Skip to comments.Black Muslims: A Fifth Column Inside The United States?
Posted on 03/04/2006 7:09:09 PM PST by strategofr
In 1936, a Spanish Nationalist General was poised outside of Madrid waiting with four columns of troops to take back the city from Communist (Republican) forces. When General Emilio Mola Vidal was asked which of the four columns would seize the city, he replied, "The Fifth." When asked to explain what he meant, he told his subordinates that the Fifth Column was a group of his loyalists inside of Madrid who would help him subvert and overthrow the Communists who held control.
In viewing America's worldwide war on terrorism and our efforts to protect our homeland from another 9-11 attack, many political analysts are expressing grave concerns over Black Muslims serving as a Fifth Column here in the United States-and within our military.
We understand that most Muslims in the United States are loyal citizens and would do nothing to undermine our nation during a time of war. However, there is a radical contingent of Islamists operating in the U.S. who are willing to provide aid and comfort to our enemies. Black Muslim leaders like Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, for example, have publicly expressed their hatred of America-and could easily function as a Fifth Column inside the U.S.
We may have seen this Fifth Column at work at the 101st Airborne's Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait City on March 23, 2003. During the night, Sgt. Asan Akbar is alleged to have tossed several grenades into the tents of senior officers. Two officers were killed and 15 were wounded. Akbar is a Black Muslim who was being kept back from the front lines because his superior officers were concerned about his anti-war attitudes.
The Los Angeles Times (March 24, 2003) reported that shortly after Akbar was captured, he shouted at his fellow soldiers: "You guys are coming into our countries and you're going to rape our women and kill our children." Clearly, Akbar identified with Muslim terrorist nations rather than with his own country and fellow soldiers. Akbar's terrorism and treason against his own men and nation may be the beginning of more serious problems for our nation and our military.
One think tank has expressed grave concerns over Akbar and what other Black Muslims might do as we fight Islamic terrorism. The Center for Security Policy, headed by Frank J. Gaffney, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy during the Reagan Administration, recently published an essay on Akbar and the threat that Black Muslims may pose to our national security.
In "'Fifth Column' within the U.S. armed forces," published on March 25, 2003, a Center analyst wrote: The murderous insider attack in the 101st could be the precursor for a far larger and more dangerous problem, both for the military and for American society more generally. That problem is the "fifth column" that is developing inside the United States and its institutions.
In a related article on the Black Muslim fifth column, published earlier by the Center, the author noted that Asan Akbar attended the Masjid Bilal Islamic Center in South Central Los Angeles. This mosque is predominately black and was funded by the Saudi Arabian government. According to WorldNetDaily (April 22, 2002), the Saudis provided $8 million for the Masjid mosque and another $295,000 for a school. In total, the Saudis have spent as much as $19 billion to build mosques and spread Wahhabism-the Islamic fundamentalism espoused by terrorist and murderer Osama bin Laden.
Black Muslim Paranoia And Hatred
The Masjid Bilal Islamic Center is associated with the Chicago-based Muslim American Society (MAS), which is an offshoot of the Nation of Islam (NOI) headed by Louis Farrakhan. MAS is headed by Imam W. Deen Mohammed, the son of NOI founder Elijah Muhammad. Mohammed had fought for control of NOI after his father's death, but lost to Farrakhan. He later founded MAS.
The Muslim American Society web site has alarming articles against our war on terror and includes an essay entitled "Israel: America's Shame and Humanity's Stain." The author, Mohamed Khodr, claims that most of our American institutions are controlled by Jews and that President Bush is a pawn of Zionists and the religious right (Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Franklin Graham, etc.) "...whose aim is to kill Jews, Muslims, and anyone else, to bring back the 'Prince of Peace.' Thus, their plan for salvation is paved with war, death, and blood." Khodr claims that the Jewish control of our government gives Israel "a free hand to drench the soil of peace in the Holy Land with Arab Christian and Muslim blood."
According to Khodr, our war on terrorism to liberate Iraq from the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein is designed to enrich the oil interests of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and to provide billions for the military industrial complex. If this is the kind of religious instruction that Asan Akbar received at his South Central Los Angeles mosque, it is little wonder that he fragged his fellow soldiers who were going to war against Saddam Hussein.
The Muslim American Society and the Nation of Islam preach hatred against Israel and are opposed to our nation's war against terrorism. The MAS has aligned itself with the Communist front organization known as International Answer (Act Now To Stop War & End Racism). ANSWER is run behind the scenes by the Workers World Party, a Communist group that supports North Korea. A MAS representative participated in an anti-war rally on September 4, 2002 and the group continues to oppose our war efforts.
MAS has published a lengthy document, "War in Iraq: Guidelines for American Muslim Leaders," that outlines the organization's opposition to our effort to rid the world of tyrants and Islamic terrorists. According to Islamist expert Daniel Pipes, MAS founder W. Deen Mohammed and Louis Farrakhan reconciled with each other in February, 2000, and have vowed to work together on common goals ever since then.
Nation Of Islam
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has long been associated with terrorists and nations that sponsor terrorism. He embarked on a "World Friendship Tour" in 1996 that included visits to several states that sponsor terrorism: Libya, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, and Syria. During this tour, he denounced the United States as the "Great Satan." Farrakhan's good friend, Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi, said this about their meeting: Our confrontation with America used to be like confronting a fortress from outside. Today, we have found a loophole to enter the fortress and to confront it. On this basis, we agreed with Louis Farrakhan and his delegation to mobilize in a legal and legitimate form the oppressed minorities, and at their forefront the blacks, Arabs, Muslims, and Red Indians, for they play an important role in American political life and have weight in the U.S. elections. (Reuters, January 26, 1996)
Farrakhan is far more racist than is MAS founder Mohammed, but their overall goals are the same: the spreading of their peculiar brand of Islam among our nation's black population. This effort is going on in our nation's public housing projects as well as in prisons-where alienated black criminals are converting to Islam in increasing numbers.
We also face a potential threat of radicalized, anti-American Black Muslims within our military's chaplaincy program. According to the Center for Security Policy, as of June, 2002, nine of the military's 14 Muslim chaplains received their training at the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences (GSISS) in Leesburg, Virginia.
In March of 2002, a federal task force called "Operation Green Quest" raided the offices of GSISS, along with 23 other Muslim groups. Agents also raided the homes of Dr. Iqbal Unus, the Dean of Students and Dr. Taha Al-Alwani, the school's president. According to the search warrants issued at the time, these groups were raided for "potential money laundering and tax evasion activities and their ties to terrorist groups such as al Qaeda as well as individual terrorists (including) Osama bin Laden." The GSISS was raided because of its suspected ties to the World and Islam Studies Enterprise, a terrorist front group established by former University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian who was arrested in February, 2003 for being a leader in the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The fragging of American soldiers by a Black Muslim in Kuwait City could be an aberration, but the teaching that Black Muslims receive creates a mindset that is predisposed to hate America, whites, and any war against Muslim terrorists. Daniel Pipes has expressed alarm over this incident. He says the Asan Akbar terrorist attack re-enforces what he said in January, 2003: There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism, as do Muslim chaplains in prisons and the armed forces. Muslim visitors and immigrants must undergo additional background checks. Mosques require a scrutiny beyond that applied to churches and temples.
Clearly, we face not only an external threat but an internal one from a dangerous, hate-filled Fifth Column.
For additional resources on Black Muslims and Islamic terrorism, access Daniel Pipes' web site: www.danielpipes.org; and The Center for Security Policy: www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org.
And profoundly disturbing!
A must read Bump!
The Muslim (pig poop be upon it) recruiting in prison worries me.
Thanks for posting.
I've also wondered about that. The NOI seems to get the majority of its members from prison.
"And profoundly disturbing!"
Yeah. Not only is this a very bad situation. It is a very different difficult situation to do anything about. Even talking about it proves you are a "racist". I wonder if some of our agencies connected with national security would hesitate to be sufficiently vigilant in this case.
I had never even heard that this guy who threw the grenades was a Black Muslim, though I read several news accounts referring to the incident.
Apparently, the administration has already refused to profile Muslims in airports. And of course, for police to profile blacks is simply illegal---even though it is the logical thing to do based on existing crime rates.
Even thinking about this problem tends to generate paralysis.
It is as you say, but, HST, we will have to conFRont the problem at some point in time. Just as well it be now.
I am convinced beyond the shadow of any doubt that the Muslim "religion" is purely evil. It represents, IMHO, a clear and present danger to our way of life and is much worse than any criminal enterprise or tyrannical government the US has ever faced.
We (The West) had better gain the high ground, and damn quick, or we're in grave danger of being relegated to the ash heap of history by these murdering fanatic Islamofacists.
You are absoFReepinglutely correct, Master Chief.
Thank you for your service!
"It is as you say, but, HST, we will have to conFRont the problem at some point in time. Just as well it be now.
I am convinced beyond the shadow of any doubt that the Muslim "religion" is purely evil. It represents, IMHO, a clear and present danger to our way of life and is much worse than any criminal enterprise or tyrannical government the US has ever faced.
We (The West) had better gain the high ground, and damn quick, or we're in grave danger of being relegated to the ash heap of history by these murdering fanatic Islamofacists."
I appreciate your point of view but see it somewhat differently. Obviously, there has been a large capacity for evil within the one he be sect of Islam for a long time. But if you think about it, for 300 years this potential has primarily lain dormant.
It is really since 1991---since the breakup of the Soviet Union---that Islam has exploded into the main force of evil. Before then, there were terrorists all over the world---in fact, they were all trained and financed by the Soviet Union.
I believe Russia is behind the explosion of Islamic terrorism in the world today. Here's a suspicious story for you.
Volume 2 Issue 1 (January 15, 2004)
A RUSSIAN AGENT AT THE RIGHT HAND OF BIN LADEN?
By Evgenii Novikov
The Arabic television channel Al Jazeera broadcast an audiotape on December 19, 2003, that was said to be from Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the right hand man of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. In it, Zawahiri claimed that his group was chasing Americans everywhere, including in the United States. This claim helped raise the terror threat level.
But where is Zawahiri, whose head now carries a price of US$25 million? Recent media reports have said that he is hiding in Iran, though Iranian authorities deny this. Yet it could be that Russian intelligence knows exactly where he is and may even have regular contact with the elusive Egyptian.
Zawahiri as Prisoner
There are many accounts of Ayman al-Zawahiri published in the press. These stories cover Zawahiri's childhood and his relatives, his study of medicine, his connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, his involvement in the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, his close relations with Osama bin Laden, and his role in major terrorist attacks against the United States. But there are few authors who mention that Zawahiri spent half a year in close contact with representatives of Russian intelligence while in their custody.
Significantly, these contacts led to a change in Zawahiri's political orientation. Long talks with Russian intelligence officers "forced a critical change in his lethal planning. ...America, not Egypt, became the target... Freed from Russian jail in May 1997, Dr. Zawahri found refuge in Afghanistan, yoking his fortunes to Mr. bin Laden. [Zawahiri's group] Egyptian Jihad, previously devoted to the narrow purpose of toppling secular rule in Egypt, became instead the biggest component of al Qaeda and a major agent of a global war against America. Dr. Zawahri became Mr. bin Laden's closest confidant and talent scout." 
The story of Zawahiri's Russian experience begins on December 1, 1996, when he was traveling under the alias "Mr. Amin" along with two of his officers--Ahmad Salama Mabruk, who ran Egyptian Jihad's cell in Azerbaijan under the cover of a trading firm called Bavari-C, and Mahmud Hisham al-Hennawi, a militant widely traveled in Asia. The group was accompanied by a Chechen guide. They were trying to enter Russia between the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus Mountains in an effort to discover whether Chechnya could become a base for training militants. It was here that the group was arrested by Russian police for a lack of visas. They were soon handed over to the Federal Security Service, the successor to the KGB.
When Zawahiri's computer was later discovered in Afghanistan by two journalists, it provided insight into Zawahiri's side of the story. In short, it goes as follows:
The Russians failed to: 1) find out Zawahiri's real identity and the goals of his visit to Chechnya; 2) read the Arabic texts in his laptop, which would have revealed the nature of his activities; and 3) read the coded messages that he sent from custody to his friends.
Zawahiri's Version Debunked
Yet based on my own twenty years' experience with Russian intelligence people involved in Arab affairs, these claims simply do not ring true. The Soviet KGB had good--albeit indirect--connections with Islamic fundamentalists, including the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian Jihad. The curriculum of Arab terrorists who studied at Moscow International's Lenin School placed special emphasis on cooperation between Marxists and Islamists. Soviet instructors would encourage Arab terrorists to consider the Muslim Brothers and other Islamic extremists as "allies in class struggle."
Good contacts between the KGB and Islamic fundamentalists existed at the time of the Egyptian Jihad's 1981 assassination of Anwar Sadat, after which Zawahiri was jailed by Egyptian authorities. Since the KGB followed these events very closely and may have even been indirectly involved in the plot, the KGB would have put Zawahiri's name into its records at that time. Therefore, when Zawahiri crossed the KGB's path again, that organization likely would have soon discovered his real identity.
Additionally, local Islamic organizations flocked to Zawahiri's aid during his detention and trial in such large numbers that the Russians and even Zawahiri's own lawyer were puzzled by the outpouring.  This would have been another tip-off to the authorities that they had more than just a mere merchant (Zawahiri's reported claim) in custody. Also, the fact that he was arrested along with a Chechen should have raised additional suspicions.
Perhaps most difficult to believe from Zawahiri's version is that his captors would not have read the Arabic information contained within his laptop computer. Russian intelligence has probably the best Arabists in the world. One of them--Dr. Evgeny Primakov--headed the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service from December 1991 until January 1996 and made a considerable efforts to bring many talented Arabists into this service. These individuals would have been able not only to read Zawahiri's Arabic text, but also to decode his encrypted messages without any problem.
Thus, with Zawahiri's true identity and purpose uncovered by the Russians, these authorities would have been faced with several options. One would have been deportation to either Egypt or the United States, with gratitude from those governments for Russian President Yeltsin, burnishing his image as a fighter against terrorism. But apparently the Russians decided not to do this, believing perhaps that their national interest was better served by another alternative.
One should bear in mind that at the time of Zawahiri's capture, Chechnya was enjoying a period of actual independence from Moscow. The Kremlin was having great difficulty finding "agents of influence" among the Chechen people. At the same time, Moscow knew that representatives of al Qaeda and other foreign Islamic fundamentalists were present in Chechnya and exercised strong influence on the Chechen leaders, especially on the military commanders. It would have been logical, therefore, for the Russians to try to persuade Zawahiri to cooperate with them in directing the activities of Arabs in Chechnya, in getting information about the plans and activities of Chechen leaders, and in influencing the Chechen leadership.
It may not have been too difficult for Russian officers to persuade Zawahiri to go along with such a plan. The prisoner would have been very frightened by the prospect of being deported to Egypt or remaining jailed in Russia. Furthermore, methods of torture during interrogation used by KGB officers would have truly almost scared Zawahiri to death. Execution very likely was just one threat.
Once made aware that the KGB knew of his true identity, Zawahiri would have realized that it would be useless to lie further. At a minimum, Zawahiri would have had to agree to cooperation with Russian intelligence to save his life and to buy his freedom. It is possible that the Russians also offered some form of assistance to Zawahiri and al Qaeda. This could have been in the form of explosive technology or other weaponry.
It is notable that Taliban and al Qaeda militants in Afghanistan received regular re-supplies of Russian arms. The man responsible for these deliveries was Victor Anatolievich Bout, the son of a top KGB officer. His father's connections helped establish Bout in the arms trade, which is linked to the Russian government and particularly to its intelligence services. Bout and his family currently reside in the United Arab Emirates. 
It is also not difficult to imagine that the Russians managed to get some information from Zawahiri about his colleagues that could have been used to blackmail him if he tried to avoid cooperation after his release. With an agreement reached between Zawahiri and the Russians, the authorities would have taken steps to make the Egyptian look "clean" to his Arab comrades and the Chechens. It would not have been difficult for them to stage Zawahiri's trial, at which the judge gave him only a six months' sentence, much of which he had already served.
A final note: Arabs are still very active among the Chechen militants today, and yet the Russians appear to turn a blind eye toward their infiltration and do not hunt them particularly. Even the most influential among the Arabs, Khattab, may well have been killed by his own people. Arabs have also never been listed as POWs. Perhaps the Russian forces have an order to kill Arabs on the spot: Nobody wants them to reveal unwanted information during interrogations. Thus left alone, the Arabs exercise significant influence over the activities of Chechen commanders according to orders from Zawahiri. Presumably they do so without understanding that they could well be the Trojan horses who actually execute the Kremlin's orders. For example, the Arabs apparently do not encourage Chechen militants to direct any attacks against Russian leaders in Moscow. This could be accomplished simply by refusing to pay for such operations.
In contrast, the Arabs do seem to encourage the taking of hostages from among the common people, as in the Moscow youth club Nord-Ost incident, thus making it easier for the Kremlin to stoke public anger against "Chechen terrorists." This in turn helps Vladimir Putin garner popular support for his own authoritarian actions as well as those of his former KGB colleagues who now occupy 65 percent of top governmental positions. Dr. Zawahiri may thus be the queen in the Kremlin's chess game not only in Chechnya, but also in Russia's power struggle at the highest levels. If so, it is not likely that the Russians would surrender him merely to help win the global war on terror.
Dr. Novikov is a senior fellow at the Jamestown Foundation.
1. "Saga of Dr. Zawahri Sheds Light On the Roots of al Qaeda Terror;" Andrew Higgins and Alan Cullison; The Wall Street Journal, July 2, 2002.
3. "International Business of Russian Mafia," Sueddeutsche Zeitung, February 1, 2001.
"Having traveled the world for many years and observed many religons and governments, I could understand all the major ones but two. Muslims and Communist rule through the ignorance and brutality of man. We must recognize the threat Islam poses to the civilized world just as we did with communism and fight it just as hard. The best way to fight Islam is to stop calling it a religon of peace and call it a religon of death, destruction and oppression. As we once used the Voice of America to broadcast truth into the Soviet Union, we must use a like program to broadcast the truth about the pedophile murdering prophet into the Muslim countries."
Please see my post number 12 on this thread. it is quite interesting that these two "religions" stand out so clearly to you. I believe that much of what we're seeing today in Islam is actually the result of FSB (KGB) agents provocateurs. Let me pick your brain for a moment. According to my theory, you should've observed a rather sharp difference in the Islamic world, pre-1991 versus post-1991 (the breakup of the Soviet Union). Have you observed such a difference?
"If we declare Islam a criminal enterprise aren't we severely damaging the 1st amendment? After all it is a recognized religion. I don't buy the whole TROP crap, but I do have friends from Iran, and Lebanon who are practicing Muslims, and I could no more tell them their religion is banned from the US than I could a Baptist, or Catholic. Heck I was raised a Methodist, and I feel with the liberal stance they have taken on almost every issue over the last 60 years, they might be as much of threat as the Muslims. Of course I am speaking from a sedition standpoint, obviously I don't think we're going to see any Methodists strapping bombs to their chest and blowing up the local mall, but they have been staunchly anti-everything Conservative, including the WOT and leading their members with that philosophy."
You are wrestling with some real problems. Here is my take. Each of our freedoms can be potentially limited: especially if the full continuation of that freedom threatens the very existence of our society.
For example, during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus (it means "show me the body" in Latin but don't ask me what the heck its significance is. The point is, this is an important freedom but Lincoln suspended it to prosecute the civil war and help preserve the Union. (I realize there are some on this web site who disagree with that goal, but that is a separate argument, in my view.)
Bush is partially suspended some freedoms in the war on terror.
So, the bottom line is, yes, we can ban Islam from the US if it is the only way to preserve a society worth living in.
Let me tell you a rather grisly story. Indonesia used to have about 3 million Chinese people living in it. Outside of China (in Asia), Chinese people tend to be very active and dominant: very successful in business and very influential. This has been going on for centuries. Some call the Chinese the Jews of Asia (I'm Jewish, so I'm allowed to say it).
At a certain point in time (this was maybe a couple of decades or so ago), the Indonesians realized that these Chinese were participating in a massive communist subversion attempt being orchestrated by the Chinese government for the purpose of having a communist government take over Indonesia. Hysteria swept Indonesia, they turned on the Chinese, and basically killed them all.
I'm not saying what they did was right. But the fact is, Indonesians have a reasonably good society today, something they probably would not have if they were spending all their time battling a powerful, devious, fairly largeif Chinese minority backed by the Chinese government.
The point is, societies have a right to defend themselves from attacks on their basic existence. Another good example is Russia at the time of the revolution. The first revolution was by Democratic Socialists, full of positive ideals. They tried to set up a democratic government respecting everybody's rights, but they were weak. After a while, they fell to the Communists. It seems like it would've been better if they were less idealistic, maybe trampling on some individual rights on occasion, but ruled effectively enough to prevent the Communists from taking over.
I am not saying that things have reached the point where we should ban Islam in United States. I do believe, however, that we should ban any further Islamic immigration at this time.
Realistically, we have already responded to some extent to the Islamic threat in United States. Mosques in the United States are being monitored by the federal government in various, pretty intense ways. CAIR, a pro-terrorist group of Islamic Americans, is fighting against this, with the help of the ACLU and the rest of the Hard Left, but so far they have failed.
What strikes me particularly about this article is the Black Muslim group in particular. Here, our hands may be tied, because any extraordinary action against them would be labeled as racist. I am not sure that a Republican administration would be able to weather that storm. Of course, under a Democratic administration that problem would not exist: presumably all of the internal monitoring of Muslims will be pretty much suspended if Hillary wins. Then we will simply have to weather the consequences (terrorism) as best we can.
"Don't most groups recruit in prison? NOI, skinheads, latin/mexican gangs, black gangs, etc? I would assume that once you get into prison you would need an alignment to keep you safe and gangs are the only option (the other option would to everybody's Sally and that doesn't sound fun. I don't see how the corollary is different with the NOI than any other racist organization."
You seem to be a bit slow in thinking on this issue. The difference is that the other groups are not dedicated to terrorism.
Main Entry: ter·ror·ism Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m Function: noun 1 : the unlawful use or threat of violence esp. against the state or the public as a politically motivated means of attack or coercion 2 : violent and intimidating gang activity ter·ror·ist /-ist/ adj or noun ter·ror·is·tic /"ter-&r-'is-tik/ adjective
It is semantical to narowly define terrorism to just Islamic radicals. I do not want to argue this with you, and I think that we probably agree with the broader scope of what it is and how it plays out everywhere in its various forms. My analogy was that the confinement of the prison systems creates an environment where immersion into different ideological tenets create havoc in various forms, of all different mindsets. No?
Are the Black Muslims a Fifth Column?
You have to ASK this question?
Militant black Muslims are perfectly situated in this country. Who would DARE to question them?
They are the biggest sleeper cell on the face of the earth. If the commies are behind them or the martians....who cares? The result is the same.
True under Liberal leadership (ain't that an oxymoron) we would turn a blind eye to all, and let the chips (and bodies) fall where they may.
"I understand the reasons that you give, and they make perfect sense, I guess I am beginning to understand how the Libertarians feel about the Patriot Act. I see a dangerous precedent, and a very "slippery slope". Things in DC are seldom "undone".
I also don't know if I would have the heart, guts, fortitude, call it what you will to defend an action that would take away one of the essential rights of a couple of my closest friends. It, to say the least, would be a very tough pill to swallow.
Thank you for visiting the Rikkir cliche festival."
I feel that your point of view has validity. It is indeed a danger that we would go too far in the opposite direction and seriously lose our own freedoms. I too have been worried about some of the things that have happened with the patriot act, etc. It is an established fact that the federal government acts in an idiotic manner quite frequently.
I agree that declaring Islam a criminal enterprise would undermine the Constitution.
HST, something must be done -- I guess that close monitoring is the best we can do.
HST, we have ample proof that the Arabic and English words that Muslims use to describe their beliefs oftentimes differ markedly. On the one hand, we hear a Imman or Mullah calling for moderation and accommodation with the West when speaking in English. And, OTOH, the same man calling for death to all Infidels and destruction of the West when speaking in Arabic.
Yassir Arafat became a billionaire doing just that.
Why am I supposed to believe that ordinary Muslims are any different, especially when their religious instruction and the example set by their leaders teaches them to do so?
I am at the point in my life where I do not trust the word of any Muslim. It will be a long, long time -- on the order of Hell FReezing over -- before I do.
I am concerned for my country and the Western Culture. It is not even arguable that when comparing the cultures of Judeo-Christian countries with Islamic countries, Judeo-Christian is better is all respects.
I have no problem with Muslims who want to move to Western countries and live their lives as productive citizens therein. But when they do so, they must understand the culture and the society they are voluntarily moving to does not permit them to establish their own rules -- they must abide by the rules of the society they move into, or suffer the consequences, just as a native born person must abide by the same rules.
So, back to the beginning -- when a Muslim misbehaves, he/she must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, Political Correctness be dammed!
And, if we value our country, our way of life and our children and grandchildren's future, we'd best heavily monitor the activity of all Muslims in America (Black and otherwise!) and not be aFRaid to call a spade a spade when dealing with them. And, when caught violating American laws, we'd best deal with them quickly and efficiently.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.