Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz elevated fringe anti-Muslim conspiracy theories to the level of a U.S. Senate hearing on Tuesday, inviting a panelist who said that leading Muslim American civil rights organizations are infiltrated by terrorists and that the Obama administration is covering it up.
The hearing, titled “Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts To Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism,” was designed to let Cruz criticize the administration’s refusal to use the term “radical Islamic terrorism” and the removal of the world “jihadist” from FBI training documents.
Chris Gaubatz, who Cruz invited to testify, accused prominent Muslim-American charities of being front groups for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and said that “the global Islamic movement” had infiltrated the FBI and Department of Homeland Security. Gaubatz’s comments drew no scorn or correction from Republican lawmakers.
Gaubatz is a staffer at Understanding the Threat, a nonprofit organization founded by former FBI agent John Guandolo. Guandolo is known for his bizarre claims and erratic behavior, including stating that CIA Director John Brennan is a secret Muslim convert. Like many others on the ultra far right, Guandolo claims that “the most prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are all controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood,” the pan-Arab Islamist movement whose Egyptian branch briefly took power in Egypt before being deposed by a coup.
Gaubatz said he had worked as an undercover agitator at the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a mainstream Muslim group that advocates against Islamophobia and for civil liberties. He claimed that Hamas, the Islamist faction that rules the Gaza Strip, was “doing business as CAIR,” “coordinating with Bin Laden and his associates,” and had local “Hamas chapter offices” “conspiring to influence Congress.” Gaubatz also accused both the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the largest organization of American Muslims, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a prominent Muslim rights advocacy group, of being front groups for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Gaubatz’s testimony seemed to be built entirely out of anti-Islamic conspiracy theories, but no Republican member of Congress condemned his remarks. Gaubatz went on to say that the FBI and DHS had been infiltrated by pro-Hamas jihadists — based on the fact that the FBI and Department of Homeland Security had “recruitment and outreach booths” at a 2008 ISNA conference. He also noted that two Muslim members of Congress, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., and Andre Carson, D.-Ind, spoke “at the Muslim Brotherhood event.”
As for the FBI’s wording choices, in 2011, Wired revealed that FBI training documents referred to “Mainstream Muslims” as “violent” and “radical,” called the Muslim Prophet Muhammad a “cult leader,” and labeled Islamic acts of charity a “funding mechanism for combat.” Later that year, the FBI director announced a “comprehensive review” of its training materials that relate to religion – something Cruz called a “purge” motivated by “political correctness.”
Ironically, the Obama administration’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) program has itself been assailed for targeting Muslim Americans while ignoring non-Muslim variations of extremism. Others question the effectiveness of the program, warning that it over-simplifies a complex problem. Last year, one Air Force Research Laboratory re-issued a paper that warned that wearing a hijab, a Muslim head covering, can contribute to “passive terrorism.”
Blanket surveillance aimed at American Muslims or targeting mosques where no reasonable suspicion exists has a poor track record. The New York Police Department’s “Demographic Unit” targeted and spied on thousands of Muslim New Yorkers for several years, and didn’t generate a single terrorism lead.
Cruz ended the event on Tuesday by taking offense at the analogy drawn by some Democrats between the Ku Klux Klan and Christianity, on one side, and terrorist organizations that invoke Islam, on the other.
“Several of my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle made invocations of the Ku Klux Klan, and drew the analogy of blaming the Klan on Christians to addressing directly and candidly the threat of jihadism and radical Islamic terrorism,” he said.
“I would hope that all of us on both sides of the aisles could agree that the Ku Klux Klan is evil and bigoted and has no place in civilized society, and I would note that the suggestion that that could somehow be extended to the Christian faith, Dr. Martin Luther King and many of the civil rights pioneers were Christian ministers!”
The fact that Cruz was vindicating the analogy rather than refuting it was apparently lost on the Texas Senator.
Top Photo: Cruz questions witnesses during a 2014 hearing about ISIS.
GET INVOLVED with the CounterJihad movement! The CounterJihad is a movement of American citizen-activists dedicated to safeguarding the country from the danger posed by Islamic Supremacists.
Sharia: The totalitarian Islamist doctrine of sharia mandates the spread of Islam by all believers and submission to its laws even by non-believers. Not all Muslims practice this, but those who do represent a major threat to the free world.
Let’s band together and FORCE our USELESS politicians to abide by their Oath of Office to place our NATIONAL SECURITY as their #1 priority in accordance with (IAW) our Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 to “provide for common defense” of this nation.
In addition the Guarantee Clause, Article IV, Section 4 states: The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion;
How it the world can our politicians completely ignore the Muslim Brotherhood and the document they wrote to destroy us from within at our own hands.
https://www.facebook.com/thecounterjihad
I’m Vietnam era vet with an an engineering degree at a Fortune 100 aerospace company. I am surrounded by Muslims whom are naturalized citizens from India, Pakistan, Iran, etc, working on sensitive military programs. They support our military and our allies on a daily basis. They are patriotic, smart, disciplined, competitive and motivated protecting all of our rights on a daily basis.
It is un-American to paint them all with a single broad brush. We owe them a debt of gratitude.
On one hand we read this:
And, on the other hand, we read this:
“On the Fourth of July: None of us has Inalienable Rights if American Muslims don’t”, at http://www.juancole.com/2016/07/inalienable-american-muslims.html
Excerpts:
So it seems the American non-Muslims are in a dilemma over how to treat American Muslims.
I came on this site to find a break away take from the mainstream media propoganda machine , only to be dissapointing with the classic reductionist, intellectually lazy, cointelpro talking points I hear everywhere else.
The utterly nonsensical kitchen sink gobbledygook catchphrases such as “Conspiracy Theory” has come to be the gold standard for the hive mind consensus trance hipster journalist on the race to the bottom of contemporary investigative reporting. It’s come to be the knee jerk reaction of the priest class of corporately controlled state media, i.e. Provda, RT.
The labeling of a political viewpoint as being a ” Conspiracy Theory” was invented by the CIA to create a veil of castration and naked ridicule upon those questioning the narrative of the status quo.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-23/1967-he-cia-created-phrase-conspiracy-theorists-and-ways-attack-anyone-who-challenge
It’s become the defacto coat of armor for all journalist to dismiss, without proper investigation, the real and credible threats openly eroding the pillars of freedom and liberty to all who inhabit this fragile little planet.
The idea of a media elite, and their army of minios that wave a magic wand and steer the massive waves in the ocean of political opinion in the global body politic is becoming increasingly obvious as a failing mechanism for the Globalist and their brain dead zombie following them on their march towards ultra liberal pop sensationalized utopia.
The passing of Brexit on June 23rd was a clear indicator that the long standing institutions that dismiss the valid and perpetually growing voice of a concervative minded electorate has reached a critical mass. The left wing media will need to actually bring fact based emperically valid substance to their arguments instead of government sponsored propoganda talking points to persuade an ever growing free thinking society.
I came on this news site because it was associated with the prestigious Glenn Greenwald, I have to say I find the content of this news blog typical establishment mainstream bullshit I find in the NY Times, Huffington Post and the rest of the noise touting the platitudes if a dying and antiquated power structure.
Happy 4th of July!
It’s unfortunate that this site supports Islamic Jihad
I am not concerned with what this site supports and does not support, but here’s what traditional Muslims think what Jihad is:
“The Spiritual Significance of Jihad”, at https://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/vol-9-no-1/spiritual-significance-jihad-seyyed-hossein-nasr/spiritual-significance-jihad
One of the ways to distort a path is to take some of the key terms it uses and distort their meanings. Those who have done so are Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Excerpt:
Read the whole article at the above link.
Take time to read: Islam’s Threat Exposed On Capitol Hill, Chris Gaubatz Testifies: Sharia Law The Epicenter! Commentary By Adina Kutnicki
Posted on June 30, 2016 AKIN to a metastasizing cancer, Islam’s tentacles are enveloping America, as well as the west at large. But for this discussion, let’s just stick to the heretofore superpower of the world.
AS always, alongside a treacherous terrain, it is the case that a less than truthful diagnosis is deadly. No ifs, ands, or buts.
THAT being established, when anyone in leadership (or within the so-called elite) babbles about Sharia Law, opining, it is a harmless set of rules which in no way impinge upon non-Muslims, thus, its basis must be respected akin to any other religion alongside the multicultural hue, the only rational response is: slap them upside the head! Really. [SNIP] https://adinakutnicki.com/2016/06/30/islams-threat-exposed-on-capitol-hill-chris-gaubatz-testifies-sharia-law-the-epicenter-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki
Questions for you:
1. What do you think Shariah is, and what is your basis for your understanding of it?
2. Are you aware that Muslims have different understandings of Shariah? Do you know what many contemporary Sufis think of Shariah?
3. Are you aware that when a Muslim prays, fasts, serve others, carry out charitable acts, etc., that they tend to follow Shariah rules as they understand?
4. Are you aware that obeying the laws of the land is according to the Shariah of many, many, many Muslims?
5. Do you know that there are aspects of Shariah that are in need of re-interpretation and reformation, and the best place to do that is the West, for it requires challenging the orthodoxies, which is best done in the West because of the freedoms it offers?
6. Do you know what Steven Colbert said about the banning of Shariah? He said that the banning is a solution looking for a problem. Do you know what he meant by that?
I do not care for ANYONE that believes in Islam! Your leader was a child molester, pedophile and that is disgusting to me!
I didn’t ask you about your feelings towards Muslims and their Prophet (S).
You posted a few things and I asked you a few questions in a very reasonable manner.
Are you going to answer my questions?
I also asked you this:
Are you going to address this as well?
I am tired of responding to your repeated questions and I have other fish to fry. GOODBYE!
You actually did not answer my questions. You simply resorted to expressing your feelings towards the Muslims and their Prophet (S).
You’ve copied and pasted a lot here, but it did not tire you even though it is apparent that you did that without thinking, so lack of thinking while copying and pasting should not tire you. Yet, you claim that you are tired of responding to the following questions, even though I don’t see your answers in this thread (where are they?).
Here’re my questions, again:
1. What do you think Shariah is, and what is your basis for your understanding of it?
2. Are you aware that Muslims have different understandings of Shariah? Do you know what many contemporary Sufis think of Shariah?
3. Are you aware that when a Muslim prays, fasts, serve others, carry out charitable acts, etc., that they tend to follow Shariah rules as they understand?
4. Are you aware that obeying the laws of the land is according to the Shariah of many, many, many Muslims?
5. Do you know that there are aspects of Shariah that are in need of re-interpretation and reformation, and the best place to do that is the West, for it requires challenging the orthodoxies, which is best done in the West because of the freedoms it offers?
6. Do you know what Steven Colbert said about the banning of Shariah? He said that the banning is a solution looking for a problem. Do you know what he meant by that?
7. I said: I am not aware that it (i.e., [the establishment of] a GLOBAL Caliphate, and authority of it given to that ambassador) is written in the Quran, and then asked you: Can you please show me where it is written in the Quran — Islam’s primary source?
Where have you responded to these questions in this thread?
I think it’s clear that you came here to throw some rocks at the Muslims, and are not interested in a rational and sober discussion.
But I ask you again: Are you willing to, and capable of, engaging in a reasonable and rational discussion with a Muslim on what exactly the Quran says on the issues you’ve brought up which you suggested are according to the teachings of the Quran?
Yes or No?
So far, the answer is No. That is, you are neither willing to, nor capable of, engaging in a rational discussion. Or, at the very least, you are not capable of because of low energy, as you get tired of NOT ANSWERING questions I have asked you in this thread.
WHAT IS SHARIAH?
A Sufi Muslim’s Understanding of Shariah You Won’t Hear About:
Every creature on earth and beyond follows a pattern that defines it and identifies it as unique with a distinct physics or behavior profile unto itself.
For example a dog cannot be a cat, a cat a mouse etc. They are limited and defined given the parameters of their design.
The human being, in his animal self is also subject to this “natural” evolutionary design. The major difference between humankind and the rest of the animal world is the development of the frontal lobe and the evolution and plasticity of the cerebral cortex.
The overwhelming majority of the life of animals is inbreed, “written” within their DNA and cannot under most ordinary situations be altered. Granted among some animals, especially higher on the evolutionary scale have some learning capacities. Some simple animals seem also to “learn” from experiences, but this is more from repetitive experiences and not from reasoning per se.
Mankind gifted with these two developments nearly entirely learns behavior, empathy, concepts shaped within him through the experience of life.
Shariah is the the exemplary pattern lived, modeled and communicated through the emergence in every era of the prime pinnacle of guided human evolutionary mutations. These mutations are known as the Prophets, Messengers and “enlightened” teachers that are known and some unknown throughout the history of human kind.
Shariah is the attempt to catalog, communicate and contextualize their exemplary life as way through following in their example, humanity as the potential to reach its highest potential as human beings.
Shariah has been much misunderstood and wrongly practiced and defined by the ignorant, Muslims and non-Muslims. It has become a collection of restrictions, judgments and jurisprudence practiced without self-consciousness and higher referencing. In this form it is mostly a detraction and distraction from the “meaning full” and therefore, quite rightly despised.
Shariah has to be part of a holistic approach with the intent to surrender one’s habitual behaviors, concepts and notions of existence to the truth that is resident at the core of everything, especially its glory of Light within the human heart.
In reality, there is nothing but Shariah, in the sense that not even an atom, a quark, an intention, divine or otherwise that is not at it’s core, the very fabric of existence, without which there would have never been a question or questioner regarding Shariah in the first place.
Question: How do we reconcile this description of the Shariah with the Quranic injunctions and Prophetic traditions that seem to indicate that Shariah is also a set of laws, e.g., in matters of marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc.?
All Quranic injunctions and Prophetic traditions that results in “laws” and injunctions are born out of the “original wisdom patterning” that underlies the created world. In present day “Islam” not all the laws and injunctions meet the test and qualify as true to the original patterning. Many have been extrapolated through history as a result of political influence, both secular and “religious”. Many have come about by the best efforts of the scholars and at times they themselves are lost in the influences of their circumstances. That is why the Prophet many times counseled that if you hear something that is attributed to him, to test it against the teachings of the Quran and your own heart!. We all need to reflect on these matters and not leave them solely to the judgment of the Ulema.
The Divine messaging….through the universal sacred patterning and geometry….is the underlying foundation of all things. From this the Quran….its reality..has always been present in the world. This wisdom is revealed at intervals, when the Creator “sends” His messenger to the world to remind and renew…appropriate to the time and place in history. From this foundation…..as life carries on in it myriad of expression….we look for what needs we have and apply them to our own contemporary circumstance. Yes there are “clear” laws and injunctions that have come directly out of the Quran and the Prophetic person, but, context, sensibilities, applications and Mercy must be part of the equation or we surely could use these so-called “clear” laws and injunctions to oppress others for power and obedience to corrupt individuals and systems that keep the letter of the law, but not the spirit and since the spirit is ever with us, it must have its voice, lest the Shariah become a hardened hammer than what it was intended to be, a doorway to rebalancing what has become imbalance.
Frank,
Wouldn’t the best way for the USA to protect itself from the ‘metastasizing cancer’ of Islam’s ‘tentacles’ ‘enveloping’ America to get out of the Middle East by closing the hundreds of military bases there and bringing all the troops/CIA agents/agent provocateurs/assassins/US installed dictators, home?
“Frank” illustrates the stark contrast between irrational fear and fear mongering of Islam/Muslims and legitimate, sober and scholarly criticism of Islam and Muslims, which is extremely important and much needed and is healthy.
“He” comes here and posts some comments, quoting someone, in order to show how the non-Muslim Americans should fear Islam.
When I asked him a few questions in order to have a rational discussion with him, he threw some insults at the Muslims’ prophet and said something nasty about the Muslims, with no regard for the fact that there are all kinds of Muslims, and ran away.
So he’s not the one trying to build bridges or engaged in sober critical analyses of the various forms of Islam that are in existence today. His agenda is fear mongering and irrational fear of Islam/Muslims.
So, the next time someone wants to know what scholarly and rational critique of Islam/Muslims is, the answer is that it’s not what “Frank” has shown in this thread.
The Center for Security Policy felt it important for Americans to better understand– and, then, be able to successfully contend with– those that attempt to destroy or subvert our way of life. As making our nation’s enemies’ threat doctrines available is a key part of their educational efforts and present the blueprint for the Muslim Brotherhood in America, known as An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America or, in America’s largest terrorist prosecution in US federal court, Government Exhibit 003-0085 3:04-CR-240-G in U.S. v Holy Land Foundation, et al.
In August of 2004, an alert Maryland Transportation Authority Police officer observed a woman wearing traditional Islamic garb videotaping the support structures of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge, and conducted a traffic stop. The driver was Ismail Elbarasse and detained on an outstanding material witness warrant issued in Chicago in connection with fundraising for Hamas. The FBI’s Washington Field Office subsequently executed a search warrant on Elbarasse’s residence in Annandale, Virginia. In the basement of his home, a hidden sub-basement was found; it revealed over 80 banker boxes of the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. One of the most important of these documents made public to date was entered into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation trial. It amounted to the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan for the United States and was entitled, “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.” The Explanatory Memorandum was written in 1991 by a member of the Board of Directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America and senior Hamas leader named Mohammed Akram. It had been approved by the Brotherhood’s Shura Council and Organizational Conference and was meant for internal review by the Brothers’ leadership in Egypt. It was certainly not intended for public consumption, particularly in the targeted society: the United States. For these reasons, the memo constitutes a Rosetta stone for the Muslim Brotherhood, its goals, modus operandi and infrastructure in America. It is arguably the single most important vehicle for understanding a secretive organization and should, therefore, be considered required reading for policy-makers and the public, alike.
Another extraordinarily important element of the Memorandum is its attachment. Under the heading “A List of Our Organizations and Organizations of Our Friends,” Akram helpfully identified 29 groups as Muslim Brotherhood fronts. Many of them are even now, some twenty-two years later, still among the most prominent Muslim- American organizations in the United States. Worryingly, the senior representatives of these groups are routinely identified by U.S. officials as “leaders” of the Muslim community in this country, to be treated as “partners” in “countering violent extremism” and other outreach initiatives. Obviously, this list suggests such treatment translates into vehicles for deep penetration of the American government and civil society.
We urge the readers of this pamphlet to share it with others— family members, friends, business associates and most especially those in a position to help adopt policies that will secure our country against the threat posed by shariah and its most effective and aggressive promoters, the Muslim Brotherhood.
More about the Explanatory Memorandum (from Shariah: The Threat to America):
The following Muslim Brotherhood document was entered into evidence in the U.S. v Holy Land Foundation trial, and is a primary source threat document that provides new insights into global jihad organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood. These documents (covered extensively in chapter four) define the structure and outline of domestic jihad threat entities, associated non-governmental organizations and potential terrorist or insurgent support systems. The Memorandum also describes aspects of the global jihad’s strategic information warfare campaign and indications of its structure, reach and activities. It met evidentiary standards to be admissible as evidence in a Federal Court of law.
In the original document, the first 16 pages are in the original Arabic and the second are English translations of the same. It is dated May 22, 1991 and titled “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America” (Memorandum). The document includes an Attachment 1 that contains “a list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”
The Memorandum expressly recognizes the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) as the controlling element of these organizations and expressly identifies the Muslim Brotherhood as the leadership element in implementing the strategic goals. The Memorandum is reproduced here in its official Federal Court translation, as Government Exhibit 003-0085 3:04-CR-240-G in U.S. v Holy Land Foundation, et al. with punctuation, line spacing and spelling intact.
From the Explanatory Memorandum— the Muslim Brotherhood in America in its own words:
“The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2013/05/25/an-explanatory-memorandum-from-the-archives-of-the-muslim-brotherhood-in-america
You chose to run a story about Gaubatz, but not Phillip Haney DHS whistleblower. Haney is very credible. He describes in great detail how
documents and databases from his investigations were purged by DHS.
Why?
Mike: I agree with you and suggest folks read his book: “See Something, Say Nothing” SFR sits down with DHS whistleblower Phil Haney. TAKE TIME TO LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW! http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2016/05/27/how-dhs-shut-down-investigations-into-islamic-jihadists-that-could-have-prevented-san-bernardino/
@Frank Livingston:
Amazing gymnastics with Islam’s primary source, the Quran! Whoever did it was one ignorant person! And whoever thinks that this is how all Muslims interpret the Quran is seriously wrong.
I would love to see “Frank Livingston” quote the portions of the Quran that he thinks suggest these things so I can see how he reads them.
Sufi Muslim: I was quoting a 230 year old letter and I suggest you read it! What we faced 230 years ago we are facing now with the Muslim Brotherhood and the other Muslim organizations that want a GLOBAL Caliphate, an Ummah ruled by Shariah/Islamic law! Here is a quote from the letter:
“The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every musselman [muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
This statement was a part of a March 28, 1786, letter from John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, the United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Continental Congress, concerning their conversation with Tripoli’s to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman as to why his pirates/terrorists hijacked our merchant ships, stole the ships and cargo while holding the sailors for ransom. (Source: Founders:
http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-09-02-0315
http://memory.loc.gov/master/mss/mtj/mtj1/005/0400/0430.jpg
http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~argyll/From%20JOHN%20ADAMS%20And%20THOMAS%20JEFFERSON.pdf
I am not aware that it (i.e., [the establishment of] a GLOBAL Caliphate, and authority of it given to that ambassador) is written in the Quran.
Can you please show me where it is written in the Quran — Islam’s primary source?
That’s what I’d like to know.
UAE agrees that CAIR is a terror supporting group.
I do not know enough about CAIR to form an opinion about them, nor do I cair (pun intended).
However, it seems illogical to my simple mind that if an organization freely functioning in the U.S. was a terror supporting group, that they’d be suspended, charged and tried in court and, if found guilty, their leaders, and possibly other members, will be imprisoned.
Can you share with me if that has ever been done? If so, were they found guilty? If so, then how come they are still allowed to exist and function?
I am asking these questions with the utmost sincerity as I really don’t know much about CAIR.
After working for over 40-years in the federal, state and local government it was quite obvious to me our USELESS politicians from a mayor to president ignore their Oath of Office, our NATIONAL SECURITY and our Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 “provide for common defense” of this nation and instead worship at the alter of political correctness (i.e. Cultural Marxism) in order to gather campaign contributions and gain votes in order to get reelected. The Muslim Brotherhood wants to slowly form a global caliphate; an Ummah ruled by Shariah/Islamic law while ISIS/ISIL/Islamic state wants to do it fast. What is the difference between them? NOTHING, except deception i.e. how long to reach a global caliphate and the methods of doing so.
Will you ask your two Senators and House member to co-sponsor these bills and ask your friends to do the same? On November 3rd Sen. Cruz (R-Texas) filed (S. 2230) and Rep. Diaz-Balart (R-Florida) filed (H.R.3892) both bills titled ‘‘Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2015’’. These bills will require the Secretary of State to submit a report to Congress on the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization, and for other purposes.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2230/text
Not just CAIR, but also the Muslim American Society . Which is equally as absurd.
The UAE “agrees” with that because of its own pissing match with the Muslim Brotherhood and the baseless rumors that CAIR takes marching orders from the MB. Indeed, in that region there’s been controversy about the Muslim Brotherhood: Egypt and Saudi Arabia, have claimed MB is a terrorist organization to yank the chain of Qatar, which supports the group.
It’s all politics. No one taken seriously in the U.S. think CAIR is a terrorist organization; the idea is preposterous.
As if there is anyone more preposterous than Mona posting on TI? Run on back to 4chan, troll. Your cover is blown.
Is that like the LIKUD party of ISRAEL?
Anyone recall the Red Scares and McCarthyism?
This is a totally avoidable debate. Once the Walls are up we will chuck Cruz right back where he came from and let him deal with his Syrian neighbors that have flooded his homeland. Rather, have them deal with him.
There have been currents within Christianity and Islam that are utterly against each other.
There’s nothing anyone can do about them.
They are not the ones for building bridges.
There are other Christians and Muslims who are there to build bridges.
Building something takes time and effort.
Destroying it takes much less time.
Funny, I’ve always thought of the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths as being essentially very similar to one another, part of the Abrahamic tradition – monotheistic, patriarchal, all working off the same creation story, Genesis, etc. Sibling rivalry, maybe?
Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. are all very different, let alone your various native American and native Australian and Pacific Islander belief systems. And of course secular atheism is just another belief system.
Personally, I joined them all, I figured that way I couldn’t go wrong: “Sure, I’m one of you!”
Just kidding, I’m actually a sun worshipper; the ancient Egyptians were right about that.
The doctrine of transcendent unity of religions, or the perennial wisdom, sees all orthodox religions, including the native American ones, as the radii on the same circle.
They differ on the circumference, which represents their outer forms, but merge at the center in the realm of the esoteric, the center being the Truth.
Those who are exclusivists do not see it that way as they just look at their different forms at the circumference and are not cognizant of their same inner essence.
They also tend to be quite judgmental, and some of them even carry hatred for each other.
Many Christians have treated Islam as a competing religion, like Apple vs Samsung.
Read Frithjof Schuon.
Nice summary.
Interesting. I tend to think of religion as being the source that gave rise to the twin pillars of modern civilization, i.e. science and law.
Science is just the observation and understanding of nature; something that monks and mystics began to do thousands of years ago, and has now become a systematic application of observation, experiment and theory, but science provides no guide as to how humans should behave towards one another. Those who’ve tried to apply their “science” to human society (social Darwinists, etc.) have created nothing but savage disasters.
Law was originally religious law, ten commandments etc., but evolved into the modern system of courts overseen by judges, laws written by elected legislators, prosecution and defense given equal access, etc. The only place science comes into law is in forensic evidence, etc. Ethical behavior is a matter of law, with its roots in all religious doctrines.
This isn’t to say that science and law are all that matters, but religion is now a matter of personal belief, mystical inspiration, etc. and religious texts are no longer viewed by rational people as literal truth, but rather as metaphorical works.
The throwbacks (like creationists in the US who say the Bible is the only truth, and thus deny science, and religious states that deny democratic law-making in favor of literal readings of the Quran, and thus persecute other religious groups), however, are a real problem; they are incompatible with modern civilization and multicultural societies.
I spent a great part of my life studying Islam as a source of law and a contributing factor to the establishment of a society and a civilization.
There are a few other ways to examine Islam and other religions.
I later moved on to examining Islam and, to an extent, other religions, as transformative paths that can be utilized to groom the self so that it reflects the higher qualities.
And that’s where I am at the moment.
However, I have also recognized that a person can be on a non-religious path to groom the self.
So it comes down to an individual choice. Whatever works for one, one should adopt it — though it may not work for others.
I am curious as to how one would be on a non-religious path to groom the self? The path must include interior discipline (cleansing), and while I think it’s possible to nurture this outside of faith-wisdom-religion traditions, I am wondering how you would suggest it? What comes to mind for me is self-reliance in nature, living close to natural, pure systems, opting-out of systems that negate “grooming.”
Grooming the self means developing it so that it reflects the higher consciousness, whose qualities include selflessness, generosity, love, peace, justice, not doing unto others what one doesn’t want done unto one, compassion, serving others without expectations, humility, seeing no otherness, forgiveness, lacking desire for power and control, etc., to varying degrees.
I know a few secularists who reflect the higher quite a bit. Obviously, they’ve figured out non-religious ways to develop their self.
The guiding light is already within us. We just need to figure out our own way to connect with it. There are as many ways as there are hearts.
These are some of the things that I know work for many; though some of them turn to Buddhism as well and find the cosmology of the self they seek.
The current political systems do not generally provide conducive environments for training the self so that it reflects the higher. It’s hard for a politician to be truthful, selfless, lacking attachments and desire for power and control, etc. and be successful; though there are exceptions.
ADDENDUM:
Take, for example, a few of the qualities of the higher self: Generosity, Attachment, Selflessness.
One way to groom the self so that it experiences these qualities could be for someone to identify something that they love and are attached to it. Then find someone who one thinks needs it more, and give it to them.
This way, the self would experience detachment, albeit with a bit of pain, but also generosity and selflessness, even if it is only to some extent.
Carrying out this act of generosity doesn’t have to be within the framework of a religion. Anyone can do it and experience these three qualities of the higher self.
This way, the lower self will yield to the higher to some extent, and the reward will be the joy that comes with such a selfless act. In other words, through such an act the self points to the light of the higher self.
Human beings recognize the value of such acts. Which is why, many, who have carried them out, report a sense of inner joy and satisfaction, often resulting in love.
Now, one can go further and carry out this act of giving, but do it to someone one dislikes, but expecting nothing in return.
The person at the receiving end may not appreciate it at first and may be suspicious. But what if they realize that the doer had done that act of generosity without expecting anything in return? Is it not possible that acts of generosity will cause the animosity between the two to eventually disappear?
And these acts don’t have to be between two individuals. They can be between two groups of people and even nations and countries.
Moreover, as I stated above, they don’t have to be within the framework of a religion. Quite often, it is the religion that causes people to behave in quite the opposite ways.
I have given an example of how one can groom one’s self to reflect three of the higher qualities without religion. I can certainly give more examples, but I’m sure you get my point.
“Take, for example, a few of the qualities of the higher self: Generosity, Attachment, Selflessness.”
should read: “Take, for example, a few of the qualities of the higher self: Generosity, Detachment, Selflessness.”
These are interesting points, but for those of us who have experienced the arbitary attacks of a corrupt government apparatus?
We will take the law into out own hands, we will demand a unambiguous application of Constitutional Law to our own situation as well as to those who hold the reins of power in our societies. We will not submit to a two-tiered justice system that persecutes the powerless and protects the powerful. This is guaranteed, do you understand? We will use every legal means at our disposal to achieve justice, and if those legal means are denied to us. . .
There’s some wonderful work in the area of children’s resilience (trauma, poverty, war) that speaks of the importance of attachment (care givers, family, pets, favorite blanket, faith community). In the main, I understand detachment, especially after deep diving in Buddhism, but I think “attachment” has received a bad rap simply because it seems to be the counter-pole to detachment, when in fact, perhaps the continuum are separate. I believe there are such a things as healthy attachment, and we are well served when we are aware of our various attachments and accept them as such.
Indeed!
Obviously, I’m not able to present the entire cosmology of the self in short posts here. I just wanted to give some basic ideas on the lower and higher self and how one can groom one’s self to reflect the higher without following a particular religious path, especially an organized religious path.
The discussion on this subject can be quite long and complex.
There are indeed some philosophical paradoxes.
For example, one can be very loving and suggest that one’s path is about love, yet, one can hate ignorance and violence.
Or, one can claim to be tolerant, but be intolerant of intolerance.
Yes. This, my friend, is why there is such a thing as “Theology on Tap.” One simply cannot groom the higher self without periodically drinking beers at the local pub with like-minded higher selves in training. Namaste
I’ve found complete cosmology of the self in the Sufi Islam I adhere to: the Islam of ibn Arabi, Rumi and similar others.
Others have to find their own paths.
As I have stated before: There are as many paths to the Truth as there are hearts.
However, I’ve met non religious people who reflect the higher to the extent that they do.
So I’m not going to suggest to them that they are on the wrong path. I’ve enjoyed their company and discussions with them, and find that I’ve much more in common with them than with many religious people who tend to be arrogant, exclusivists and judgmental.
Agreed. I frequently read poems from Hafiz, one of my favorites. You speak my language, friend. Peace on the journey…
Many thanks for a wonderful conversation. Take care,
I leave you with this poem by ibn Arabi:
My heart has become capable of every form:
It is a pasture for gazelles,
And a monastery for Christian monks,
And a temple for idols,
And the pilgrim to Ka`bah,
And the tablets of the Torah,
And the Book of the Qur’an.
I follow the religion of Love:
Whatever way Love’s camel takes,
That is my religion and my faith.
I do get your points and I appreciate you taking the time to write them. Indeed, it is “all straw” when the Truth is encountered.
dontya jus’ lovit….
“And now, ladieeeeeeeeeees and gentlemen……. far from the mongol hordes and the coliseums of days long gone and over doooooooooooooooo…. presenting the title fight of the decaaaaaaaaaaade……. in this corner weiging in at 500 pounds wearing the black trunks with the white scribblies and vest belt thing from the furthest reaches of the scorpion filled deserts of the middle east….. alaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah “the extremist” akbaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar (pause, sounds) and in this corner…….. weighing in at 150 pounds with the red white and blue trunks and the cross looking thingees from the lone star state of texaaaaaas…… ted “the grand inquisitoooooooor” croooooooooooooooooooooooz.”
LET’S GET READY TO RUM BULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
pardon me, there’s just too much material here.
Suddenly i believe in RE-INCARNATION, McCarthy was reborn as Cruz – they even look alike.
I say, let’s co-op c-span and put up a couple commentators for the blow by blow action in the new reality match of the century, and make it PAY PER VIEW.
Will the NRA pay for “sponsored by”?
The tabloids are now hyping “terror cells in the hood” articles.
America’s reward for not financing public mental health.
Maybe its Cruz’s “not for the public” thing so he can sell a book later…. publish and profit his findings on the taxpayer dime, with an alarming title of course, and a call to arms.
He’s a united states senator for god’s sake…..
America is in serious trouble by the McCarthyist’s….I mean seriously, this kind of nonsense was supposed to have died in the 50’s…. do the Texas school commission not do their job in the last 60 or so years? What is up with this retarded Senator? They are being fueled purely by right wing ultra extreme hateful Christian ideologies, being barely concealed in a suit, in the halls of American power, now that is scary.
It is not a conspiracy theory to say the MB is a terrorist organization, it is a fact. Those who support the jihadist threat doctrine of Sharia and the draconian punishments for leaving the faith and violating speech codes, to use just two examples, are extremists. Saying ‘No to Sharia’ is not McCarthyism, it is liberating for millions of Muslims and will help to bring the end to Islamic terrorism. This is what the Islamist’s fear most, an honest discussion of the problems inherent in the faith and strategies to survive it.
I noticed that you used the terms, Islamic, to refer to terrorism, and then referred to Islamists.
Do you think that Islam and Islamism, and Muslims and Islamists are the same?
Also, what do you think Sharia is, and are there any American Muslims who are demanding that the constitution and the laws of the U.S. be based on Shariah? Do you know that Steven Colbert has said that banning Shariah is like a solution that is looking for a problem?
Are you aware that the Judaic law is referred to as the Shariah of Moses?
Furthermore, are you aware that when a Muslim prays, fasts, engages in selfless service of others, etc, they do so according to the rules of the Shariah?
Are you also aware that there are many understandings and interpretations of Shariah?
Have you any idea that obeying the laws of the land is in fact according to the Shariah that many Muslims adhere to?
Lastly, do you realize that there are aspects of the Shariah that are in need of a reform, which can best be done in the West due to the freedoms it offers? Are you cognizant of the fact that the true reformers of the Shariah will be harmed in the Muslim world because it requires challenging the orthodoxies?
‘Radical Islam’ is NOT the name of the Driving Force behind both ISIS and Al Qaeda. The REAL name of their apocalyptic DEATH cult is the Wahhabi sect. The REASON we dare not use THAT name is because it is the State Religion of Saudi Arabia – the people who funded 9/11
you got the people who funded 911?
what about the people who PLANNED 911?
it might be a whole lot worse than you think.
Irony is lost on the State Department.
Although I am not inclined to give credit to the notion of reincarnation, the resemblance between Ted Cruz and Joseph McCarthy, both in behavior and appearance, gives me pause to reconsider. Unfortunately there is no reincarnated Edward R. Murrow to deflate this bloated ego, though there are plenty of sycophants on both sides of the isle to feed it.
Thanks for your posts. You saved me the trouble of posting a similar comment.
“Chris Gaubatz, who Cruz invited to testify”
never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for whom
The objective case of “who” is dead, Jim. ;^(
But, then, we live in a time when the style guides of major media outlets permit the use of the non-word, “snuck,” so whaddaya gonna do?
If you complain, they’ll just tell you that language evolves. And so it does. Sadly, it may also devolve, but they ain’t never gonna unnerstan that.
I wonder if the churches in the South still support the KKK or did they finally decide it was a losing proposition?
Emmons and Jilani: Read our nation’s history with Islam and Shariah/Islamic law.
Who said this, to whom, when, why and what have we ever done about it? Would you consider this statement to be contrary to our Constitution, our way of life, a danger to our National/Homeland Security and the preservation of our nation and our Constitution? Would you think these are words of an enemy? Surely, both the House and Senate studied this but where are the reports?
“The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every musselman [muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
This statement was a part of a March 28, 1786, letter from John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, the United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Continental Congress, concerning their conversation with Tripoli’s to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman as to why his pirates/terrorists hijacked our merchant ships, stole the ships and cargo while holding the sailors for ransom. (Source: Founders Online: http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-09-02-0315
Their 1,400 year old Shariah/Islamic law movement is not allowed by our Constitution Article VI.
Here are the main points in 1786; they the same today with the Muslim Brotherhood in America and their plan they wrote to destroy us from within by what they call their “Civilization-Jihad Process” plan.
a. “it was founded on the Laws of their prophet”;
b. “that it was written in their Koran”;
c. “that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners”;
d. “that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and”;
e. “to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and”;
f. “that every musselman [muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
g. “that it was a law that the first who boarded an Enemy’s Vessell should have one slave more than his share with the rest”;
h. “which operated as an incentive to the most desperate Valour and Enterprize;
i. “that it was the Practice of their Corsairs to bear down upon a ship;
j. for each sailor to take a dagger in each hand, and another in his mouth, and leap on board, which so terrified their Enemies that very few ever stood against them.”
k. “That he verily believed the Devil assisted his Countrymen, for they were almost always successful.
Please quote from the Quran and analyze what it says.
For that there’s http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm . They read it so we don’t have to. ;)
(Seriously, while I don’t recommend ignorance per se, the Quran is a terribly dull read, vague promises and threats repeated over and over interspersed with a few nuggets of the type religionofpeace collects. It’s definitely preferable to have a specialist handle this.)
I fully understand and appreciate what you get out of the Quran — most likely from a translation.
Others get something else out of it.
It illuminates some, and repels others.
http://zahrapublications.com/#theQuranAndItsTeachings
Complete fabrication….Sharia law is simply moral law or civil law as defined by our creator and never teaches to hurt any innocent. Stop decieving people about Islam.
The only law that came from the creator was the 10 commandments how come the muslims who claim to worship the same god never speak of that, instead they speak of the sharia which the rest of us know is islamic fictional. If we keep encouraging foolishness we will get foolishness from the cunning muslims
The Quran acknowledges and recognizes the validity of all messengers and prophets and the shariahs (outer forms) they adhered to.
The 10 commandments are part of that.
Every religion is like a radius on the same circle, which represents their outer forms. They differ on the circumference, but merge at the center in the realm of the esoteric, with the center representing the Truth and their inner essence.
Those who are dividers tend to discuss and argue over the outer forms of religions.
They are also exclusivists as they, in their state of arrogance and self-pride, can’t seem to see the truth that is common in all religious paths.
Those who are unifiers and are engaged in building bridges focus on each other’s common inner essence, and are aware that there are as many paths to the Truth as there are hearts.
http://www.zahrapublications.com
Your comments are ignorant and foolish. First, most Protestants believe the entire Bible constitutes law coming from God. Moreover, Roman Catholics add doctrine as promulgated by the Pope and/or his cardinals.
And if you think Jews believe the only law binding them from their Scriptures is the Ten Commandments, well, that’s just to dumb to even argue about.
Shariah explained: “Reasoning with God” at http://www.amazon.com/Reasoning-God-Reclaiming-Shariah-Modern/dp/0742552322/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1449692131&sr=1-1&keywords=reasoning+with+god
To many, Shariah is simply the outer form of a religion that functions as a protective shell for the self to develop in this realm of existence so that it reflects the higher qualities, such as selflessness, generosity, love, peace, forgiveness, humility, not doing unto others what one doesn’t want done unto one, justice, etc.
If something is not conducive to the self, it is not part of the Shariah.
If anything, based on historical events. I think a fair assessment of successfully penetrating the CIA and/or FBI, is the Mossad. I would propose, more successful than the KGB.
In some parallel reality Cuz said: “I would hope that all of us on both sides of the aisles could agree that the ISIS is evil and bigoted and has no place in civilized society, and I would note that the suggestion that that could somehow be extended to the Islamic faith, Malcolm X and many of the civil rights pioneers were Muslim ministers!”
Goubatz’s worknoa based off of inertial CAIR documents and while CAIR sued to get those files back they never once contested his book.
The KKK analogy is actually not a whole hell of a lot better. However unappealing the white-power groups are ideologically, they are not all killers. Many of them go no further than proposing some kind of retreat to a pure racial homeland. The KKK only has a few thousand documented murders over its entire existence, though it has had up to four million members. So it can fairly be argued that calling the white supremacists terrorists is similarly strained. I mean, to put an edge on it, the Muslims have 3.3 million members in the U.S. and they also have a few thousand documented murders… so far.
Few thousand documented murders? Are you referring to the American Muslims because that would be factually incorrect. The number is more like a little under 100 counting only domestic homegrown terrorists who happen to be Muslim. There is also only 10 deadly incidents since 2001. There was no deadly /fatal domestic terrorism committed by American Muslims prior. Other attacks like the first and second WTC attacks, Pentagon attack, etc were committed by foreign Muslim terrorists.
From 1995-2015 there has been 29 deadly attacks committed by White extremists with over 60 dead. This is not including the study that concluded from 1882-1968 White Supremacists lynched 3,445 Black people. Not to mention uncounted murders and “disappearances” committed by the Klan. So we are looking at thousands of cases of domestic white supremacist terrorism committed which resulted at least over 3,500 deaths.
I think the analogy is between the KKK of the post-Civil War 19th and early 20th century and the ISIS/Al Qaeda groups of today:
http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1979/2/79.02.04.x.html
I think what the Congress has the hardest time dealing with, however, on both sides, is the role that the Saudi and Qatari dictatorships have played in supporting and financing ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other forms of violent Wahhabi Sunni radicalism (Boko Haram in Nigeria, etc.) as ‘proxy forces’ serving their agendas. This would require designation as ‘state supporters of terrorism’ and would impact arms deals and oil sales.
However, I think the Spanish Inquisition is a better model for how the ISIS/Al Qaeda “Daesh” phenomenon works in practice, but is perhaps too close to the truth for Congress to embrace. The Spanish royalty at the time allied itself with the Inquistion to drive out Jews and Muslims from Spain in order to cement their political control over the region; just as the Saudi Royals have allied themselves with “Daesh” to do the same in their own backyard.
Both Republicans and Democrats fall over each other to embrace the Saudis, too, as the recent visit of the Saudi Prince and his retinue to Washington have revealed – Pelosi & McCain, Obama & Bush – they all have that in common. As do Trump & Clinton, both beneficiaries of Saudi investments.
This article is from a year ago, and it shows that groups like the “KKK, anti-government radicals, black panthers and other racist groups” have killed far more people since 9/11 than Muslims have: http://guardianlv.com/2015/06/kkk-and-racist-groups-have-killed-more-people-than-islamist-terrorists-in-the-u-s-since-911/
You have more than a billion Muslims worldwide of whom only a tiny percentage are extremists. The analogy is on point, b/c I can replace Cruz’s words with my Islamic equivalents and it makes total sense:
“I would hope that all of us on both sides of the aisles could agree that the [ISIS] is evil and bigoted and has no place in civilized society, and I would note that the suggestion that that could somehow be extended to the [Islamic] faith, [Muhammad Ali] and many of the civil rights pioneers were [Muslims].” It would make more sense to say that many of those committed to fighting ISIS and other extremist groups today are Muslims, i.e., Hamza Yusuf Hanson, Zaid Shakir, etc.
“Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?” Seriously, you can’t write off 9/11. Muhammad Atta lived here as an ordinary legal immigrant, spent some time living in an apartment I used to walk by (not when he was there though!). And saying that the entire huge bulk of American radicals and cranks kill only twice as many people as the Muslims who are 1% of the population??? You’re sinking fast here!
I’m not suggesting to deny them their rights – they, like the KKK, have rights. But when it comes time to pass out the immigration quotas, I’d think really carefully.
“When it comes time to pass out the immigration quotas, I’d think really carefully.”
Me too – I’d keep all members and associates of the House of Saud out, due to their involvement in financing 9/11 (28 classified pages, right) – but, refugees from the Syrian civil war, which the U.S. did so much to initiate – I’d let them in, I think we have a moral responsibility to.
It’s no big deal – when I was a kid growing up in Northern California, there were a whole lot of South Vietnamese families there too, mostly war refugees, ex-South Vietnam military officers, etc., making a living as kiwi fruit farmers, mainly. If we could let them in, (undercover Communist agents!), why not Syrian refugees too?
When someone is raised under the idea that apostasy is a severely punishable crime, that proselytism can’t be tolerated, are they really going to take like a duck to water to the idea of freedom of religion? Often yes, but it’s the noes that worry a person. In a case like Syria, there would be a large number of Yazidis that want our help, who are at risk of being persecuted if they stay in Turkey or any other neighboring Muslim country. So if we set some arbitrary quota like 10,000 – much smaller than the number of Yazidis – how can we justify admitting even one Muslim when we could admit a Yazidi instead?
In any case, the moral cause is better handled by helping the millions of people just outside the Syrian border than by showering First World levels of assistance on a few lucky winners.
Because those who reflect the higher self (aka consciousness) do not see other-ness. They are not concerned with the religious beliefs of someone who is genuinely in need of being rescued.
Because you are making a huge generalization and assumption when you say this:
When a rescue team sees a downed plane, it’s burning, and its passengers are in a life or death situation, the rescuers do not apply a religious litmus test before rescuing them.
They just rescue them.
You have a tendency to make some very outlandish generalizations and assumptions about the refugees most of whom are obviously in dire situations. Many have perished trying to flee war torn areas. You don’t seem to realize that human beings by nature prefer to live where they are unless their situation becomes difficult for them to bear. For them to risk their lives their situation must be extremely bad.
The U.S. vetting process is very detailed and comprehensive and it takes a while for a refugee to be accepted.
I appeal to you to find your inner Justin Trudeau and act like the better son of Adam.
Those who help others unconditionally actually help their own selves. Reflect on it.
We’re not talking about rescuing people from Syria – we’re talking about rescuing people from Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. Nobody crosses the border from Syria into Los Angeles – they escape to some supposedly safe country first. But those countries are more safe for Muslims than for Yazidis.
Ah, I see!
As long as Hillary and Obama rub elbows with the enemy the worse things will be
In fairness, I’m not sure anyone in DC can 100% avoid rubbing elbows with Republicans as long as they are not considered enemies of the state.
Funny how Trump supporters refuse to acknowledge his long history of doing deals with the Saudis and Qataris.
http://qz.com/568178/donald-trump-owes-much-of-his-fortune-to-wea/
And yet Trump has the chutzpah to attack Hillary Clinton for her equally sleazy kickback deals between the Clinton Foundation and the Saudis over arms deals; he calls this “running the State Department like her private hedge fund” – sure, there’s an element of truth to that, but would he do it any differently?
It all makes the argument for gridlock make some kind of twisted sense – as long as the Democratic and Republican politicians are kept busy attacking each other, they’ll be able to do less damage to the American public.
More and more I’m convinced the US government is run by a bunch of psychopaths vying for the most extreme ways to subsume their subjects. How much better off we’d all be if they would just get over themselves. The world doesn’t need violent assholes running things but because they are indeed violent and use it to get their ways we’re all screwed; and it doesn’t matter whose on the ticket because they’re all cut from the same mold.
mold noun (GROWTH)
a soft green, gray, or black growth that develops on old food or on objects that have been left too long in warm, slightly wet places
Cruz, despite his legal education, is a moron and a fascist. His witnesses are too. I’d think his political career will end in an implosion of corruption eventually. The guy couldn’t defeat Donald Trump and he was peddling the same shit, but with a heavy dose of the party line. The “Evangelicals” (much less the overt bigots and white supremacists) as a voting force/faction days are numbered.
Trump is a much better populist than Cruz, who suffers from the special disadvantage of being the most-disliked guy on the Hill.
Maybe, but I doubt it. as long as the Bosses find it convenient to play upon the “natural” prejudices of the have-nots in order to disguise the true driving forces and goals of their endless resource wars, the ignorant and thoroughly-propagandized masses are likely to continue to play their pre-ordained roles.
As an Arab-American who has spent half his life in the Middle East and the other half here in the states, I find the right-wing insistence on tying everything relating to Muslims back to the Muslim Brotherhood to be both amusing and thoroughly invidious.
It seems to be entirely motivated by a desire to create the illusion that all Muslims are somehow linked to one political ideology that can, and – if not stopped by patriotic Americans – will take power right here in the USA. As if we’re all members of this one group and will can therefore accurately be portrayed as a menacing, monolithic “other”, which serves to further the whole “clash of civilizations” worldview. The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood has been banned in Egypt and GCC countries and its suspected members are being actively persecuted is of course entirely ignored as it invalidates this view.
The GOP banks on the idea that all Americans are as uninformed and reactionary as the FOX audience. Whether Cruz or any of these rightwing tools believes the bullshit they’re pushing is anyone’s guess. They know it gets them votes in red states, so they will continue to push their anti-American/anti-freedom of religion message to the knuckle-dragging yahoos who live in conspiracy land.
People here are just plain xenophobic. I’m glad I can see past beards and headscarves. We’re all the same – all stupid, selfish humans who love our families and want power.
But muslim oil y ou will steal, sell, and use!
ahhh..
i think you got something there.
cruz suffers much guilt from his oppression and theft abiding and support. To rationalise then he condemns them so that he can feel entitled to rob them as punishment for their evil ways.
maybe that’s like the likuds are doing to Palestinians…
Cruz’s statement is merely another example of my first rule of irony (the most ironic statements come from the mouths of those totally oblivious to the irony).
PS, the Klan were once invited into the White House to educate a President on the dangerous nature of Blacks, so the irony gets doubled by the direct echo
PPS, that the Muslim Brotherhood ‘briefly took power’ through the ONLY election in Egypt, an election their continued efforts to bring democracy and freedom to Egypt brought about DESPITE the opposition of the American government, and that the coup and subsequent rein of terror against democracy and human rights in Egypt occurred and continues with the support of the American government under the Democrats should be enough to show how deeply ingrained Islamophobia is in BOTH parties, though that very thing, the ubiquity of Islamophobia in both parties and their associated media, is what makes the whole irony of Cruz’s statement a whole order of magnitude more ironic.
Well said sir!
Indeed. Yet another example of the hypocrisy of our government, promoting democracy and free and fair elections except in those cases where the outcome is not to our liking. Egypt, Ukraine, Palestine, Honduras, Brazil, Venezuela, Guatemala, and Chile come immediately to mind. Far too many for it to be coincidental.
Naturally. He’s just laying the groundwork for another huge military contract.
“The fact that Cruz was vindicating the analogy rather than refuting it was apparently lost on the Texas Senator.”
The object of oratory is not truth but persuasion.
Buy a Senator, or Secretary, and you can drag the public along; anywhere in fact.
This from Ferris Wilks, one of two billionaire-brothers backing Cruz. The guy is a pastor in a tiny church in Texas.
He also said this:
Small world. Texas cults, radical christians, anti-commie rants, Cruz dad hanging out with Lee Harvey Oswald, and what have we here? Why it’s a president having an affair outside his marriage. Maybe Lee Harvey was just trying to earn his way in to the club.
It appears that Cruz suffers foot-in-mouth. Or is it block-in-head syndrome? Does he realize how much he embarrasses himself? Do the voters that vote for him realize how much of an embarrassment he is to them?
Take him at his word? He said there is a higher law than the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The only infiltration of the USG is David Koresh II aka Ted Cruz whose “soul” objective is to “cult”ivate enough of a following to possibly, start a new religious order, declare the USG dysfunctional useless and illegitimate in their eyes, and propose a “replacement” in some “made in texas” fashion.
He is only getting started.