Islamists, and their infiltration of OUR nation
Posted by Non_mooching_artist 11 years, 3 months ago to Politics
I followed a link to this site. I don't mix religion with my comments or posts as a rule. I broke it for this post.
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
In addition to immigration, the state, federal and local prisons of the United States may be a contributor to the growth of Islam in the country. J. Michael Waller claims that Muslim inmates comprise 17-20% of the prison population in New York, or roughly 350,000 inmates in 2003. He also claims that 80% of the prisoners who "find faith" while in prison convert to Islam.[1] These converted inmates are mostly African American, with a small but growing Hispanic minority.[2] Waller also asserts that many converts are radicalized by outside Islamist groups linked to terrorism, but other experts suggest that when radicalization does occur it has little to no connection with these outside interests.
Concern over jailhouse conversions to Islam first rose in 2001 when Imam Warith Deen Umara, Islamic chaplain for the New York State prison system, was reported to have praised the September 11 attacks. This prompted members of Congress to call for an investigation of Islam in the nation’s prisons.[6]
In a 2004 report, the Justice Department faulted the prison system for failing to protect against “infiltration by religious extremists.” However, the report made clear that the problem was not radical chaplains, but, rather extremist inmates running worship services.[6]
Mark S. Hamm, a criminologist at Indiana State University, describes a phenomenon he calls "prison Islam." This consists of "small gang-like cliques that use cut-and-paste versions of the Koran" to give a religious patina to violent and criminal activities. Hamm has identified five such examples since 2005, notably the 2005 Los Angeles bomb plot.[6]
I am not trying to create a confrontation here in the Gulch. I am merely asking a question related to grand strategy of the western world, and my greatest fear...That being that freedom will be lost for hundreds of years, if not thousands, if the Islamists are successful in their goal of world domination.
Do we not, as a society, as a western enlightened society, need to find common ground to counter the mounting momentum in the offensive from Islam?
If so, what ground can we find in common?
And if common ground is found, how do we go about turning back the Islamic momentum?
Objectivism is a non-violent philosophy, as far as I know. How do Objectivists envision countering the Islamist momentum?
First, from a "rabidly fundamentalist Judeo-Christian" angle:
If the Hebrews had done what Jehovah commanded them to do during the exodus, we would not have these folks to deal with today. They were declared anathema, and their complete destruction was ordered. That they exist today is due to the Israelite's disregard for the commands they were given. Furthermore, if one dissects the scriptural descriptions of who survives into the "millennial period," it appears none of them are there. So, one way or the other, Jehovah's dictum that Muslims be completely destroyed will (eventually) come to pass.
I have heard Christian apologists state something along the line of "the complete destruction of Islam could be enough to bring peace to the earth." We all sense, at an innate level, that this is not true. However, the truth that for as long as Muslims have been around, there has been some kind of war going on with/for/between them is beyond dispute.
I, personally, do not advocate the above. I add it as a point of delineation for my second comment.
Second, from a libertarian angle:
Islam had declared that all other tenets, religions, philosophies, etc, are to be completely destroyed. The only "common ground" it accepts is you become one of them, or die. Period. That would include Objectivists. They have become quite successful at taking the strengths of their enemies, and using them against them. They are taking our money and freedoms, and using them against us.
There is only one way to "turn back the Islamic momentum." Send them home. Yes, that means stick their butts on planes or ships, and take them back to the middle-east, and leave them there. Stop all funding for all Islamic controlled countries, stop sending troops to "help them," stop getting in the way of their internal affairs. Let them kill themselves off until all of the most radical of them are dead, and hope the survivors are more reasonable.
That, you might say, is the message of Atlas Shrugged. The process was the opposite, but the message was the same. In AS, the ones running things were pulled out, and the survivors were left to fend for themselves. After the sheeple and corrupt politicians were all gone, they could go back and rebuild society. My proposal would be the opposite, but the same philosophically. Forcibly remove them from our society, and stick them back where they "belong" or "came from" (or whatever euphemism you want to use), let nature take its course, and deal with the survivors.
As for "non-violence," I am not sure that is a tenet of Objectivism or not. On the "Ayn Rand Institute" page, it says a basic tenet of Objectivism is "it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders." How hard is it to envision Islam as a "foreign invader" in this case?
As an aside, I have no qualms with this kind of "round 'em up and kick 'em out" solution. The reason is simple: they have openly declared they are fighting for our destruction, and have proven their intent by attacking our people for years! They are a real danger to our country.
Now, is it possible for there to be an Islamic individual or family who is here for purely "righteous" reasons, and they are offended by what the bulk of Islam is declaring? I would assume that to be the case. I don't know any, personally (hence, observationally, I would have to say "no," but rationally I have to say "yes"). If we could figure out who they were, and let them stay, then that might mean fewer "reasonable" folks when the internal/civil wars ceased. But I would agree that as reasonable humans, we might want to make allowance for those (very few???) folks.
I have said much they same the last few years in family and friendly gatherings. I think Islam is fundamentally in opposition to everything American. Why we let this cancer grow in our midst puzzles me to no end.
My wife and I have much the same opinion with respect to Latin Americans who are coming here. If they have no interest in assimilating, why should we let them stay? Why should we allow them to Balkanize our society?
Anyway, we have come to the conclusion that even though it is the common sense thing to do, to send them home, Latins and Muslims alike, apparently it is not the PC thing to do, and these days common sense is trumped by Political Correctness.
God help us, and God's speed to you Mr. Crites. You're one of the good ones.
I see a difference in the Muslim/Islam folks and the Hispanic folks. Let me explain it this way...
I live in the Texas panhandle, but my "industry" is not here. For me to work, I have to find a client from outside of this area. Some allow me to work remotely, so I can stay home. Most do not. So I have to go somewhere else (mostly the Bay Area or perhaps Dallas or Austin) to work on-site for a client.
When I am in California, I am, literally, a foreigner. I don't give a fig about their local political issues. I don't bother to keep up with the latest problems they are having. I am only there for one thing: work. I work, I send money back home to Texas. When the contract is over, I find something else to do. If it is in the same area, then cool; if not, that's life.
I guess the major difference is that when I work in California, the company I work through withholds CA taxes, which probably doesn't happen with the vast majority of the illegal aliens there. But that is a CALIFORNIA problem!
You see, in Texas, the illegal aliens pay the same taxes that I do. We do not have a state income tax to worry about. They pay the same sales taxes I do; they pay the same gasoline taxes I do; they pay the same property taxes I do. I'm sure you get the idea. So back here in Texas, a Hispanic who is here on a work visa and/or here illegally, does not have that significant of an impact on me, personally.
Now, you might ask about the government charities and "entitlements," but you see, most of those are Federal -- what do we Texans care????? Every two years, we vote for secession as it is. To Texans, the stupidity of Washington is a piss-me-off, to be sure, but not so much as in other places.
When I am in California, all of these issues are totally different. It is a night-and-day difference!
But getting back to my point. I understand someone wanting to go to where the jobs are for work, and sending money home to mamma. That is how I earn my living. How can I denigrate others for doing the same thing? Show up; do your work; keep your nose clean. I don't see a lot of illegal activity from the illegal aliens in this area. We ship their butts home if they pop up on the radar. So the ones who are still here, it appears, obey the common laws of the area.
That is how I am. I have been around the world and all over the US. I go; I work; I mind my own business; I keep my nose clean; I send money home to mamma. Life is good.
That is my take on the Hispanics.
The Muslim/Islam groups are radically different. They are here to exploit, infiltrate, and destroy. I agree it is possible that some are here for the same reason I go to California. Some. A few, perhaps. The ones I have interacted with enough to know their attitudes, show me they are sill quite in line with the radical clerics who preach jihad and the complete destruction of the West. When some terrorist attack strikes, I hear things like "I did not personally support that activity." Which tells me two things: 1) they might personally support a different activity, and 2) they are not condemning it. I have yet to have a real conversation with one of these folks who openly denounced Islamic terrorist activities.
At a local university (which has a fair number of these students), it was reported that after the 9/11 attack, when a HUGE percentage of folks in this area were openly displaying American flags, that one of these students stated it was a "good thing," because it showed them who their "potential targets" were. My understanding was the student wasn't even disciplined for that comment!
So to *ME*, the two groups you mentioned are different. The Hispanics are looking for a better life; the Muslims are looking to destroy our life. I have no qualms kicking out people who are, at a core level, seeking our destruction.
Those of us with at least moderate brain activity left have learned that appeasement does NOT work! The liberals are probably too brain damaged to ever grasp that point.
It is the Romans against the barbarians. No common language here...only brute force reigns.
The Crusades once did the trick, but Christianity had to stand on it's head, and finally decide that "turning the other cheek" wasn't really a good game plan.
Not much has changed, except that we have bleeding heart liberals that capitulate to the PC god, instead of the Vatican. They have no stomach to do the hard work, and despise those that do. Thanks to them, the Pentagon has become the Hexagon,,,and the sixth side is the Department of Appeasement.
We are on our own. And we will get no help from those that vow to harm us, or those that have placed us in this danger.
But...we can have fun while we can!
Whew!