Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dear Rep. King: Forget 'Radical' -- ISLAM is the Culprit
American Thinker ^ | 03/10/2011 | Amil Imani

Posted on 03/10/2011 6:47:30 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Republican Congressman Peter King has strengthened his security in the wake of "hostile phone calls" and threats from overseas, as he is getting ready to chair a hearing on Islamic radicalization in the United States today.

The Congressman's hearing on this important issue, though much overdue, is perhaps the first step towards recognizing that Islam is the culprit, not radical Islam. Islam by its mere existence is radical. "There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it," said Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and he's absolutely right.

Decades ago Marshall McLuhan observed, "The medium is the message." As the print and electronic media penetrate more and more every aspect of life, their influence increases greatly in shaping views and the behavior of the public. The power of the media is a mixed blessing. On one hand, it can serve to expose injustices, wrongdoings, and flaws. On the other hand, it is able to propagate misinformation and outright disinformation.

Manipulation and control of the media is of critical importance to the rule of totalitarian states. Free societies, although less subject to laundered information, are still at considerable risk of being selectively informed or misinformed outright. The overlords of the media can deceive the public more easily when political correctness is used as a subterfuge for the promotion of certain ideas.

A case in point is the media's portrayal of Islam, articulated by politicians and pundits -- the talking heads on television and radio, as well as the analysts who write for newspapers and magazines. Time and again we hear and read that Islam is a religion of peace, in spite of the fact that Islam has been a religion of violence from its inception to the present. This mantra, "Islam is a religion of peace" is repeated so often that it has become an indisputable statement of fact in the minds of many.

Even a cursory examination of Islam's history and Islamic texts conclusively proves the exact opposite. Islam was, and continues to be, a movement of unbridled violence.

Former President George W. Bush along with President Obama on several occasions have repeated the mantra and attributed the horrific violence committed under the banner of Islam to a small band of extremists. Both Presidents' assertion is either based on ignorance of the facts about Islam or their attempt at political correctness. Perhaps President Bush's reticence to speak about the true nature of Islam was due to his desire to avoid inflaming the already charged feelings by many about Islam and President Obama's appeasing the Muslim world is another story. In any event, truth is sacrificed and the public continues to cling to the false notion that Islam is a peaceful religion. People who dare to disclose the true nature of Islam run the risk of being castigated as bigots and hatemongers.

Meanwhile the courageous Congressman Peter King said: 'I'm not going to give in to political correctness.' Surrounded by a noticeably heavier security presence, Congressman King told CBS 2: "I'm getting a lot of hostile phone calls now, but the main threats I'm getting are from overseas." What more one can expect from "the religion peace?"

The pundits, the analysts and the politicians are doing a great disservice to the public, each segment for its own expedient reasons, by parroting the mantra regarding the peaceful nature of Islam. As a matter of fact, the so-called small band of Islamic extremists is the true face of Islam. Admittedly, from time to time and place to place, Muslims have shown a degree of tolerance for non-Muslims. This tolerance dates back to the very early years of Muhammad himself. Early on Muhammad was meek and proclaimed, "For you, your religion, and for me, my religion." This assertion lasted but a few years until Muhammad's movement gathered strength and Islam became the only alternative to death or heavy taxation. The imposition of 'jizya' was a clever ploy for filling the Islamic coffer to support its armies and to finance its further conquests.

The liberal media and pundits engage in willful misinformation and deception when it suits them. Terms such as "Political Islam," or "Radical Islam," for instance, are contributions of this group. These terms do not even exist in the native parlance of Islam, simply because they are redundant. Islam, by its very nature and according to its charter -- the Quran -- is a radical political movement. It is the liberal media and politicians who sanitize Islam and misguide the populace by saying that "real Islam" constitutes the main body of the religion; and, that this main body is non-political and moderate.

Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with these nonsensical euphemisms depicting Islam because it prefers to believe them. It is less threatening to believe that only a hijacked small segment of Islam is radical or politically driven and that the main body of Islam is indeed moderate and non-political.

We must recognize that Islam is political to the core. In Islam the mosque and State are one and the same -- the mosque is the State. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even "moderate" Islam is radical in its beliefs as well as its deeds. Muslims believe that all non-Muslims, bar none, are hellfire bound and well deserve being maltreated compared to believers.

While I salute Congressman Peter King for having the courage to discuss the issue of Islamic radicalization in the U.S, I warn my fellow Americans: remain a spectator at your own peril. It is imperative that you take a stand and do your part in pointing out that Islam is the culprit and do all you can to prevent the Islamic fire from devouring our civilized way of life and our republic.

-- Imani is the author of the book "Obama Meets Ahmadinejad".


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: islam; muslim; peterking; radicals

1 posted on 03/10/2011 6:47:33 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
More here

Another smear against Rep. King by the former 'paper of record'


By Richard N. Weltz

It's not surprising, but it is another blood-boiling instance of the self-proclaimed "paper of record" acting more like the propaganda organ for the left wing of the Democratic Party than a legitimate news venue.

Just a day after a very strongly worded editorial slam at Congressman Peter King over his committee's planned hearings into the radicalization of domestic Muslim community members, the Gray Lady follows up with a two-pronged smear attack.

Right on the front page of the March 9 edition, the paper ran an article headlined: "For Lawmaker Examining Terror, a Pro-I.R.A. Past."  Reporter Scott Shane, reaching back into the past some 30-plus years, advises readers:

As Mr. King, a Republican, rose as a Long Island politician in the 1980s, benefiting from strong Irish-American support, the I.R.A. was carrying out a bloody campaign of bombing and sniping, targeting the British Army, Protestant paramilitaries and sometimes pubs and other civilian gathering spots.

Although the article delves deep and wide into King's support for the Irish Republicans -- one shared by a considerable number of Americans at the time -- he does admit that King eventually played a key role in settling the conflict:

In later years, by all accounts, Mr. King became an important go-between in talks that led to peace in Northern Ireland, drawing on his personal contacts with leaders of I.R.A.'s political wing, Sinn Fein, and winning plaudits from both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, the former president and the British prime minister.

Meanwhile, on its Web-site blog, "City Room," one Noam Cohen mocks King with claims that the Congressman's 2004 book, Vale of Tears, is nothing but a "barely veiled ... thriller" about King himself, which Cohen would have readers believe shows the Republican Representative to be a hypocrite at best, a long-term schemer at worst:

As Mr. King takes the spotlight this week with his hearings on the radicalization of American Muslims, "Vale of Tears" shows he has long been considering the dangers posed by radical Muslims, as well as what role a mere congressman can play in protecting his country.

Those of us who are not in the business of denying Islamic radicalism, apologizing for it, or painting it with whitewash will welcome the opening of hearings which are long past due to attempt to discover the causes of why so many domestic terrorists are able to be enlisted in a jihadi cause against their own country by one particular group following one particular book.

2 posted on 03/10/2011 6:49:52 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

WE need to stop Muslim immigration or we are going to end up like the UK and France. Now that they are in a pickle they are not sure how to extract themselves.


3 posted on 03/10/2011 7:05:01 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The importance of these hearings is monumental and prehaps even historical. This is the line in the sand and izzlum knows it. I hope he goes into the writings of the koran and hadeethaa and all the other hate literature of this cancer.

He has stood firm by not letting enemies “water down” the hearings by introducing side shows. We all know it that if that happened, the terrorists from the splc would spin this out of control and turn it into an anti Tea Party diatribe.

Pray for this man, because the work he is doing is of historical importance.

izzlum knows this, and Rep. King’s life and the lives of his family, are in great danger.


4 posted on 03/10/2011 7:06:21 AM PST by ConradofMontferrat (PS. The muzlim nations think my handle is a prime example of "hate speach." Oh Well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Lets stop acting like leftists when it comes to King. Instead of defending the indefensible, lets ask why our side was so stupid to put a past supporter of terrorism in the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Commitee. Anybody with a little knowledge of King knew he was a supporter and vocal backer of the Provos. For the last 15 years I knew this would eventually bite us in the ass. Instead of whining unfair, lets admit we were stupid for having King be a front man for anything to do with terrorism. Is there nobody else in the GOP who could have sat in this position. Instead our side selects the only representative who supported pub bombings in the past. This reminds me of the 90’s, when some of those selected to lead the correct impeachment of Slick were found out to have cheated on their wives also. The stupidity of our Congressional leaders never fails to amaze me anymore.


5 posted on 03/10/2011 7:10:05 AM PST by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ConradofMontferrat

Don’t worry about King. If anyone tries to harm him, they will probably get a visit from the Belfast Nutting Squad.


6 posted on 03/10/2011 7:15:34 AM PST by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
What do you Freepers think about Keith Ellison's big show at the hearings this morning? I found him insincere and had little sympathy for his readings, at least those he was able to murmur while crying and sobbing for Muslims.
7 posted on 03/10/2011 7:24:50 AM PST by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConradofMontferrat

Just reported on Fox....Keith Ellison crying during his testimony. Give me a break - did he shed those tears for every victim of his horrid sham religion? If he can’t reconcile his loyalty to Islam with what should be loyalty to America and Americans then he should resign.


8 posted on 03/10/2011 7:26:18 AM PST by liberalh8ter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

You’d better get onto this thread fast and straighten out the misinformation. You were just telling us a few days ago that Islam is a peaceful religion, and it’s only a few fanatics we have to worry about. You said the vast majority of Americans understand this, so I guess you think Freepers are in the ignorant minority [i.e.: most of us think Islam, not radicalization, is the problem].

So here is a golden opportunity for you to sow your seeds of multicultural wisdom. Show up and explain how wrong we are, and that will display a modicum of courage and integrity on your part. I think you owe that much not merely to us, but to the Islam you know so well and defend (when you think no one is looking) so eloquently.


9 posted on 03/10/2011 7:31:15 AM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Islam is a cancer. The natural history and the prognosis for this disease, if left untreated, is clear. The treatments needed will be based on those for cancer. Will we have the stomach to understand and implement that?


10 posted on 03/10/2011 7:33:10 AM PST by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Found the webmail link for Peter King....please join me in sending him a THANK YOU for his courage!

http://peteking.house.gov/email.shtml


11 posted on 03/10/2011 7:50:42 AM PST by Gopher Broke (Repeal Obamacare !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

With over a billion Muslims in the world, it stands to reason that there must be champions of a process to liberalize and de-radicalize orthodox Islam.


12 posted on 03/10/2011 8:05:02 AM PST by Crucial
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vetvetdoug

“What do you Freepers think about Keith Ellison’s big show at the hearings this morning?”

I say it was an Oscar-worthy example of taqiyya at its finest. I say “boo hoo hoo - cry me a (bleepin’) river.

I DID think that the black businessman’s traumatic story of losing his college student son to Islamic brainwashing, and now prison for terrorism, was very sad - my heart goes out to him and his family, and he was brave to come forward and be so outspoken about the real danger that radical Islam poses to our country.


13 posted on 03/10/2011 1:20:45 PM PST by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: liberalh8ter

” If he can’t reconcile his loyalty to Islam with what should be loyalty to America”

Of course he can’t. I fear most Americans are reluctant, or loathe, to face just how very different Islam is from any other “religion”.

No Muslim should hold public office here because their religion calls for no separation of mosque and state - the mosque IS the state. It’s more a political ideology than a true religion in that sense. Therefore, when Ellison was sworn in (on the Koran), he could never honestly swear to uphold, preserve, protect and defend our Constitution, due to the clear conflict between their religion of total submission to Allah/sharia law and our constitutional republic with all its freedoms. This would be true for any Muslim, elected or appointed. To take the oath of office for them is to use taqiyya - lying that is condoned, even encouraged, by Muhammad to fool the infidel(s) and further the mission of Islam to reign supreme over all nations.


14 posted on 03/10/2011 2:21:27 PM PST by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: llandres

I wish you would have been there to query him on this. Perhaps he could explain his oath of honesty (in between sobs).


15 posted on 03/10/2011 3:15:19 PM PST by liberalh8ter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; jamese777; Lazamataz; Kenny Bunk

Jamese, this is now the fourth invitation I’m extending to you to repeat on an actual Islamic thread what you’ve so far confined to ‘birther’ threads. Namely, your liberal-letter-perfect defense of Islam. If you really believe it, then why confine it to threads not related to Islam? Why not put it out there for broader FR consumption?

I’ll make it easy for you. Multiple choice. Do you believe:

(1) Islam is a bloodthirsty cult that requires, according to the quran, its adherents to cut the throats of infidels, or

(2) Islam is a mainstream, peaceful religion hijacked by a minority of extremists. I.e.: that it’s the moral equivalent of Christianity, save for a handful of radicals that enable Islamophobes to unfairly malign it.

Given the hours you spend harassing people on eligibility threads, surely you can spare a few seconds to clarify this point. Even your sole defender, Kenny Bunk, admits you’ve gone overboard on the shadenfreude. [I.e.: you’ve done a whiz-poor job of concealing your gloating over the courts’ refusal to rule on the Natural Born Citizen issue.] How about a veneer of balance? It’s not asking too much, is it?


16 posted on 03/10/2011 5:41:57 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Jamese, this is now the fourth invitation I’m extending to you to repeat on an actual Islamic thread what you’ve so far confined to ‘birther’ threads. Namely, your liberal-letter-perfect defense of Islam. If you really believe it, then why confine it to threads not related to Islam? Why not put it out there for broader FR consumption?

I’ll make it easy for you. Multiple choice. Do you believe:

(1) Islam is a bloodthirsty cult that requires, according to the quran, its adherents to cut the throats of infidels, or

(2) Islam is a mainstream, peaceful religion hijacked by a minority of extremists. I.e.: that it’s the moral equivalent of Christianity, save for a handful of radicals that enable Islamophobes to unfairly malign it.

Given the hours you spend harassing people on eligibility threads, surely you can spare a few seconds to clarify this point. Even your sole defender, Kenny Bunk, admits you’ve gone overboard on the shadenfreude. [I.e.: you’ve done a whiz-poor job of concealing your gloating over the courts’ refusal to rule on the Natural Born Citizen issue.] How about a veneer of balance? It’s not asking too much, is it?


I’m sorry to disappoint but I have no issues with Representative King holding hearings on the radicalization of American Islam. I think it’s a good idea to hold such hearings and I look forward to their findings which I hope will move us toward knowing just how many radicals there are in the American Islamic community.
As for the multiple choice question, I chose “all of the above.”

It was nice talking to you but I’m going back to the topic of my thesis now, which is my primary posting interest.
Take care.


17 posted on 03/10/2011 6:19:51 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

Either you are dishonest and inconsistent, or you could very well answer the multiple choice question by going with (2). Your dodge doesn’t surprise me. You like pimping for Islam when you’re confident of not getting caught, but you don’t dare do it in a more open and honest way.


18 posted on 03/10/2011 6:28:34 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

Btw, as a Lutheran, what do you think of the ordination of practicing homosexuals?


19 posted on 03/10/2011 6:29:34 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

Oh, and btw, not to dispute your intelligence, but (1) and (2) are mutually exclusive. I understand that cognitive dissonance is a specialty of liberals, however, and contradictions/irrationality/illogic are their stock and trade.


20 posted on 03/10/2011 6:49:29 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Either you are dishonest and inconsistent, or you could very well answer the multiple choice question by going with (2). Your dodge doesn’t surprise me. You like pimping for Islam when you’re confident of not getting caught, but you don’t dare do it in a more open and honest way.


You don’t have to be a liberal to respect other people’s religions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaNKz2rDF04


21 posted on 03/10/2011 8:57:59 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

Bush had many good points and many blind spots. What do *you* think of Islam?


22 posted on 03/10/2011 9:15:47 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Either you are dishonest and inconsistent, or you could very well answer the multiple choice question by going with (2). Your dodge doesn’t surprise me. You like pimping for Islam when you’re confident of not getting caught, but you don’t dare do it in a more open and honest way.


In my humble opinion, Islam has its radical fundamentalist sects that are death cults of evil and it also has its adherents who are peaceful people just living their lives and harming no one. I personally know Muslims who celebrate a few holidays and go to a Mosque once or twice a year and that’s the extent of their practice of the faith. Just like some Christians who are Christmas and Easter only.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/08/31/americans-views-on-islam-and-violence

It looks like a significant plurality of Americans agree with me.


23 posted on 03/10/2011 9:17:32 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

Jamese, there are good and bad adherents of every faith (and/or cult). The question is not about individual members of Islam, but about Islam itself. I.e.: not whether some Muslims are radical or some are moderate, but what the belief system itself, as set forth in the quran, teaches. If the quran praises moderates and condemns extremists, that’s one thing. If it demands extremism and condemns moderates, that’s something else altogether.

Which do you think the quran does?


24 posted on 03/10/2011 9:25:30 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

Jamese, there are good and bad adherents of every faith (and/or cult). The question is not about individual members of Islam, but about Islam itself. I.e.: not whether some Muslims are radical or some are moderate, but what the belief system itself, as set forth in the quran, teaches. If the quran praises moderates and condemns extremists, that’s one thing. If it demands extremism and condemns moderates, that’s something else altogether.

Which do you think the quran does?


As with any religion, it’s all in the emphasis that the practitioner places on various tenets of the faith.


25 posted on 03/11/2011 8:59:47 AM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

“As with any religion, it’s all in the emphasis that the practitioner places on various tenets of the faith.”

I can understand why you or anyone else would think it his. It’s all the MSM, and many clueless pols, have been telling us for decades now. After a while people start thinking it must be true.

It isn’t. Each religion, both true and false, and every cult, has unique teachings. Adherents can quibble about the finer points, but either the main doctrines must be understandable or it’s a jumbled mishmash nobody pays attention to.

Islam is very clear in what it teaches. It teaches hate and murder, and offers ‘paradise’ only to those who faithfully practice these tenets.

You can’t dispute this, Jamese. It’s in the quran. The command to murder is not only spelled out in black and white—it was modeled by ‘the prophet’, Mohammed. Surely you know how many Jews and other infidels he savagely raped and killed killed. Are you suggesting ‘the prophet’ didn’t even understand his own religion???

It is only the brain-dead liberal creation known as ‘moral equivalence’ that makes this even an issue. Pre-moral equivalence, people had no difficulty comparing and contrasting the fundamental teachings and commandments of various religions. Post-moral-equivalence, those who voluntarily turn off their own capacity to critically think spout ideas that are ridiculous on their face—and they do so without dissolving into uncontrollable laughter.

It is a fact that a significant percentage of the population have reduced themselves to intellectual cripples—and they have seemingly no comprehension of what they’ve lost. We are the age of voluntary critical-rational morons, and the more moronic the pronouncements of the liberal ‘intelligencia’, the more brilliant they are declaimed to be.

Sad, isn’t it?


26 posted on 03/11/2011 9:29:07 AM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

I can understand why you or anyone else would think it his. It’s all the MSM, and many clueless pols, have been telling us for decades now. After a while people start thinking it must be true.

It isn’t. Each religion, both true and false, and every cult, has unique teachings. Adherents can quibble about the finer points, but either the main doctrines must be understandable or it’s a jumbled mishmash nobody pays attention to.

Islam is very clear in what it teaches. It teaches hate and murder, and offers ‘paradise’ only to those who faithfully practice these tenets.

You can’t dispute this, Jamese. It’s in the quran. The command to murder is not only spelled out in black and white—it was modeled by ‘the prophet’, Mohammed. Surely you know how many Jews and other infidels he savagely raped and killed killed. Are you suggesting ‘the prophet’ didn’t even understand his own religion???

It is only the brain-dead liberal creation known as ‘moral equivalence’ that makes this even an issue. Pre-moral equivalence, people had no difficulty comparing and contrasting the fundamental teachings and commandments of various religions. Post-moral-equivalence, those who voluntarily turn off their own capacity to critically think spout ideas that are ridiculous on their face—and they do so without dissolving into uncontrollable laughter.

It is a fact that a significant percentage of the population have reduced themselves to intellectual cripples—and they have seemingly no comprehension of what they’ve lost. We are the age of voluntary critical-rational morons, and the more moronic the pronouncements of the liberal ‘intelligencia’, the more brilliant they are declaimed to be.

Sad, isn’t it?


I take no issue with you having a different point of view from me on Islam. That’s your opinion, and you’re entitled to it.
I have found it to usually be rather fruitless to try to argue religion so I tend to stay away from that particular topic. You asked me some questions, I answered them to the best of my ability and I’m moving on now.


27 posted on 03/11/2011 4:01:18 PM PST by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

unmitigated drivel


28 posted on 03/11/2011 5:11:33 PM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 ....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bert

What an intelligent response.

You have a good day too.


29 posted on 03/11/2011 6:21:53 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jamese777

I know the feeling.

Here’s a brilliant video on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c

Not a dull moment in it, and worth every second.


30 posted on 03/11/2011 8:14:58 PM PST by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson