Trump’s boasts about heading off the 9/11 attacks ring hollow when one watches the video below, in which he refuses to say that he would insist that the President place adherence to the Constitution over adherence to Sharia. And after he denounced our free speech event in Garland, Texas, last May, it is not at all clear that he understands the jihad imperative or the war against free speech, or is at all equipped to counter them.
Many people, particularly his supporters, misunderstand this point, saying that Trump is all for free speech, he just objects to how Pamela Geller and I were exercising it by drawing Muhammad. However, that objection in itself misses the point. Is the freedom of speech only to be defended when we like what is being said. Speaking strictly for myself, I always hated the Charlie Hebdo Muhammad cartoons: they were crude, puerile, silly, and often genuinely offensive (not because they depicted Muhammad). But I understood that they were necessary, as the cartoonists were standing up to the jihadist bullies and showing that violent intimidation would not rule the day, so I never voiced any objections: to have done so would have needlessly detracted from the genuine meaning and importance of what they were doing.
That battle was lost: Islamic jihadis murdered the cartoonists, and Charlie Hebdo surrendered, vowing never to draw Muhammad again. But the principle remains, and people like Trump, Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham who took issue what we were doing in the wake of the jihad attack on our event in Garland don’t seem to grasp what the freedom of speech is all about. What they’re missing is neatly encapsulated in what used to be an adage: “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” In other words, I will stand with you against tyranny, because even if I disagree with your opinions, I understand that once opinions begin to be criminalized, we are all the poorer, and all at risk.
Trump doesn’t get this. After Garland, he breezily and readily voiced his willingness to adhere to Sharia blasphemy laws and refrain from drawing Muhammad. And in this video, he refuses to say whether he agrees that the President should put the Constitution over Sharia. So when he says he would have prevented 9/11, his Sharia compliance makes me wonder if his doing so would have made any difference for the U.S. in the long run.
(Video thanks to Larry.)
“Donald Trump On 9/11: My Immigration Policies Would Have Prevented Sept. 11 Terrorist Attacks,” by Morgan Winsor, International Business Times, October 18, 2015:
Donald Trump said Sunday his “extremely tough” immigration policies would have prevented the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks if he had been president of the United States. The Republican presidential candidate also said his GOP rival Jeb Bush should stop defending his brother over the terrorist attacks, which claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 people.
“I am extremely, extremely tough on illegal immigration. I’m extremely tough on people coming into this country. I believe that if I were running things, I doubt those people would have been in the country,” Trump said on “Fox News Sunday,” according to the Washington Post. “With that being said, I’m not blaming George Bush. But I don’t want Jeb Bush saying, ‘My brother kept us safe,’ because Sept. 11 was one of the worst days in the history of this country.”
Bush fired back at the real estate mogul and defended his brother, former President George W. Bush. “Look, my brother responded to a crisis, and he did it as you would hope a president would do. He united the country, he organized our country, and he kept us safe. And there’s no denying that. The great majority of Americans believe that,” the GOP presidential candidate said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Bush slammed Trump for his comments about the Sept. 11 attacks by al Qaeda terrorists and said they show his “lack of seriousness” about being commander-in-chief. Trump talks about national security and foreign policy as if he is playing a board game or still hosting reality TV show “The Apprentice,” Bush said.
“Across the spectrum of foreign policy, Mr. Trump talks about things [like] that — as though he’s still on ‘The Apprentice.’ I mean, literally, talking about Syria, saying ‘ISIS should take out Assad, then Russia should take out ISIS’ as though it was some kind of board game and not a serious approach is just — this is just another example of the lack of seriousness,” he told CNN on Sunday, referring to the Syrian conflict in which Russia says it is conducting airstrikes against the Islamic State group, also known as ISIS or ISIL, in support of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime….
Kevin says
I think Trump – like most people – is not knowledgeable about Islam let alone Sharia law which is why he declined to answer question. When it comes to stopping the Muslim invasion Trump would be the best President. Can you imagine what would happen if Hillary gets into the White House? As we know her constant companion – Huma – is a member of the Muslim brotherhood. It would be a continuation of the Obama presidency.
Beagle says
Based on his answer, I doubt Trump knows sharia is Islamic law. I still can’t figure out how he became the Republican frontrunner so quickly. His platform seems to be “best, winning, and YUGE!” He’s kinda sketchy on details.
mortimer says
If Trump were to read Robert Spencer’s books, he would have sufficient knowledge to know how to address POLITICAL ISLAM and know why he should.
In the meantime, he is GUESSING! Does Trump guess about buying real estate? No? So why does he GUESS about Islam?
wildjew says
I am guessing, like me, Trump is not much a reader. But for people like me and Trump Spencer’s books (several of the more important ones) are available at Audible.com. I am a member.
Here: http://www.audible.com/search/ref=a_hp_tseft?advsearchKeywords=robert+spencer&filterby=field-keywords&x=0&y=0
For members, Spencer’s books and other great books, history, biography, politics, philosophy, etc. (some containing nearly 1,000 pages) are available for approximately $9.00 plus, a pretty good deal. Trump can be listening to these great books while traveling between campaign stops, early in the morning, on the weekend, etc.
I have a few of Spencer’s books and other great books on Kindle here in my computer Kindle library for reference. The great thing about Kindle, you can type any word in the search engine and it brings up every place the word or term can be found. It beats an index.
Shane says
Looks like of the Presidential candidates only Ben Carson knows anything about Islam, jihad, and sharia law, but Trump has said previously that Islam is a problem.
Presidential Candidates Stances on Iran, Terrorism, and Jihad:
http://www.clarionproject.org/presidential-race-2016/
voegelinian says
“I’ll get back to you on that Sharia question — even though it’s 14 years after 911, even though I’m a concerned citizen, even though I have enough money to give me the luxury of time to study the matter, even though I could hire 100 academic experts on the matter to brief me, even though I’m running for President — I just don’t know enough about Sharia to answer that most urgent question …”
cronk says
Compared to GW Bush who went out of his way to protect the House of Saud and white wash Islam and attacking a country(Iraq) that had nothing to do with 9/11 he’s a genius.
Also this Bush did nothing to secure our borders, expel Muslims on expired Visas, etc.
and Jeb, AKA: “Act of Love” who wants open borders and to gut the 2nd Amendment, no thank you.
Same with Rubio and Cruz,
So Robert who are you supporting?
wildjew says
Senator Cruz (he slipped in response to Dr. Carson’s statement he would not support a Muslim for president) supports open borders and gutting the 2nd Amendment.
David Ramseur says
Ted Cruz is 100% for securing the border. He is 100% against any pathway to citizenship, aka amnesty. Illegals would have to stay in the shadows, and if arrested in the transmission of a crime would be deported. Cruz is also the best on the 2nd amendment. It is Trump who is for an assault weapons ban! Cruz is endorsed by the gun owners of America as the best 2nd amendment rights candidate there is. I agree that he slipped on the response to Dr. Carson’s statement. I believe he does understand the Islamic threat though. There is no need to lie about his other positions.
vlparker says
Trump can talk for 20 minutes and say absolutely nothing. He is nothing but bluff and bluster. “Yeah, I would do this and I would do that and blah, blah, blah.” All generalities and little substance.
I was a Cruz supporter until he criticized Carson for saying he wouldn’t vote for a muslim president unless he disavowed sharia law. So now I’m leaning Carson. I hope he stands his ground and continues to educate himself about islam. It is essential that we get a president who understands islam and isn’t PC.
Angemon says
Nonsense. Immigration policies, “extremely tough” or not, wouldn’t prevent US-born American converts from carrying out 9/11.
Wellington says
Agreed, Angemon.
Blablah says
Disagree.
voegelinian says
What would prevent them?
wildjew says
Nor would it (nor did it) prevent a U.S. born Muslim-born politician from reaching the highest office in the land, which I suspect is what Dr. Carson was alluding to (but did not say) in his interview with Chuck Todd. Asking a Muslim to publicly disavow sharia in favor of the U.S. Constitution is meaningless.
Wellington says
Trump often times says things which need to be said and which almost all other candidates for the Presidency shy away from saying (this very timidity reveals a major dysfunctional aspect of Western polities in our age), but the man remains to this day largely (if not completely) ignorant of the spiritual fascism which is Islam.
Trump knows a lot. He certainly understands (and appreciates) the capitalist system far better than the fool currently occupying the Oval Office. But on the matter of Islam, which is the single greatest matter for mankind in our time, he is still woefully ignorant. Please, all Trump enthusiasts out there, take note of this.
Rich says
Take note of what?
Look, even staunch anti-jihadists have had some reservations about the Garland event. Did you have the ‘right’ to do it? Yes. Was it necessarily the battle that needed to be fought in that way at that time? Debatable, frankly.
My point: lay off Trump. He is the only one who would even come close to:
1. Actually going to war against and defeating ISIS.
2. Actually defending the persecuted Christians of Iraq and Syria. And…
3. Closing the Mexican border effectively and thereby preventing jihadists from entering the country through that flank.
My further point: listen to Rush Limbaugh for a half second. He not right about everything, but he’s right about this. Conservatives tend to find ONE thing that their prospective candidate doesn’t get “exactly right” and then pile on him as if he were completely worthless and no one should vote for him. And the Democrats rejoice. And win.
Okay, Trump may have criticized your little Garland event. Forgive my sarcasm. Get over it. This is a presidential election and he is still someone who would do INFINITELY MORE in real terms in the fight against Islam than ANY other candidate.
Stop being so provincial. We need someone in the White House who would make the kind of America where no one would shooting at your free speech event…because they wouldn’t be here in the first place. Trump is better on Islam than ANY of the other candidates, hands down. And he was the ONLY candidate who mentioned the persecuted Christians in either debate.
And if the reply is Ben Carson…please. Okay, he answered correctly about Islam. Great. But he knows nothing about the economy or foreign policy, and so we’re still dependent on foreign oil and embroiled in a hundred conflicts overseas because we’re…dependent on foreign oil.
Again: listen to Rush for a second: The fact that a candidate didn’t answer one issue to your complete satisfaction, doesn’t mean he’s not the best candidate overall and even for your issue in particular.
And if you think Trump is not the best candidate on the issue of Islam, go to http://www.shoebat.com and inform yourself. Dammit. Pisses me off.
Wellington says
Even “staunch anti-jihadists have had some reservations about the Garland event.” OK, name a few. Yeah, Rich, name some (one thing’s for sure, your list couldn’t possibly include Robert Spencer, now could it?)
As for laying off Trump, I and others should not do this? Why Rich? Gee, Rich, is there anything where criticism of Trump would be OK with you? If so, name a couple.
Did I completely trash Trump? No way. Look at my 8:03 P,.M. post where I wrote such things as, “Trump often says things which need to be said” and “Trump knows a lot.”
As for “getting over” the Garland event, tell that first and foremost to the bravest woman in America, Pamela Geller, who has death threats hanging all over her head for the very event which I and others should “get over.” Do you get at least this much, Rich?
As for my being “so provincial,” once again you are guilty of vagueness. Exactly how have I been “so provincial?” Spell it out, Rich, because generalizations without specifics are worthless. And saying that Trump’s better on Islam than the other candidates says almost nothing at all, but then, you top yourself in the dismal category by mentioning that Ben Carson really does get Islam better than Trump but it doesn’t really count because he doesn’t know enough about “the economy or foreign policy.” This is PATHETIC, Rich. Can’t have it both ways, Rich.
Your turn, Rich. Yeah, go ahead. Give it a shot. Hopefully you will be more accurate and specific next time. And please don’t give me links or mention Rush Limbaugh. Say it in your own words, Rich, as I have in my response to you. Got that, Rich? Your own words. No links. ONLY your own words. Waiting.
Rich says
Wow. Wellington: Decaf. Invested in this debate a bit, brother? Get help. You’re a “Comment Star” on a weblog. Get over yourself.
As for specifics, Dumbass, thank God for ‘copy and paste’ [see my comment above]:
“He is the only one who would even come close to:
1. Actually going to war against and defeating ISIS.
2. Actually defending the persecuted Christians of Iraq and Syria. And…
3. Closing the Mexican border effectively and thereby preventing jihadists from entering the country through that flank.”
Can you even read?
Or, if that question is too sarcastic for your gentle eyes, answer me this: If not Trump, then WHO in the Republican field (who stands a chance of defeating Hillary) would you recommend Americans vote for next year? Be specific, now, W. No allusion intended.
Wellington says
First of all, there is no one in the Republican field who really “gets’ Islam. The closest anyone has come, easily so, is Ben Carson with his indicating the inappropriateness of any Muslim who accepts Islamic law becoming President. Trump’s statement about the Garland event was PATHETIC and one either knows this or should know it. You don’t.
Second, with respect to specifics, you in no way indicated (yet again) how I was “provincial.” So you failed here (again). You also didn’t address (yet again) the non sequitur that though Carson “answered correctly about Islam,” the knowledge of “the economy and foreign policy” by Trump makes him somehow better on Islam than Carson. In addition, you didn’t give me one name of a “staunch anti-jihadist” who had reservations about the Garland event even though I challenged you too, so, once again, you failed on specifics. Moreover, the first two of your three points about Trump, i.e., being the only one ready to go to war against ISIS and protecting Christians, are both assumptions, not fact, and also discount that other candidates might do the same or be even tougher than Trump in the Middle East (e.g. Cruz, who even trumped Trump by indicating that he would move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem). As for protecting the border, I’ll give you this, but then this goes along with what I first said, which you completely ignored, that being that Trump says a lot of things which need to be said.
As for your general bromide insults, remember, it was you who went after me first, calling me “provincial’ (once again with no specifics) and stupidly (yes, stupidly) telling me to get over Garland. No one should “get over” Garland who really knows what Islam intends for us all. No one. Not you, Rich, and certainly not Donald Trump. Shove it.
vlparker says
And saying that Trump’s better on Islam than the other candidates says almost nothing at all,
Which is exactly what Trump does all the time; he talks and talks and says nothing at all.
wildjew says
Wellington, I am beginning to think, as David Pryce-Jones wrote in one of Spencer’s earlier books, “the West has so lost confidence in itself and its spiritual, cultural and political values that it is defenseless before violence-in which case absolutism will triumph and the Muslim fantasy of superiority will come true.”
In the age of nuclear weapons and ‘gadgets’, maybe not in your or my lifetime, Islam will be crushed one day but more than likely it will be at the cost of billions of souls or as William Shirer put it, the “charred remains of an uninhabitable planet.”
Meanwhile the best we can do is vote for the man who we think will give us a little prosperity and safety; one who will make an attempt at reversing some of the damage this Muslim-born nightmare has wrought in this country and in the Middle East, North Africa, etc.
Wellington says
I will vote for Trump, wildjew, if he is the Republican candidate for President. But then I will vote for any Republican who may be the candidate. A Democrat anymore is simply not an option for me. I like a fair amount of what Trump says though I don’t think he “gets” Islam but then who does among our political elites? Very few actually. I do detect a bit of the demagogue in Trump and I also think if he became President he will find things tougher going than he now believes. It’s almost as though he is too confident, to the point of cockiness but I like the fact that he never backs down.
voegelinian says
Looks like “Rich” is an alumnus of the Phillip Jihadski School of Netiquette…
Angemon says
Didn’t you call most people here “fucktards“, voeg? You’re one to talk about Netiquette…
Also, PJ hasn’t posted here in a while – get over him.
Kevin says
I agree Trump is not very knowledgeable about Islam but he has good instincts. He knows there is a problem with Islam he just doesn’t know how to articulate it. He has said “we have a Muslim problem…it wasn’t Swedes that brought down the WTC”. I would trust Trump with the Muslim issue if he were to become President. My only disappointment with Trump was his failure to support Robert Spencer and Pam Geller over the draw Mohamed jihad attack.
mortimer says
Trump’s intuition must be backed up with KNOWLEDGE.
Start reading books, Donald. Islam is a complex subject steeped in deception.
Rich says
So, Mort, who do you recommend the American public vote for next year who is better than Trump on Islam? Who?
Rich says
Right. He gets this one thing wrong. Which reasonable people will agree was debatable. And people want to throw him overboard.
For those who say Trump’s offense is unpardonable, answer this: Who in the republican field [that stands a chance of defeating Hillary] is better than Trump on the problem of Islam?
mortimer says
Trump is clueless about the importance of freedom of expression…which is the founding (and most important) principle of America.
He is a philosophical dunce.
Jay Boo says
I feel sorry for poor deluded Rich.
Another voter seduced by the great Republican hope Trump.
Hollywood Pizazz and tax plan sound bite campaign promises are enticing.
But we are being set up with Trump as a Hillary foil.
The sad reality is that Hillary would mop the floor with wealthy egotistical Trump who’s negatives would serve as class war red meat to liberal MSM lying in wait and a convenient distraction to make voters forget all about Hillary’s nasty dirty laundry scandals.
Rich says
So, JB, WHO do you recommend that ‘right minded’ true anti-jihadists vote for as the Republican candidate for president? The ONLY name I’ve seen above is Ben Carson. And it is laughable that people would consider him better than Trump as a presidential candidate – on the whole. He may have better answered the question put to him about Islam. But as a complete presidential candidate [economy, foreign policy, etc] Trump is much better. So WHO would you recommend?
p.s. the reason I don’t come to this dumpster fire of a Comments Section more frequently is that IT IS NOT DISCUS. You get one reply to an interlocutor, then they get to reply back, then no more replies are possible. WTF? Completely retarded. I would like to respond to Wellington, for example, right now, but I can’t because this dump doesn’t have Discus and so you only get one reply per person. I’m sorry, is it still 1973? So please pass on to Wellington, if you would, that this dumpster fire of a Comments Section does not permit me to reply to his last reply. Pity that.
DISCUS people. It’s a whole thing that allows an ongoing conversation [hello] instead of two snarky replies and then a quick mandatory exit. Retarded.
Rich says
Learn the truth about Trump on Islam (many articles):
http://shoebat.com/?s=Trump&submit=
wildjew says
Rich, you wrote: “p.s. the reason I don’t come to this dumpster fire of a Comments Section more frequently is that IT IS NOT DISCUS. You get one reply to an interlocutor, then they get to reply back, then no more replies are possible….”
You can make more than one reply by going up the the last “reply” button in the conversation. It will post your comment at the bottom of the discussion. Over time I learned the trick.
Angemon says
Or by subscribing to new posts and follow-up comments by email. Those emails always come with a “reply” link. Read message, click “reply”, and write your repsonse on the window that pops up. Easy, nice and clean 🙂
wildjew says
“So, JB, WHO do you recommend that ‘right minded’ true anti-jihadists vote for as the Republican candidate for president? The ONLY name I’ve seen above is Ben Carson. And it is laughable that people would consider him better than Trump as a presidential candidate – on the whole….”
I gave Senator Ted Cruz a couple of small contributions early on. He’s probably one of the smartest, most articulate candidates out there. He has a history of fighting the Republican “Establishment.” But after I read Cruz’s book: “A Time For Truth: Reigniting the Promise of America,” after some of the things Senator Cruz said and more importantly things he did not say, I have stepped back a little from my support. It seems to me, this election could have a momentum beyond our control. When the primary nears, at that point I will have to make a determination who to vote for after much thought and prayer.
Daniel Triplett says
@wildjew
I was a big Cruz supporter early on, but have now stepped back a bit, mostly because I realized I don’t know enough about him to just go “all in.”
I didn’t read his book, and likely won’t have time.
What did he say, or not say in his book that gave you pause?
Dan
Rich says
Learn the truth about Trump on Islam (many articles):
http://shoebat.com/?s=Trump&submit=
simpleton says
The key for any President, is the right adviser that over time will bring them up to speed with the right understanding.
Steve Coughlin
Robert Spencer
William says
From Trump’s remarks, at the point where he said that what Ms. Geller was doing was risky, he shows a disregard for the law. He shows that he knows that there are people out there who may hurt others physically because of what they say, which is illegal and wrong. Yet he did not denounce that. He failed to say that threatening to harm someone because of what they say is wrong and is against the law. That is very bad. Instead of attacking those who intend to or actually break the law, he attacked the lawful citizen. Is that willfully overlooking some crimes? Even if the speech is provocative, is provocative speech illegal? He denounced the speech and he is free to do that. But he did not denounce the threat to those who were not breaking the law.
Rich says
Look, even staunch anti-jihadists have had some reservations about the Garland event. Did you have the ‘right’ to do it? Yes. Was it necessarily the battle that needed to be fought in that way at that time? Debatable, frankly.
My point: lay off Trump. He is the only one who would even come close to:
1. Actually going to war against and defeating ISIS.
2. Actually defending the persecuted Christians of Iraq and Syria. And…
3. Closing the Mexican border effectively and thereby preventing jihadists from entering the country through that flank.
My further point: listen to Rush Limbaugh for a half second. He not right about everything, but he’s right about this. Conservatives tend to find ONE thing that their prospective candidate doesn’t get “exactly right” and then pile on him as if he were completely worthless and no one should vote for him. And the Democrats rejoice. And win.
Okay, Trump may have criticized your little Garland event. Forgive my sarcasm. Get over it. This is a presidential election and he is still someone who would do INFINITELY MORE in real terms in the fight against Islam than ANY other candidate.
Stop being so provincial. We need someone in the White House who would make the kind of America where no one would shooting at your free speech event…because they wouldn’t be here in the first place. Trump is better on Islam than ANY of the other candidates, hands down. And he was the ONLY candidate who mentioned the persecuted Christians in either debate.
And if the reply is Ben Carson…please. Okay, he answered correctly about Islam. Great. But he knows nothing about the economy or foreign policy, and so we’re still dependent on foreign oil and embroiled in a hundred conflicts overseas because we’re…dependent on foreign oil.
Again: listen to Rush for a second: The fact that a candidate didn’t answer one issue to your complete satisfaction, doesn’t mean he’s not the best candidate overall and even for your issue in particular.
And if you think Trump is not the best candidate on the issue of Islam, go to http://www.shoebat.com and inform yourself. Dammit. Pisses me off.
Robert Spencer says
Rich, your thinking here is just the kind of thinking I was addressing in the post. The fact that I was an organizer of and speaker at the Garland event only obscures the issue, because it makes people think that my criticism of Trump on this score is personal or “provincial.” In reality, I would take issue with him just as strongly if he had said that people should not draw Muhammad in any context, referring to any event. For saying that is adhering to Sharia. That is Trump’s fatal and unpardonable flaw.
Rich says
Great. Then who in the Republican field of candidates (who stands a chance of defeating Hillary) would you recommend Americans vote for next year?
Because ultimately that was the source of my use of the word “provincial”. It was just to say: don’t let one issue determine whether you will or will not support Trump.
KnowThyEnemy says
I’ll take a stab at answering your question with explanation. IMO the best candidate to vote for is Ben Carson! Why? Read on-
A few comments earlier, wildjew quoted David Pryce-Jones who said “the West has so lost confidence in itself and its spiritual, cultural and political values that it is defenseless before violence…..”
Now consider what Osama Bin Laden [correctly] said regarding people naturally liking the strong horse over the weak one. A society that “has so lost confidence in itself….” is the weak horse, and the only way it will become strong again is if it regains that confidence.
So where does Ben Carson come into the picture? He wrote this book that he has been promoting lately- A More Perfect Union, which “explains the basic principles of the Constitution and the freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights….”
Now why would someone write this book? Well, because he is [positively] passionate about those values and principles! ….And we can sense this passion whenever he talks about them in his interviews.
On top of that, he is a serious Christian, which means he also possesses, or is strongly aware of, the Christian values. And the fact that he rose from rags to riches through hard work and honesty, shows that he possesses positive personal values too.
A strong adherence to such principles and values is exactly what makes someone a “strong horse”. In his talks, he seems to make effort to make others see the importance of living by these principles and values, and if he keeps doing so, hopefully there will be many more strong horses, and America will become confident again.
And that is why he is the best candidate to be President!
———————-
I have not had a chance to read what Carson has to say on fiscal policy but I did watch a video on him talking about foreign policy, and his understanding regarding the ME countries, and the US involvement in those countries, is quite poor. He easily confused Afghanistan with Iraq and was struggling to speak.
However, this weakness is easy to overcome. The ME is not too hard to understand if one can find a learnt adviser/expert (Robert Spencer, for example 🙂 ). The same is true of fiscal policy.
————————-
BTW the US has been self-sufficient when it comes to petroleum, and has been this way for a decade. Whatever little oil the US imports, is easily available from many dealers domestically and internationally.
KnowThyEnemy says
Hmm…. no one has replied to my post regarding Ben Carson either positively or negatively so just in case there is confusion, I should clarify. There are two ways to counter the enemy:
1) Weaken the enemy somehow (e.g. weaken their confidence in their beliefs and values), and/or
2) Strengthen ourselves (e.g. by strengthening our values and becoming confident regarding their worth).
It just so happens that the principles enshrined in the US Constitution are more than capable of taking care of totalatarian ideologies provided that citizens respect them, have faith in them, and are confident enough to live by them. It so happens too that our current breed of ‘leaders’ are doing everything they can to bend the constitutional rights and principles however they want to fit their agenda, trash them outright, or just plain ignore them….. with the result that people are all confused and have no confidence left.
And this is where Dr. Ben Carson can help by becoming our leader. As an honest person of integrity who is clearly passionate about the rights and principles of the US Constitution, he is highly likely to protect those rights and principles, propagate them, and restore the citizens’ confidence in them.
The more faith and confidence that Americans have in the US Constitution, the harder it will be for Islamists (both political and otherwise) to carry out their sinister plans.
eduardo odraude says
But do not all the candidates have fatal and unpardonable flaws?
Whether the answer to that is yes or no, it would be interesting to see your current ranking of the available candidates, including the criterion of electability.
livingengine says
It’s a cult.
mortimer says
Robert Spencer wrote: “Trump’s fatal and unpardonable flaw”
That flaw is that he does not understand WHY FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE UNDERPINNING THE USA.
Trump is a power-hungry philosophical simpleton.
gravenimage says
Rich wrote:
Look, even staunch anti-jihadists have had some reservations about the Garland event. Did you have the ‘right’ to do it? Yes. Was it necessarily the battle that needed to be fought in that way at that time? Debatable, frankly.
………………………………..
Rich, what battle can be more important that reaffirming our right to speak honestly about Islam–including criticizing Islam–in the face of Muslim demands that we abandon freedom of speech and submit to Shari’ah law?
More:
Okay, Trump may have criticized your little Garland event. Forgive my sarcasm. Get over it.
………………………………..
Trump is willing to submit to Shari’ah strictures, fails to defend our freedom of speech, and castigates those who are brave enough to do so.
This isn’t “little”–it is alarming.
More:
This is a presidential election and he is still someone who would do INFINITELY MORE in real terms in the fight against Islam than ANY other candidate.
………………………………..
Given a slate of candidates that is in many ways pretty poor, this may indeed turn out to be the case. This article is not demanding that no one vote for Trump under any conditions. If it is Trump versus, say, Bernie Sanders, I am going to hold my nose and vote for Trump, despite my considerable reservations.
And why not? I voted for McCain and Romney in the past two elections–and urged others here to do the same–despite my realization that both candidates fell far short of a full understanding of the Jihad threat.
I still felt that they would be better than the truly egregious Barack Obama–and I stand by my choices at the time.
More:
Stop being so provincial…
………………………………..
You may believe that protecting freedom of speech is a “provincial” issue,l but it *is not*.
The first thing that Muslim supremacists do on securing their power is to prevent their victims for speaking out about Islam.
And free speech is not just an issue in Garland–ravening Jihadists have violently targeted those speaking out about Islam *throughout* the West–going after the Danish MoToon cartoonists,, massacring the Charlie Hebdo journalists and cartoonists, making assassination attempts against Lars Vilks, putting out Fatwas against critics like Salman Rushdie–all things that took place outside of little Garland, Texas.
There is a reason that freedom of speech is enshrined in the First Amendment of the Constitution–if we lose our ability to speak honestly and critically about Islam due to undefended violence against us, then we lose *everything*.
Nothing “provincial” about this.
Rich says
You said: “Given a slate of candidates that is in many ways pretty poor, this may indeed turn out to be the case.” (Referring to Trump and the possible ‘need’ to vote for him against a [presumably even worse] Democrat candidate).
That is precisely my point. You may not love Trump on every issue. But he is better than everybody else in the Republican field [including Carson, imo] on the issue of Islam. And, again, if Carson is brought up as an alternative option, I would maintain that he is not a serious contender because his other “presidential prerequisites” are simply not there. Trump has all the other stuff AND he’s very good on Islam, on the whole. Carson may get Islam right, but his ‘everything else’ sucks. That’s what I meant about ‘provincial’: don’t be one issue voters. Because if you accept Carson just because he’s “good on the Islam question”, you may lose the general election because he sucks on everything else. Whereas with Trump you get someone who is very solid against Islam AND he can win the general election because he has very solid policies on all the other issues as well.
And I know Wellington doesn’t wanna go through all the work of clicking on a link, but if you just go to http://www.shoebat.com and see what Walid Shoebat has to say about Trump, I think you will agree that he is indeed the best candidate vis-a-vis this hellish ideology.
gravenimage says
Rich, both Wellington and I have said that we would be willing to vote for Trump under certain circumstances–and almost certainly if he is the Republican candidate.
But I don’t believe that *any* candidate should be held to be above scrutiny–it is important to know what we are dealing with.
And I have a great deal of respect for Walid Shoebat. While he has written approvingly about aspects of Donald Trump, he has *also* done the same for Dr. Ben Carson and Ted Cruz.
I don’t believe, in fact, that Shoebat has yet specifically endorsed any candidate. And even if he had, his site would not be the only one I would look to for information on what will be a very long race.
Rich says
Learn the truth about Trump on Islam:
http://shoebat.com/?s=Trump&submit=
Jay Boo says
I do not believe that Rush Limbaugh is 100% sold on Trump.
He consistently seems to leave some wiggle room (just in case).
Rich is only right about not mocking (the religion of) Islam and Muhammad —
— if and only if we assume that Islam is a religion of human decency that has earned respect. —
The problem isn’t too much mocking but far too little.
Every time the MSM shows reverential treatment toward Islam, it validates Islam as a legitimate religion which it clearly is not and encourages Muslims to feel entitled to special treatment which breeds butcher knife attacks and worse. We need around the clock mockery until the Allah A-holes submit and feel subdued enough to stop their disgraceful pretense.
somehistory says
In country after country, nation after nation, laws are being passed and people are going to court for telling the truth. Just today, I was emailed an article about rape in Sweden and who is responsible for the horrible increase…and the fact that a man was taken to court for pointing out the stats…because they clearly showed moslims were the most prolific perpetrators.
If one cannot draw the murderer…or even someone that moslims take to be their fake prophet…without being shot at, stabbed, threatened, etc., then that is the first step to taking away of the freedom to say that islam teaches rape, rape of children, beating of family members, killing of family members…
It’s a first step that people wish to gloss over and say that drawing isn’t *necessary* and is unnecessarily provocative. But islam doesn’t allow music, art of any kind, eating pork, women wearing bathing suits, going about without being *covered* to the satisfaction of the nearest moslim, etc.
Is Trump willing to forgo any kind of things that moslims don’t like or act on as a *provocation*? Where would he draw the line?
When he goes to dinner, if a moslim is nearby, is he going to think hard before he orders a pork product? What about when it comes to the way his chicken or beef is killed and prepared? Will he leave wine off his menu? Does he drink beer? If so, will he stop if moslims tell him they find it provocative?
Ten to one, with all the money he has, there are paintings in his properties….homes, offices, etc. Is he going to remove those and trash them if moslims object to them as provocative?
Does he still do the beauty pageant? Ah, women in bathing suits, low cut dresses, singing, dancing, …all provocation to moslims.
He’s famous, He’s rich. He talks a lot and gets a lot of attention. But he is woefully ignorant of what islam and moslims expect from him. Esp if he backs away from a mere drawing event and criticizes those who held it to make a very important statement about the freedom to speak…about what we wish to speak about.
gravenimage says
Trump boasts he would have prevented 9/11, but dodges Sharia question
……………………………..
So Donald Trump says that defending the Constitution against the horrors of Shari’ah law “is not his argument”?
Doesn’t he know that the presidential oath calls for this vow: “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”?
This means he will not even bother giving lip service to the core role of the president. Why the hell is he even running?
As to 9/11 itself, it is by no means clear that any president could have stopped the attack given the level of communication between security service branches in place at the time.
But certainly, Trump’s commitment to foiling Jihad terror is a good thing–assuming it is not just an empty boast, given that it can never be proven one way or another.
But here’s the salient point–what does Trump think Jihad terrorism *is for*? Like so many, he appears to have no clue that Jihad is not an end in itself–instead, all forms of Jihad have the same aim–the *imposition of Shari’ah law”–the very thing Trump says he will not argue against.
mortimer says
graven wrote: “So Donald Trump says that defending the Constitution against the horrors of Shari’ah law “is not his argument”?”
Donald SHOULD know the president’s job is to DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES…of which SHARIA LAW IS ONE.
Donald is a philosophical simpleton.
gravenimage says
Exactly, Mortimer.
Bukkdem Jizheads says
Who is the “philosophical” genius in the race? I think it’s Trump. He and Cruz have courage, but Trump is the one with a sense of humor; a clear indicator of superior intelligence. He knows how to surround himself with brilliant people. He will brook no insult without a counter-punch, usually hilarious. Yes he’s wrong on Garland, but I agree with Rich in supporting him. He would not be the success he is if he couldn’t learn. He will attract Democrats and the others won’t.
Conservatives reflexively refuse to “dignify an insult” and this just throws more meat to the dogs of hell: liberals. It lets them control the narrative, and thus history. Trump has the fight in his gut, and has an unerring, spontaneous aim for the weak spot. He will paddle right through the coming shit-nami that will drown any other Republican president.
sidney penny says
Australian Senators do not know what Sharia law is either.
If only she kept up to date with Jihadwatch !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o63FGy3mPWI
Senator Jacqui Lambie struggles to explain sharia law
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/22/jacquie-lambies-comments-on-sharia-law-outrage-muslim-leaders
http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101
d. Sharia Law
Unlike many religions, Islam includes a mandatory and highly specific legal and political plan for society called Sharia (pronounced “sha-r�e-uh”), which translates approximately as “way” or “path.” The precepts of Sharia are derived from the commandments of the Quran and the Sunnah (the teachings and precedents of Muhammad as found in the reliable hadiths and the Sira). Together, the Quran and the Sunnah establish the dictates of Sharia, which is the blueprint for the good Islamic society. Because Sharia originates with the Quran and the Sunnah, it is not optional. Sharia is the legal code ordained by Allah for all mankind. To violate Sharia or not to accept its authority is to commit rebellion against Allah, which Allah’s faithful are required to combat.
There is no separation between the religious and the political in Islam; rather Islam and Sharia constitute a comprehensive means of ordering society at every level. While it is in theory possible for an Islamic society to have different outward forms — an elective system of government, a hereditary monarchy, etc. — whatever the outward structure of the government, Sharia is the prescribed content. It is this fact that puts Sharia into conflict with forms of government based on anything other than the Quran and the Sunnah.
The precepts of Sharia may be divided into two parts:………
duh_swami says
Donald is an egotist. His biggest fan is himself. He thinks he can fix anything. He will be disappointed when he finds out he can’t… If he’s going to bring prosperity, and make America ‘America Akar’, he needs to get real about Islam.
William says
Trump may be uninformed about Islam and about Sharia. But he knows at least one aspect of Sharia, which is you shall draw Mohammed at risk of death. So Trump is not totally ignorant of Sharia. He may not even know that it is part of Sharia law. But he knows the command of not drawing Mohammed is a part of Islam. And he does not condemn it. Why doesn’t he and other politicians condemn it?
richie says
It astounds me that so many people out there really think Trump is a conservative. He has always been a new york liberal. Hes pulling a Mitt Romney and flip flopping when it is convenient. He will be as toothless as any liberal in confronting the enemy -one he is even reluctant to name
Edward says
Trump was a no show in Garland:
I think Trump considers any contact a business opportunity! Perhaps his MO/ethics is to not antagonize the principals in any way in the beginning. If this is going to be his carryover approach when he is elected president he might as well start learning Arabic. If he butters-up to the Arabs he may have a greater chance of a temporary détente till he gains strength in his overall state of world affairs. Trump is a very shrewd contender when bartering.
That is going to be his greatest benchmark task of his life……when he deals with Muslim world! I will venture to say he will never give away any strategic gains…..I say in contrast to our present…err previous POTUS!
William says
I wish Mr. Spencer would propose and encourage one question, for example concerning Sharia law, that all candidates for national public office should be asked. In that way, there would be people, forget about the news reporters for they are useless, ready to ask the candidates about one of the most important issue facing us. It would only be necessary simply to ask them the question in a public event, such as a town-hall meeting. There would be no need for follow up questions. The purpose will be to examine the candidates’ knowledge of the issue and their preparedness to deal with the problem. How they answer the question would provide us with the answer, that is, are they prepared or not, and are they interested in becoming prepared or not?
eduardo odraude says
Here’s a ranking of all the candidates according to “Islamophobia.”
http://chicagomonitor.com/2015/06/policing-politicians-attitudes-toward-islam-and-islamophobia/
Though the author of the piece is completely naive and misinformed about Islam, she nevertheless might give us a clue about how “Islamophobic” — in other words, how informed about Islam — any given candidate is.
I would like to suggest that if you comment there, be polite and give evidence, do not insult or attack the author. We need to persuade people, not harden them in their prejudices against us.
gravenimage says
Yes–sometimes information, even when from those with totally different goals from ourselves–in this case, from deluded dhimmis–can still be useful. Thanks for the link.
antikythera says
Like the AIDS virus, that prevents the system from recognizing and responding to infection, if TRUMP manages to eradicate Political Correctness as, he claims will do, he would have fulfilled a far more valuable service to protecting Western civilization
Edward says
It is interesting that you mention: “if TRUMP manages to eradicate Political Correctness as, he claims will do, he would have fulfilled a far more valuable service to protecting Western civilization.”
Two of the 1st and 2nd poll ranking runners have PC’s eradication on their minds.
A Trump/Carson or a Carson/Trump team would be great. Personally they seem to complement each other. They are both are astute/forward thinkers! They both possess a virtue that paves the way for America’s survival. ….COURAGE!
Daniel Triplett says
I’m not addressing anyone in particular here, but I notice some are suggesting those who believe in the existence of Satan are naïve fools, beholden by religious myths, and are therefore unfit to be President.
You must therefore consider me unfit too. And Robert Spencer. And every GOP Presidential candidate. And every other American Christian. Because we ALL believe in the existence of Satan. It’s in The Bible, for starters. By this logic, MOST Americans would be unfit to be POTUS, since most Americans are Christian.
You’d best look to the Democrat field if you feel strongly about this.
Plus, to me, there is ample evidence in the World of pure demonic evil of a spiritual nature.
I also believe, along with millions of others, that Satan is involved with the Islamic problem.
Personally, I’ve never seen a ghost, good or evil. But MILLIONS of people say they have. Sure, some may be crazy, but ALL of them? Moreover, check out some of the many ghost documentary shows that are popular now. Some show some pretty compelling evidence, as far as I’m concerned. Is 100% of it just Hollywood hocus-pocus? I don’t think so.
And what about the millions who have had Near Death Experiences, and all come back to describe nearly identical experiences? Are they all just bullshit? I don’t believe so, and in fact believe that’s evidence of an Afterlife. So, if there is an Afterlife, wouldn’t it make sense that such a domain has a Divine Authority? An Authority such as God? I fully believe in The Trinity, and regard others who believe the same as not only humble and sane, but also realistic. There’s plenty of evidence out there if you just look for it and keep an open mind.
For what it’s worth, I saw a poll on Fox a few months back, that polled ALL Americans (not just Fox fans). It asked: Who would you definitely never vote for?
The choices in the poll were Christian, Catholic, Jew, Mormon, Muslim, and Atheist. The two most notable numbers that stood out to me were Muslims and Atheists. The poll revealed 46% of Americans would never vote for a Muslim, under any circumstance. The only one that was worse was Atheists, right at the bottom, with 49% saying they’d never vote for an Atheist under any circumstance.
I know that people like Palin got slammed because she believed in Creationism. For that reason alone, my own mother voted for Obama instead of McCain (a choice for which I’ve rebuked her incessantly). She did vote for Romney though, to giver redeeming credit.
Personally, as a strong Christian, I believe in Intelligent Design, and the evolution of species. I believe God started it all, but I don’t believe he gets involved in which Little League team wins the game. I do, however, believe Christ can help and guide us if we ask Him out loud.
I’m among those who would never vote for a Muslim or an Atheist, under any circumstance.
We all think we’re so smart now, and know everything. But we don’t. People 3000 years ago probably thought they knew everything too. But they didn’t. Don’t you think people 3000 years in the future will know more than we do? They’ll likely look back on us the same way we look at people 3000 years in our past.
And we’re just talking about the Earth here. There’s an entire Universe out there about which we know jack squat.
To me, for a person to say, “I know for certain there is no God anywhere in the Universe,” suggests a closed mind and know-it-all arrogance I believe is highly inappropriate in the leader of the Free World.
That’s just me though.
I’m not trying to start a big debate here and derail the thread. I’m simply pointing out the poll numbers reflecting how Americans feel about the importance of the President’s religion.
Blahblah says
Well said, Daniel. I don’t understand how people don’t see it. Good witness.
Daniel Triplett says
Thank you. May God be with us.
Stay strong. We have a big fight ahead of us.