Posted by Tina
In my reading today I found myself, once again, further informed by one of America’s great litigators, Andrew McCarthy. In his latest article for National Review, “The Controversy over Syrian Refugees Misses the Question We Should Be Asking” McCarthy points out the problem with our vetting process. We vet for terrorism when we need to be vetting for Sharia adherence:
vetting only works if you vet for the right thing. Washington, in its delusional Islamophilia, vets only for ties to terrorism, which it defines as “violent extremism” in purblind denial of modern terrorism’s Islamist ideological moorings. As the deteriorating situation in Europe manifests, our actual challenge is Islamic supremacism, of which jihadist terrorism is only a subset. …
…We should long ago have recognized sharia as the bright line that separates authentic Muslim moderates, hungry for the West’s culture of reason and individual liberty, from Islamic supremacists, resistant to Western assimilation and insistent on incremental accommodation of Muslim law and mores. …
… Not only are we vetting for the wrong thing, we are ignoring the dynamics of jihadism. The question is not whether we are admitting Muslims who currently have ties to terrorist organizations; it is whether we are admitting Muslims who are apt to become violent jihadists after they settle here.
Do read the article. It not only informs us about those who wage war against us, it serves as a reminder of who we really are as a nation and why it’s important to preserve the principles and ideals that formed this nation. McCarthy’s conclusions cannot be denied.
McCarthy’s conclusions absolutely can be denied, because he is starting from a false premise:
“…We should long ago have recognized sharia as the bright line that separates authentic Muslim moderates, hungry for the West’s culture of reason and individual liberty, from Islamic supremacists, resistant to Western assimilation and insistent on incremental accommodation of Muslim law and mores. …”
Quite simply, McCarthy doesn’t know what “sharia” means.
“Sharia” is God’s law according to Muslims. Muslims of course have differing interpretations of sharia, but when conservatives use the term, they are talking about the legal systems of Muslim majority countries, most of which are horribly unjust and oppressive. But all Muslims follow sharia in some form.
If you asked any Muslim refugee, no matter how moderate, if they followed “sharia,” you’d get a yes. McCarthy’s proposal is deceptive; his policy would essentially ban all Muslims from entering the United States, not just radicals. Saying “we shouldn’t ban all Muslims, just those that follow sharia!” is like saying “We shouldn’t ban all Jews, just those that follow halacha!” It doesn’t make any sense.
The nit picking is getting ridiculous…and it’s costing lives.
So for you, Chris, there is no “bright line that separates” moderates and supremacists? There is no point to be made because all Muslims follow sharia according to their own interpretations?
Not all of them Chris. Some think there is no room for interpretation. We need to know who they are.
Britannica:
Those Muslims that follow the “rigid and static” system of sharia are people we don’t want in our country. Determining how refugees and immigrants practice their religion and whether or not they have any desire to assimilate should be an important part of the vetting process.
Turkey’s Islamist strongman Recep Tayyip Erdogan proclaimed that pressuring Muslims to assimilate in their new Western countries is “a crime against humanity,” according to McCarthy.
Do you think that’s true? Are you someone who thinks we can share this nation with opposing sets of laws and survive as a nation?
Or can you see Erdogan’s statement is a tool in the supremacists arsenal, using the west’s religious tolerance against them to gain power ans supremacy?
Vetting requires more than a single question, Chris. It definitely requires setting the idiocy of resistance to a vetting process that would work better to keep our citizens safe.
You are part of the left, a group that’s constantly concerned about Christian influence in our society and yet when it comes to Muslims it’s hands off…we can’t question or criticize them, he77, we cannot even make a distinction between the black hats and the white hats!
“So for you, Chris, there is no “bright line that separates” moderates and supremacists?”
That’s obviously not what I said; it amazes me how you can constantly put words in my mouth while accusing me of doing the same.
What I said was that “sharia” is NOT this “bright line that separates.” I said that very clearly. Moderate Muslims also follow sharia, but they interpret it in a different way from the radicals. I don’t see how you can call that “nitpicking”–the idea that sharia is one thing and one thing only is crucial to McCarthy’s article, and the title of this one.
“Those Muslims that follow the “rigid and static” system of sharia are people we don’t want in our country. Determining how refugees and immigrants practice their religion and whether or not they have any desire to assimilate should be an important part of the vetting process.”
Agreed.
“Turkey’s Islamist strongman Recep Tayyip Erdogan proclaimed that pressuring Muslims to assimilate in their new Western countries is “a crime against humanity,” according to McCarthy.
Do you think that’s true?”
Of course not.
“Are you someone who thinks we can share this nation with opposing sets of laws and survive as a nation?”
No.
“Or can you see Erdogan’s statement is a tool in the supremacists arsenal, using the west’s religious tolerance against them to gain power ans supremacy?”
His statement is definitely a tool in the supremacist’s arsenal, but they definitely don’t want the west to show “religious tolerance.” If anything, Erdrogan is intentionally stoking fears in Westerners. People like him want an all-out war between Islam and the West. One of the most effective tools in their arsenal is exploiting the idea that Islam and western democracy are incompatible. They want both Muslims and non-Muslims to believe that. Let’s not help them along.
Can you cite any prominent liberal who has argued that Muslims should never be criticized?
Chris you refuse to admit that we at Post Scripts do distinguish between terrorists and covert activists who want to impose sharia on the world with moderate Muslims that want to live in peace. No matter what we say or do to demonstrate the distinction you insist that we are bigots or racists. You’ve earned the nit picking label.
Americans do not wish sharia, however it is practiced, “imposed” on us to replace our system. That is the point of the bright line distinction. McCarthy’s point isn’t that we are just fighting terrorists; his point is we are fighting an ideology that is religious, civil, and judicial.
Yes Chris, you are nit picking! You grab the opportunity to tell us, once again as if we were unaware, that there are moderates who follow “sharia.” You seem to have a need to shame, blame or accuse and you miss the importance and substance of the article entirely!
In this age of war with murdering fanatics I would think you could focus on the problem!
Tina, you did not originally say we should keep out Muslims who want to “impose” sharia. You said we should keep out Muslims who “adhere” to sharia. Do you understand the difference between those two statements? Do you understand that pointing out that difference is not “nitpicking,” but is actually super important?
Sharia is really quite clear, it takes a liberal like Chris to muddy the waters.
The RW Colorado shooter just killed more people than a refugee has in the USA in over 10 years.
What is the preoccupation with Sharia law? A game of propaganda to take your eye off what they are doing.
Republicans WANT Sharia Style Law because they intend to implement a Christian Theocracy no different than Sharia Law.
Religion has no place in politics period. Christians are out of line and need to zip it. This war on women and constant blabbing about the Bible when talking about law needs to be squashed.
“Republicans WANT sharia style law….Christians are out of line and need to zip it.”
Just as it is wrong to generalize about all Muslims in hateful terms, it is wrong to generalize about Republicans and Christians in the same way. You raise good points but you too often sabotage yourself by making hypocritical statements like this. No one is going to listen to your point about domestic terrorists being more likely to be white Christians if you say things like the above right after. Don’t make it so easy for others to discredit you.
Sorry Chris but that is the consensus of many. Their lawmaking suggests exactly that.
Republicans KNOW they intend to enact as many heinously draconian laws as possible and to deflect attention from this agenda they are simply trying the “Hey! Look over there! technique.
If people actual read the laws they propose instead of rely on media propaganda one would see it.
They have gone as far as try to start with State Religions. So far it has failed but they will not stop trying. The laws they propose on women are so close it is disgusting. Only diff is they would never want to cover their heads because sex sells and that industry has a lot of clout.
So Chris they will say as they want, Fact is many of us see it. Many of us talk about it. Always look at the laws and what they really say.
In fact the old Blunt/Rubio so called contraception bill stated an employer can deny any person, almost any medical service based on the employers religious beliefs. It was not just about contraception as it was titled.
I stand By my statement. They use religion to control a population and it has been that way for centuries.
Your quite the bully and liar, Dewey…go to your room.
The Boston Marathon bombers were refugees and they killed 3 people and injured an estimated 264 others. Many of those injuries were severe. Shortly after the FBI released identifying images publicly, the suspects killed an MIT policeman, carjacked an SUV, and initiated an exchange of gunfire with the police in Watertown, Massachusetts. During the firefight, an MBTA police officer was injured but survived with severe blood loss. Their mother was a real piece of work, who encouraged the behavior of these boys.
The Fort Hood shooter wrote a letter <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/29/fort-hood-shooter-says-want-to-become-citizen-islamic-state-caliphate.html".expressing his desire to be a citizen of the caliphate:
He killed 13 people and injured more than 30. I don’t know how he got to this country, or into the military, but it’s clear he didn’t intend to assimilate.
Thought you might enjoy this one . . .
Liberal Media 101 Primer
If the assailant is Black, do not report race.
If the assailant is White, report race right off.
If the assailant is Black and the victim is Black, ignore the story entirely.
If the assailant is White and the victim is White, ignore the story entirely.
If the assailant is White and the victim is Black, blame it on racism.
If the assailant is Democrat, do not report party affiliation.
If the assailant is Conservative, report party affiliation right off.
If the assailant is gay, blame it on bullying
If the assailant is Hispanic, report race as White.
If the assailant is Muslim, blame it on work-place violence.
If the assailant is gay and Black, blame it on racist bigots.
For the most part, our media are presstitutes and considering the SOURCE of stories becomes even more important.
Re The Lunatic : “Religion has no place in politics period.”
So, only atheists belong in political office and anyone adhering to a religion is a second class citizen.
Re The Lunatic’s Apologist : “You raise good points …”
Name one.
Sharia :
Saudi Arabia Court Sentences Poet to Death for Renouncing Islam
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/11/20/saudi-arabia-court-sentences-poet-death-renouncing-islam/
Get a damn clue Chris. This is mainstream Islam. This is Sharia. Quit sticking your head in liberal fantasy land sand.
Off Topic :
Carly Fiorina was up first on Fox News Sunday. The interview is worth seeing and the entire show (also worth viewing) will be up on Monday at the FNS web site for free via Hula.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace/
Pie, what is your definition of sharia?
Liar?
Tina the Boston Bombing killers parents were and they were not terrorists. The boys were Kids. They were radicalized. They did not come over as terrorists.
Tina You are in denial over the amount of Right Wing Terrorism there is.
[R]ight-wing extremists averaged 337 attacks per year in the decade after 9/11, causing a total of 254 fatalities, according to a study by Arie Perliger, a professor at the United States Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center. The toll has increased since the study was released in 2012.
Other data sets, using different definitions of political violence, tell comparable stories. The Global Terrorism Database maintained by the Start Center at the University of Maryland includes 65 attacks in the United States associated with right-wing ideologies and 24 by Muslim extremists since 9/11. The International Security Program at the New America Foundation identifies 39 fatalities from “non-jihadist” homegrown extremists and 26 fatalities from “jihadist” extremists.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/06/18/why-dont-we-know-much-about-right-wing-terrorists-conservatives-fired-the-guy-studying-them/
Religion is at the core of all these attacks both by Right Wing Americans and jihadists. Religion seems to be a problem.
Let’s look at the tally this year. That is what I was referring to. But we can go back into time. Domestic Terrorism is constant.
You are ignoring Colorado now? He believed the Fox news and right wing lies that PP was selling baby parts for profit. He muttered “No more baby parts”
Chico seems to live in a bubble. How many domestic terrorist attacks do you count this year? How many Muslim attacks this year?
You want to focus on American white Christian murders? Fine. That’s acceptable. You attempt to link criminal extreme “right wing” nuts with the Republican Party and Christians? Dumb. Really dumb!
As long as we’re targeting groups (to deflect attention from the national problem of terrorism) lets go whole hog and shine a bit of light on another group plaguing whole neighborhoods in America.
Chicago, a Democrat onclave, has had over 2700 shooting this year alone. The gang murders have been going on for decades. September and October this year were particularly violent months with incidents topping 300…and no one seems to care. Why? Blacks are the perpetrators. Gun laws in Chicago are very strict. Democrats have run the place for decades. In the latest high profile murder by a cop, the Mayor, Democrat Rahm Emanuel, is accused of hiding a portion of the video to get the black vote in the last election! POLITICS!
Accusations of white Christians being a big threat are also political!
I’d say Americans in certain areas of the country have a lot more to fear than white nutballs, even if they profess to be Christian.
The main reasons sited by right wing extremist for their murders is: “fear that government will confiscate firearms” and a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”
These fears can be directly attributed to the current divisive, gun grabbing, economically disastrous, lousy leadership and policies of the last seven years. It doesn’t excuse the violence but it shows these nuts hardly represents a broad, world wide threat!
The nut in Colorado was white and most likely mentally ill (like many others) and was not a Christian or affiliated with either major political party, according to news sources. He was allegedly offended by the idea of selling body parts of aborted babies. What person, possessing even an ounce of human kindness or respect for human life, could blame him for being offended?
One last point. Our government has been focusing on preventing terrorist attacks by Muslim radicals and has been able to disrupt most of them although “…the 20 plots that were carried out accounted for 50 fatalities over the past 13 and a half years.” The damage and loss of life that the disrupted plans would have inflicted can’t be measured…but they still count in terms of an ongoing organized threat!
As I said before…get off that high horse!
“no one seems to care. Why? Blacks are the perpetrators. Gun laws in Chicago are very strict.”
Do you understand that the last sentence here contradicts the first?
“He was allegedly offended by the idea of selling body parts of aborted babies. What person, possessing even an ounce of human kindness or respect for human life, could blame him for being offended?”
Any rational person can blame him for being offended by something that never happened, and was in fact a lie made up by right-wing activists. Your comment comes dangerously close to justifying the attack and is completely irresponsible.
Chris I do not see a contradiction. Liberals will not criticize or protest blacks killing blacks. Liberals have imposed very strict gun laws in Chicago, what liberal wants to admit they don’t work…don;t matter…don’t stop the killers from obtaining guns?
Surely you are not so dense that you cannot see this as irony rather than contradiction.
“Your comment comes dangerously close to justifying the attack and is completely irresponsible. ”
The things that were said by PP officials that I have posted are not lies and they were not “made up” by the right wing or anyone else! The idea of crushing a baby in one place to extract a heart and another a liver may not be offensive to you but it is to millions of Americans.
Nothing justifies murder. Insanity only partially excuses it; the person is still responsible. I have not in any way justified these murders. If this man believed what he did based on what I saw/heard on the video his sad little statement is understandable in terms of human kindness and respect for human life
I find what I said entirely responsible!