Sunday, November 8, 2009

Sympathy For The Devil

When the United Negro College Fund's board allows a member of the Ku Klux Klan to participate in its activities, or Planned Parenthood announces its newest member in Michael Phelps, the vile anti-abortionist who protests at fallen soldiers' funerals, then maybe I'll be able to reconcile the United States military's practice of allowing the enemy to join its ranks. Perhaps the biggest problem, however, is that no one has the fortitude to call the enemy the enemy.

Certainly there are Muslims serving honorably in our armed forces, and not all of them have nefarious intent, let me make that clear. But how do we weed out those who are engaged in infiltration for the purposes of killing our young men and women where they sleep? Do we always have to wait until 13 are dead and 30 wounded? And do we ignore the behavior of those who cheer jihadists' "victories"?

What President Obama calls "healthy diversity" in our military amounts to an Army Major praying to Allah for the defeat of his own "comrades" in both theaters of Iraq and Afghanistan. What Obama sees as a different point of view is the same Major who equates a suicide bomber with a soldier falling on a grenade to save his buddies. Even after shouting "allahu-akbar" as he murdered those who trusted him, Obama cautioned against hasty judgement, a caution he himself failed to exercise in the case of the Cambridge police.

It must be understood that even the most well-mannered wolf would never be accepted by the sheep as one of the flock. Why are men so damned stupid, then?

In March of 2008, Hassan Abu-Jihaad, a signalman on the guided missile destroyer USS Benfold, was convicted of providing classified information on his battle group's movements in 2001, putting his ship at risk of attack in the Straits of Hormuz. Abu-jihaad in e-mails praised the October 2000 terrorist suicide attack on the USS Cole - in which 17 sailors died - as effective psychological warfare and a "martyrdom operation."

At Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait on March 22, 2003, Sgt. Hasan Akbar rolled three grenades into three tents, killing two officers and wounding 14 soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division just before the invasion of Iraq. He was convicted and sentenced to death in 2005. Prosecutors said he was concerned about U.S. troops killing fellow Muslims in the Iraq war. And he shouted..."allahu akbar!" during his heinous act.

Geraldo Rivera wrote a neurotic piece concerning the latest Muslim attack-from-within, making the case for the "15,000 Muslims serving honorably in the Armed Forces, and the four to five million more who are law abiding, patriotic citizens of the United States." Forgive me, Geraldo, but my sympathies are strained for that number of Muslim voices whose best protestation of radical Islam is little more than a muffled murmur.

And demonstrating perfectly the left's angst at these attackers not being named "Smith", as so eloquently stated by C. Edmund Wright of The American Thinker, Rivera makes the ridiculous comparison of Nidal Malik Hasan's actions to those of the Columbine shooters':

But considering all we've been through, two nut-jobs do not a trend make.

To me, the accused Fort Hood shooter has more in common with the murderous duo in Columbine High. He's a Palestinian-American version of Eric Harris or Dylan Klebold; a neglected, frustrated, impotent, sociopath who attempts to couch his murderous rampage in the psycho-babble of larger purpose.
Like all good liberals, Rivera believes that if our heads are buried deeply enough in the sand that no harm can come to us. I do not suggest purging every Muslim from our military, but I do beseech the Command to - at the very least - immediately remove any Muslim who exhibits the slightest proclivity toward jihad.

Sphere: Related Content

4 comments:

Unknown said...

Since you quack like a duck, I'll proceed on the assumption.

Why do all liberals hysterically imagine what conservatives say? Ironically, your lead-in follows immediately on the heels of the recommendation I offered in the piece. My guess is that you were speed reading.

And if you are going to suggest that more Christians have killed their comrades than Muslims, you will have to offer examples. Perhaps there have been crimes of passion committed in isolated incidents, but you will be hard pressed to find examples of Christians killing their own simply because of their religion.

Mike B said...

Now who is imagining? I did not imply that Christians were killing each other because of their Christianity. It just happens to be that the ones they kill share their religious beliefs.

The point is that the U.S. is a diverse country and your "Muslims are the enemy" perspective is very naive.

If you want facts you can do your own investigating or you may like the Limbaugh approach and just put out non truths, otherwise known as lies, out there and lose your credibility and that's totally up to you.

Unknown said...

You have virtually nothing to back up your assertion that "It just happens to be that the ones they kill share their religious beliefs."

And you now suggest that I've lied with an equal amount of proof to your first assertion. And it appears that you have cornered the market on naïveté.

SuzyCVT said...

Woody,
This guys sounds familiar. Rush lies?
I would suggest waiting for the full scale attach of the US by the sleepers before attempting to wake this sort. He will be flying his flag for a week or two after the event. Then, scourge anyone who doesn't take theirs down in three.
And I have an imagination too. I imagine that this Mike B person will find himself on the wrong side of the next big American event.