Saturday, August 20, 2011


The Islamist Problem Inside the US Military


Zuhdi Jasser had an excellent piece in the WSJ yesterday decrying the political correctness inside the US military that granted Naser Abdo conscientious objector status months before Abdo was caught in the final stages of planning for a terrorist attack on or near Fort Hood, Tx. WSJ:
[T]he theological underpinnings of Islamist radicalization remain ignored by military officials, who fear appearing to discriminate against Muslim soldiers. That fear has been bolstered by leading Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups in America. Their platform of political Islam teaches Islamic revivalism and an aversion to the separation of mosque and state. Salah Al-Sawy of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) concluded in a 2008 online fatwa, "As for optionally obtaining citizenship of a non-Muslim country it is definitely prohibited without a doubt, moreover it could be a form of apostasy." An AMJA paper in 2009 stated that, "the basic conflict between the declaration of faith and testimony that there is no God except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and the declaration and pledge of Allegiance of the USA is irreconcilable."
These ideas need to be confronted. There are many Muslim leaders who can lead that defense of liberty and of the need to separate mosque and state. We must take their side over that of the Islamists.
Read the rest here.

9 comments:

Damien said...

Pastorius,

I wish more Muslims were like Jasser.

Pastorius said...

Me too, Damien.

Damien said...

Anonymous,

In all fairness the person who wrote this article pointing this problem out is a Muslim himself, so they're not all fundamentalist nut jobs who hate the west and want to turn the world into an Islamic caliphate.

Anonymous said...

...don't TRUST them...

...they are NOT TRUSTWORTHY...

Damien said...

Anonymous,

So even when A Muslim is clearly not a fundamentalist, and is clearly opposing the establishment of the Caliphate, we should regard him as the enemy? Is that what you're saying? We should just assume that he is practicing Taqiyya regardless of the fact that he is clearly writing, and saying things, and even doing things that go against what Jihadists want? By the way, if he is not trustworthy because he is a Muslim, than how can you use what he wrote, in the article that we are responding to, to argue that we should not trust Muslims?

Anonymous said...

it was tried on islamic countries,
it never worked!

Anonymous said...

«So even when A Muslim is clearly not a fundamentalist, and is clearly opposing the establishment of the Caliphate, we should regard him as the enemy? Is that what you're saying?»

why he is a muslim?

Anonymous said...

the salman and the ayatollah thing work pretty well for muslims...

Anonymous said...

muslims raped a pregnant woman in france, they should ALL leave.