| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
In FrontPage this morning I discuss the mosque-checking brouhaha. Many news links in the original:
New revelations that federal officials are checking mosques for radiation levels has the Council on American Islamic Relations in an uproar. CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper fumed: “This creates the appearance that Muslims are targeted simply for being Muslims. I don’t think this is the message the government wants to send at this time.” A CAIR statement claimed that the monitoring “could lead to the perception that we are no longer a nation ruled by law, but instead one in which fear trumps constitutional rights. All Americans should be concerned about the apparent trend toward a two-tiered system of justice, with full rights for most citizens, and another diminished set of rights for Muslims.”Indeed, the mainstream media has made much of potential Constitutional issues, trumpeting the fact that the radiation monitoring has been done without search warrants -- even though no actual searches have been carried out. Also, Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse maintained that “FBI agents do not intrude across any constitutionally protected areas without the proper legal authority,” and that it does not monitor groups in general but only acts on specific information. Is there any such information in this case? Roehrkasse spoke of official concern with “a growing body of sensitive reporting that continues to show al-Qaida has a clear intention to obtain and ultimately use chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear” weapons.
This has been public knowledge for years. Not long after 9/11, Americans discovered plans for constructing nuclear weapons in a former Al-Qaeda safe house in Kabul. A 2003 CIA report stated that jihad terrorists “have a wide variety of potential agents and delivery means to choose from for chemical, biological and radiological or nuclear (CBRN) attacks.” Other reports have claimed that Osama bin Laden himself met with Pakistani nuclear scientists; that Al-Qaeda has already obtained nuclear material on the Russian black market, and that jihadists already having brought those nukes into the United States. Others asserted that Al-Qaeda was planning to smuggle nuclear material into the U.S. from Mexico. But even if none of that is true, there is no doubt that jihadists are working in that direction. Ramzi bin al-Shibh, one of the masterminds of 9/11, has declared that “in killing Americans…Muslims should not exceed four million non-combatants, or render more than ten million of them homeless.”But of course, no Muslims who believe that four million Americans should be murdered are actually on American soil, right? Unfortunately, we have no way to know this for sure. Political correctness and unproven assumptions have kept the media and even law enforcement officials from asking the hard questions they should ask of Muslim leaders in the U.S. Absurdities consequently abound. One police official lamented: “We’ll come back from a Kumbayah meeting with a local mosque and realize that these guys who just agreed to help us are in our terror files!” The most notorious example of this phenomenon may be former Cleveland Muslim leader Fawaz Damra, who signed the Fiqh Council of North America’s condemnation of terrorism and now faces deportation for failing to disclose his ties to terrorist groups. Damra, widely respected as a moderate voice up until his arrest, was never expelled from his communities in Brooklyn or Cleveland (or evidently even reprimanded) despite having said at a 1989 Islamic conference that “the first principle is that terrorism, and terrorism alone, is the path to liberation.”
The core problem is that peaceful American Muslims have not moved to expose, expel, or separate themselves from those who hold such sentiments. There is no wall of separation in the American Muslim community between Muslims who accept American pluralism and just want to live ordinary lives and those who hold to the same ideology of jihad and the destruction or subjugation of infidels to which Osama bin Laden has dedicated his life. There is no easy or reliable way to distinguish a Muslim who may be working to launch a chemical or nuclear strike in the U.S. from one who abhors the very idea. Do the Muslims who hope to perpetrate such violence operate or at least congregate in mosques? Yes, they do. Sahim Alwan, a onetime leader of the Yemeni community in Lackawanna, New York and president of the mosque there, has the distinction of being the first American to attend an Al Qaeda training camp. Maher Hawash’s transition from secular Intel exec to jihadist was accompanied by an increase in his Islamic fervor and frequent mosque attendance.
This doesn’t mean that every Muslim in the United States is secretly plotting a nuclear strike. But with all the evidence that Al-Qaeda is making every effort to launch such an attack, would it really be wise to risk everything on the assumption that none are? Hooper’s outrage over unequal treatment supposedly being accorded to Muslims founders on the fact that it is only Muslim groups that have declared their desire to launch a nuclear strike against the United States. We would be foolish -- suicidally so -- not to take all necessary steps to protect ourselves accordingly. If Hooper were genuinely concerned about the unfair targeting of Muslims, he could direct the efforts of his organization to making concerted efforts to work with law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists in the United States, and to turn Muslims in America away from the jihad ideology. The fact that he does nothing toward either of these ends, and instead raises false Constitutional specters against genuine efforts to protect this country from a catastrophic attack, speaks volumes. There is no Constitutional right to harbor radioactive material. This monitoring should continue.
Posted by Robert at December 28, 2005 9:20 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
"This doesn’t mean that every Muslim in the United States is secretly plotting a nuclear strike."
-- Robert's FrontPage article
On the other hand, every Moslem is a participant in an ideological organization that calls for mass murder of Christians and Jews. The only question is how active a particpant.
Until Moslems are unilaterally stripped of certain consititional rights there can be no safety with them in our midst.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 28, 2005 10:17 AM
What kind of real American would object to radiological monitoring of any group anywhere after 9-11? I am so tired of Ibrahim Hooper's self-serving comments is there any way to deport this guy? Was he born here?
Posted by: tsweeney at December 28, 2005 10:22 AM
Osama's 1998 fatwa implicates "every Muslim" within a global conspiracy to kill Americans "civilians and military...in any country in which it is possible to do it." Instead of fighting reasonable law enforcement efforts at every turn, CAIR should be helping the U.S. government discover who supports Osama's cause. But I think we know that already.
Posted by: Beagle at December 28, 2005 10:23 AM
"CAIR should be helping the U.S. government discover who supports Osama's cause. But I think we know that already."
-- posted by Beagle
Are you saying that the government maintains a list of every Moslem man, woman, and child?
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 28, 2005 10:29 AM
This comment is for Ibrahim Hooper or any other CAIR member ever to wander into this forum.
and I quote Hooper:
"All Americans should be concerned about the apparent trend toward a two-tiered system of justice, with full rights for most citizens, and another diminished set of rights for Muslims"
Whats wrong Dougie? Does the American version of Sura 9:29 thrown back your face taste a bit bitter to you?
DO YOU FEEL SUBDUED YET?
Don't blame the Kafir Dougie. Blame all of your dead martyr heros (murderers) for the preferential treatement.
Posted by: Quantum Infidel at December 28, 2005 11:59 AM
I too, am tired of Hooper and his whiny posturing.
He used to be a regular on some of the Fox
shows, but it seems that he has gone into hiding
lately...afraid of hardball questions perhaps?
From what I recall, he was a student at U of
Minnesota, who converted to Islam. His anglo
name is Douglas Hooper. He is called "Doug"
by his detractors.
at December 28, 2005 12:02 PM
His anglo name is Douglas Hooper. He is called "Doug" by his detractors.
These are two of a series of school jokes currently doing the rounds. Not knowing the gentleman (hic) I have nothing else to offer.
What do you call a man with a spade on his head? Doug!
What do you call a man without a spade on his head? Douglas!
at December 28, 2005 12:22 PM
A CAIR statement claimed that the monitoring “could lead to the perception that we are no longer a nation ruled by law, but instead one in which fear trumps constitutional rights.
Sounds like Teddy Kennedy.
We're trying to stop a mass murder here guys, get with the program!
at December 28, 2005 1:05 PM
Granny -- you really shovelled it on thick with those pale attempts above...
Posted by: jsla at December 28, 2005 1:39 PM
Jsla, you think they are bad?
Try
What do you call a man with a ham sandwich?
Ahmed! (Ham-ed)
What do you call a man with three ham sandwiches?
Mohammed! (More ham-ed)
at December 28, 2005 1:43 PM
"No."
-- posted by Beagle
Why the hell not? How we are supposed to clean this mess up if we can't track them all down in a few days or less?
I say it's time to start compiling the National Moslem Registry.
PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH
Heck, we've got websites listing sex offenders, and that's a good thing.
So why not a USDOJ website listing persons committed to mass murder of Christians, Jews (not to mention the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution)?
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at December 28, 2005 2:13 PM
Mr. Hooper takes the cake. he's worried that Muslims are targeted for being Muslim. Like Muslims don't target non Muslems. Like Christians in Ethiopia and the Sudan aren't targeted for being Christians. I guess it dosen't feel so good when it's you Mr. Hooper? If you Muslims don't want to be constantly singled out, why don't you start turning in the hijackers of your "religion of peace" to keep them from murdering and/or maiming innocent people? Why don't you condemn the terrorists when they murder and/or maim innocent people? When you and your group start doing that, may be we can start trusting Muslims. But you can't do that. It's against the koran to join with an infidel against a believer, isn't it? According to the koran, it's a death sentence to convert from Islam to another faith isn't it Mr Hooper? You're not much of a good Muslim anyway. Your first name is Abraham, (Hebrew). And your sir name is Hooper, not a traditional Islamic sir name. Further adding to the confusion that is the "religion of peace".
Posted by: Ironman Hondo at December 28, 2005 4:07 PM
I admin i am amused at the people complaining...
If you follow and extrapolate their arguments..
Then the following would also be true..
1. Nazis belonged to germany so we should find eskimos to intern and let all the germans go..
2. Kamikazi pilots came from japan so we should go and invade antartica...
3. The soviet union communists primarily were russians so we need to wiretap mongolia....
IDIOTS!!!
Too STINKING BAD...
Islam and Islamic terrorists come from the Koran..
Islam is taught in mosques..
So we parked a radiation detector outside..
Too BAD....
You better thank god i wasnt in charge ...
Each mosque would be BULLDOZED...
Put that into your islamic pipe and light it with the Koran..
Posted by: jingoist at December 28, 2005 4:27 PM
You better thank god i wasnt in charge ...
Each mosque would be BULLDOZED...
Put that into your islamic pipe and light it with the Koran..
Posted by: jingoist [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 28, 2005 04:27 PM
if l would have my way, l would not allow any mosque built in any Western country until a Church or Temple could be built in SaudiArabia.. until then no mosque! those still standing l would take them down. but that is not possible in this pc environment. but one can point it out to those pc crowds!
Posted by: Lulu at December 28, 2005 7:23 PM
Perhaps there are Muslims that wouldn't want to detonate a nuclear device in the United States and perhaps there are Muslims that don't aren't part of a fifth column that desire to insinuate themselves into leadership positions for the purpose of overtaking and subduing America. And because of the practices of taqiyya and kitman, how could one know, how could one tell the difference between a truthful or a dissembling Muslim? There is too much at stake to take a chance as the spread of the tentacles of Islam marches on as foolish Westerners are beguiled and pulled in.
Posted by: epg at December 28, 2005 7:28 PM
But HOOP-
no other group openly threatens to kill Americans en masse with nuclear weapons except practitioners of Islam.
Islam has targeted America for nuclear extermination. Islamic leaders like Ousamah bin Laden have stated this repeatedly. We believe he means it. And so---
Islam is now the target because it has made itself the target by threatening to target America with nuclear weapons. I'll bet Hoop, you and CAIR are having a real bad day over this. Well--
Hoop, CAIR and your radioactive mosques, dirty bombs and filthy dirty mujahideen armies that train and live in caves (full of bat poop no less) with Martyr Ousamah --Get out and stay out!!!
Posted by: pythagoras at December 28, 2005 11:25 PM
These guys are lucky that we even agree to the public discourse on the matter in the context of the U.S. Constitution instead of the Geneva Conventions. Let CAIR continue to spew their propaganda. When this all comes to a head they can plead their case to be eligible of treatment as prisoners of war.
Posted by: Hulegu Khan at December 29, 2005 1:33 AM
If radical Catholics were plotting terrorist acts at the beheast of the Pope and various Bishops, and after those attacks the Catholic Church provided shelter and sactuary to the terrorists; then law enforcement agencies would be justified to monitor and infiltrate the church. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights allow the freedom to practice religion, not the right to practice organized crime or warfare under the color of religion.
The problem is what is going on in various Mosques across the US, and what is not happening. The Blind Iman in NY was formenting his radical thought openly in a NY Mosque prior to the first World Trade Center Bombing. It was no secret to anybody. Radicals openly plot in Lodi, and Allah only knows where else. The mosques do nothing and in fact spend more time and effort raising funds for known terrorist organizations, than concern whether their mosques are becoming terrorist cells.
But so you shall reap what you sow, the true believers of a peaceful Islam, should take care that it is not a bitter harvest.
Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at December 29, 2005 2:36 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)