerner regardless of class. Huey Long’s relatively inclusive populism was seen as an aberration.
But nothing in the racial struggles of the past could have prepared America for the current Muslim onslaught, aided & abetted by liberals with a frankly nihilistic streak.
IOW, those Somalis didn’t get here by swimming.
Some of you scumbags had to know something.
Well, duh. Backlash is coming. How about expelling them all from Minnesota?
Poor things. They should just get the hell out.
In the populist era proper, William Jennings Bryan (whom FDR considered the founder of the "modern" Democrat party) was extremely popular in the South. While he wasn't a screaming white racist (he was more indifferent to the plight of Blacks) his supporter "Pitchfork Ben" Tilghman of South Carolina mixed populism and white racism into a homogenized brew. Georgia's Tom Watson actually appealed to Blacks as a young populist politician but became a racial demagogue later (as a Democrat).
Even during the New Deal era Roosevelt was allied with racist Southern whites who often uttered their racial hatred in the name of "the poor." Bilbo and Rankin of Mississippi are two examples here. Reynolds of North Carolina seems to have been an exception to this, as was Long, though Long actually raised the specter of "Negro domination" more than most people today realize (this was in order to keep people from voting Republican, of course).
Meanwhile, in the "left wing" Midwest you had the Germanophilia of the two world wars and "America First" isolationism (something Southern conservatives didn't share in, though today's neo-Confederates do). The Midwest is of course largely ethnically German and Chicago was the center of the America First movement Charles Lindbergh, the son of a "left wing" populist congressman from Minnesota, was its most famous and visible leader.
As an aside here, it's ironic that Chicago Germans, who are regarded as practically demigods by the "palaeos" for their opposition to American entry into World War II, were at least in part lineal descendants of the huge Chicago German immigrant community who supported Abraham Lincoln so strongly. Yet those Chicago Germans are regardes as "Communists" by "palaeos!" I think they would like to imply that all the pro-Lincoln Germans were Jews!
A great deal of the populist left was pacifist and this is where the shift occurred. In the teens and twenties it was "left wing" to oppose war. Suddenly in the late thirties and early forties it was "right wing!" So a lot of the "right wing isolationists" of that era were actually simply left wing pacifists who simply maintained their original position on war rather than changing it! But that's something the libs don't want you to know. Even some of the most allegedly "reactionary" characters of the New Deal era (Father Coughlin, Townshend) were actually "left wing" on economic issues by any honest standard.
And of course, to this very day we have "radical right wingers" whose rogues gallery is identical to that of the left wing populists of the late nineteenth century: the Rockefellers, the Morgans, the Mellons, the Whitneys, etc. Only while the old populists considered them capitalist pigs, today's "palaeos" consider them "the real power behind Communism!" Amazing--the ideologies of both sides have changed 180 degrees, but the characters on both sides are the same!
Of course populist anti-capitalism has its roots in opposition to the bourgeois world created by the French Revolution and a yearning for a pre-capitalist "organic society." Both John C. Calhoun in America and Metternich in Europe assumed the role of protectors of the lowest classes from the predations of the recently unleashed (by the liberalism of the French Revolution) laissez-faire economic system. Even on Free Republic some Catholic posters voice this position. (No offense to you, elcid. I'm a Theocrat as well.)
Pinging to wideawake so he can correct my mistakes and make additional points.
Excellent post! I’ve learned a great deal about populism(s).
In World War I German-Americans suffered the suspicions we have read about (before there were Freedom Fries there was Liberty Cabbage). But I also read that Ashkenazic Jews in America were very pro-Kaiser, the old “Germans first, Jews second”) stance that the more Jews acted like Germans the more accepted they would be. Very much generalizing here, but apparently Jews in WWI did not regard Germany as an existential threat. That would later change.
A friend sent this to me today - I hadn’t heard it but she said Rush said it before obozo was elected. Can’t verify it.
“”Rush summed up all Muslims. He said, the good Muslims want all infidels dead. The bad Muslims want to live in peace. He also said there are no bad Muslims.””