Congressman King: No Need for Hearings on Islamic Extremism
The list of individuals lining up to attack Rep. Peter King’s decision to hold hearings on so-called “Radical Islam” is far and wide. From Muslim “crybaby” Congressman Keith Ellison to Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee to the sheriff of Los Angeles to hip hop model Kim Kardashian to leftist ministers to the effervescent whiners and terrorist sympathizers at the Council on America-Islamic Relations, it appears folks from all folks of life and politics are ganging up on the New York Republican for this supposed stigmatic decision.
And you know, perhaps these folks are right. Maybe this was an unnecessary move on the part of Congressman King. Maybe there was no need to hold these hearings.
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I agree. What a waste of time and money it was to call CAIR and other Muslim groups and individuals for something that has already been known for well over 14 centuries. Let’s go straight to the “good” book to find out.
Koran (4:89) – “They but wish that ye should reject faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing: But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah. But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.”
Koran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement”
Koran (5:51) – “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.”
Koran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them
Koran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.”
Koran (9:23) – “O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers“
Koran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
Koran (9:30) – “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!”
Koran (33:60-62) – “If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.”
Koran (47:3-4) – “Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners”
Crucifixion, chopping off heads, fingers and feet, slaying infidels, nah, that can’t be radical, can’t it? Of course not!
Or this most recent “act” of Islamic “kindness”.
So yeah, I agree with Ellison, Jackson and company. This is not “radical Islam”. This is mainstream Islam, straight out of the Koran. Look it up. Or if you want to isolate and check the verses about violence and avoidance of Muslims to non-Muslims, go here.
“Oh, but, Nedd, you do know most American Muslims really don’t believe or do that stuff, don’t you?”
I suppose. Perhaps you’re referring to Muslims who don’t know their Koran, right, the so-called “moderate Muslims.” OK, fine.
But what about those who do? Does the Koran instruct Muslims to kill unbelievers, cut off body parts and crucify them or does it not? I mean, do these verses exist in the Koran or don’t they?
So depending how you want to look at it, all Muslims are radical. It all depends on how you want to interpret “radical”. Most any rationally minded individual would classify crucifiers, beheaders and supporters of such heinous activities as radical.
But if a Muslim is defined as an adherent to the texts of the Koran, then regardless of their knowledge of what their so-called “holy book” contains, they all are radicals.
Or, to put it in oxymoronic fashion, they’re all mainstreamers; thus affirming a saying known in Internet circles, “there may be moderate Muslims but there’s only one Islam.”
So why should Rep. King say that he wants to track down all the radical Islamists who are part of the Al Qaida network? Should he be concerned about all Muslims?
“Oh, but, Nedd, you are a bigot. You hate Muslims. You want to stereotype them all.”
Actually the Koran has done a good job of stereotyping without my assistance. I mean, there’s one Koran, right? And there’s just one Muslim religion, right? I’m not aware of there being various sects of Islam, unlike Christian denominations like Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Catholic, etc.
Let’s take a couple examples of denominations, like the Lutheran and Presbyterian churches. The Lutheran Church has three different synods: the Wisconsin Synod, the Missouri Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA). The Wisconsin & Missouri Synods are conservative in their worldviews, opposing same sex marriage and abortion. The ELCA is more supportive both. The Presbyterian Church has two synods: the Presbyterian Church of America and the Presbyterian Church USA. The Church of America, of which the well known Coral Ridge Church of Ft. Lauderdale, FL is part of, is socially the equivalent to the Wisconsin & Missouri Synods. The Church USA is more in line with the left leaning ELCA.
Both denominations and their factions generally embrace the Bible as the Word of God, even though the left wingers in the ELCA and Church USA stray away from some portions of it. Both denominations and their factions, as well as others like Methodist, Baptist, Catholic, Episcopalian, Church of Christ, Church of God, etc, generally regard Biblical principles as ones all should live by, though they may have varied interpretations of the Bible. They all believe in different forms of church government they, based on the interpretations they see in the scriptures.
But we know of only one Islam. You cannot find in the phone book church headings that categorize Islam into different denominations the way Christian churches are split. You certainly won’t see “Moderate Islam” next to any Yellow Pages ads under church listings on church, umm, mosque doors.
So how are we supposed to interpret Islam? How is Rep. King supposed to interpret it? Frankly, he is more or less beating around the edges of the truth. The fact is all Islam is radical (or “mainstream”) by virtue of the texts in the Koran.
This means all Muslims should be treated suspiciously, especially those we don’t know personally. After all, who can always tell by an outward appearance that one is a “normal” Muslim?
“But, Nedd, there you go again, stereotyping, lumping all Muslims into one basket”.
Sorry, I can’t help that. Based on what’s written in the Koran, if I were to sit down at the table with a Muslim (actively practicing or not) stranger in one’s home or at a restaurant, what assurance(s) do I have that I won’t be attacked with a butcher knife, ax or similar object because I do not believe in Allah or Mohammed? How do I know for sure that at any given moment that he won’t suddenly recall a graphic text in the Koran and literally apply it by clubbing me or taking on some other form of violence?
I have no such assurances. I can’t guarantee that just because I don’t live in a Middle Eastern nation that I won’t be attacked. The more than ample numbers of Islamic killings here in the U.S. and disproportionate number of Muslim onslaughts (compared to other religions) do not necessarily persuade me that I am safe around any Muslim, particularly those I do not know.
”But isn’t Christianity violent? Doesn’t the Bible sanction killing in the same way you read the Koran?”
Those are two good questions. As for Christianity being violent, if you want to call it that, about the only claims to that can be made over the last 25 years are the shootings of two abortionists, “Dr.” Barnard Sleppian in 1998 and “Dr.” George Tiller in 2009. Those murders, while not sanctioned by any God fearing and loving Christian, were strictly targeted at those who killed babies in the womb and not indiscriminately. You did not hear the words “Jesus Akbar” or something similar shouted prior to the attacks.
However, you will find little, if any, other examples of any murder or attack done in the name of the Christian faith.
Now as for contrasts between the Bible and the Koran, this page will provide some help to your thinking. But on a strictly scriptural level, may I offer my personal experience as a Christian why any such comparison between the Christian and Islamic text totally fails.
In the strictest of contexts, the Christian scriptures have never advocated violence in any way, shape or form. This can be stated since the Christian faith is based on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as laid out in the New Testament. But since the Christian faith includes the Old Testament and since Old Testament prophecy predicted the coming of Jesus Christ (or as Jews call Him, the Messiah), we can and should look to the Old Testament, also known as the Old Covenant.
There are indeed passages of violence in the Old Testament that are adequately explained for the average reader. And there are a few others, such as God’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 (for deviant homosexual activity, not inhospitality as homosexual groups claim) with fire and brimstone, and passages in Leviticus calling for severe punishment on those engaging in sexual conduct with relatives of one’s family or spouse’s family.
But such should be viewed more in line with the fact that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob hated sin and when its practitioners did what God told them not to do, they were sometimes met with the fate of death. God was a pure and holy God and certain groups and individuals met their fate thru their willful disobedience and sin. Not all sins committed resulted in death. But some did. Some of the wicked were punished by the sword and some were struck dead by the Lord. Why the Lord did what He did back then, I confess I don’t have all the answers. I admit that. And many won’t be revealed, if at all, until we get to “the other side” (Heaven for those of who proclaim Jesus as Lord).
However, at no point in the Old Testament do you find any torture on the part of any of God’s people. You also cannot find an instance of crucifixion. You do find an instance of beheading in the Old Testament when David slew Goliath; however, the chopping off of Goliath’s head occurred after he was dead, not before. You also do find an instance of hanging as occurred in the book of Esther. And yes, there were slayings (by the sword) but again, that should be interpreted as punishment for gross sin and not necessarily because the ones killed were disbelievers in Jehovah God. God did use the wicked at times (such as Pharaoh and Jehu) to achieve His purposes. So it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that punishment in the Old Testament was not necessarily for refusal to believe in Jehovah God and that punishments that did occur were for gross sin.
In the New Testament, there are ZERO instances of Christians fighting for jehad. You will find the slaying of Christian leaders during the Book of Acts as well as John the Baptist’s beheading in the gospels. But since Jesus Christ paid the price for all sins of all humanity in the New Testament (or New Covenant) by being crucified for us, there was no more need for God to strike down people for their gross sins, to continue to institute human efforts to destroy evil or animal sacrifices to atone for sin. Jesus paid it all in full!
By contrast, Allah has required for over 1400 years for Muslims to kill those who do not believe in Islam. The atrocities done in the name of Islam are too innumerable to list here but many are well known, not the least of which was 9/11. The two religions are diametrically opposed to each other. The differences are stark and are too many to be named here but if you want a fairly exhaustive list of them, check them out here.
”Aren’t there good Muslims, like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser”?
By all human understanding, Dr. Jasser is a fine patriot. He probably is a person I would enjoy a good lunch or dinner with. I have no qualms about that. But he does have a problem. And that is his faith. He identifies Muslim groups and organizations like CAIR as radical and political. And from all signs he has sought to distance himself from them.
As to the faith Dr. Jasser claims to love, as he notes in his testimony to Congress, frankly, it’s hard to see it. As stated earlier, while there may be moderate Muslims, there is only one Islam. And I cannot find anywhere on his site or in any quotes or articles of his elsewhere that he repudiates any of the verses like the above ones that cause division and hatred to exist between Muslims and Jews and Christians.
But if Dr. Jasser were to call for any of those verses to be removed, he would be excommunicated as a Muslim. Like the Bible, verses in the Koran warn of those who seek to remove them. Thus my question is thus this – is Dr. Jasser willing to pay that price? I certainly cannot see the beauty of the faith he claims to love.
A website that specifically called for divisive verses to be removed, www.reformislam.org, was online for years but a recent search for it now results in the appearance of a portal page. The site was run by a so-called reformer to the Muslim “faith” but it appears he was either cast out of Islam or no longer believes what he originally penned.
But that aside, notwithstanding Dr. Jasser’s apparent patriotism and love for his version of Islam, it appears that form of religion does not exist. So while I will not call him out on this matter, I do not feel he can sufficiently reform his religion. Virtually none of these so-called moderates come out and do so. Plus we don’t know what qualifies as moderate.
In the end, I have to come to the conclusion that all Muslims are either hypocrites or terrorists. They’re hypocrites if they don’t believe in the whole Koran or terrorists if they do. I see no middle ground. Thus as much as I may hate to say it, I have to put Dr. Jasser on the hypocrite list since he doesn’t subscribe to the jehad verses in the Koran.
As such, the sooner the public and elected officials come to view Islam and the Koran literally for what it is and that technically all Muslims are potential terrorists, the sooner we will be able to eradicate this problem from our shores.
And if that means deporting all Muslims or asking them to renounce their affiliation to Islam, so be it. The nation’s safety is more important than their religion since Islam is not the religion of peace but of war and hate, something even the hard leftist comedian Bill Maher agrees with.
Of course I admit this may seem truly radical in the definition of the word but if the public cannot differentiate hypocritical Islam from terrorist Islam, then what are we supposed to do? We can live with hypocrites. We do every day. But we cannot live with terrorists, meaning those who are literal adherent of every word of the Koran. The sooner Rep. King and others like him who both have the power and will to put a stop to this can frankly address this critical problem, the sooner our nation will be safer.
Profiling Muslims is absolutely essential to the safety of America. We may be pilloried and pummeled for this view but there are no terrorist Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and atheists committing atrocities in the name of Allah and Mohammed. Groups like CAIR can howl and threaten to sic the ACLU to keep America unsafe but in the end we must profile and view Islam exactly as it laid out in the Koran without a scintilla of denial or we will end up paying a stiff price for not doing so.
Dr. Martin Luther King paid heftily in the 1960s to ensure the conveyance and protection of civil rights for blacks as well as all Americans. The question nearly a half century later is this: is the New York Congressman by the same last name (as well as other members of Congress) willing to pay in the same fashion (if necessary) in order for the right of all Americans to live, let alone be entitled to their civil rights. Because if we don’t have the right to live, civil rights are moot. And we may well lose both unless we do the politically incorrect and unprecedented thing and look at Islam and the Koran exactly for what it is. And if that means purging Muslims from our shores, it must be done. The right to life comes before liberty, pursuit of happiness and civil rights. Civil rights means zilch without life. And life and lives will be lost unless political correctness on Islam is buried 6 feet under.
God save America!