“I had an American conversion. I’m very patriotic about the Second Amendment. When my family’s involved, I will protect them. I am licensed. If you can’t beat them, join them.” – Yasir Qadhi in Clear Lake Muslim leader, Houston-born scholar named in ISIS death list [at houstonchronicle.com] [h/t Louis Bonham]
Good. The 2nd amendment is for everyone.
+1
The natural-born, human right of self-defense is for everyone. Our founders were wise enough to codify that into our constitution.
We should demand that every country that is the recipient of our aid money defend human rights – including the right to bear arms.
Countries that do not want to defend human rights can just as easily send us our money back.
(Link took me to flooding in Houston)
Me too. Bad link.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Clear-Lake-Muslim-leader-Houston-born-scholar-7252074.php
If an individual is not of the persuasion to support liberty for all as a matter of course an individual should at least support the 2nd at a level indicated by the enemies that person has.
Somebody who lives in a gated community and has never experienced any sort of crime probably wouldnt support the 2nd much at all unless a recreational shooter.
Living in a crappy neighborhood or experiencing crime directly or indeirectly should boost that support.
Joining various causes/groups/religions/affiliations should each increase that support exponentially.
If you’re going to embrace a thing, then live a life promoting that thing you’d be a fool if you didnt believe there were lunatics out there seeking to cause you harm for that thing on top of the everyday petty criminal or junkie who’d hapilly stab you 17 times for $2.
The number of people who hate you consistently dwarfs the number of people who love you in all cases.
Thank you for posting this. I personally have lived in various different places in my life, from small towns, to the country, to suburbs, and to an inner city war zone. It was living in the city that made me more appreciative of the 2A, good self defense laws, and firearms in general. Ive also noticed all these anti gun liberals, live in big cities. But not in the parts that experience any real crime. They all live in the higher income, gated communities.
Those with sufficient privilege do not require rights.
“I view it as my religious duty to fight against these types of radicals,” Qadhi said in a telephone interview Friday. “I believe it’s my religious obligation…”
This is what I experienced in Afghanistan. The Muslim men I fought with spoke of the “True Jihad” as their fight against what they considered blasphemy committed by thugs and terrorists.
I also found this quote particularly telling:
“We have a friendly atmosphere and very welcoming neighbors, but it’s hard to predict,” he said. “We’re always seeing faces. We don’t know who’s a threat. … ”
Good job on tooling up to protect your flock, Mr. Quadhi.
As an aside, what do I have to do to get on the Daesh hit list? I got on the Taliban’s hit list pretty quickly. I even got my own old school wanted posted with my name and a bounty and everything. These guys? Nothing. Come on, I’ve killed Muslims, I’ve preached to Muslims, I’ve even been nice to women and girls. Once, while putting a tourniquet on her bleeding leg, I actually touched a Muslim woman’s thigh. Hell, I once broke up a big Muslim man orgy in the Afghan National Army barracks. It was unintentional, but still, I would have thought surely that one would have gotten me on some list, somewhere.
I don’t know, maybe I’m being a jerk, but I feel left out.
Sad panda.
If you really want to, get on a plane and fly to the UK (you don’t have to go all the way to France, Denmark,whatever).
Go wander around in any one of the dozens of no-go zones. You won’t have your weapon, your squad, or close air-support on the radio. Set up a table and talk about Christianity, better yet, a cartoon of Muhammad on a poster. I give you 30 seconds till beaten bloody, in under 3 minutes your body will be in a dumpster.
You don’t get to even walk through the immigrant infested areas as a proper citizen of the country. There are roving “Muslim Patrols” who will harass the actual citizens of the country about their dress, drinking, whatever. There are hundreds of videos on YT, go watch what tolerance gets you.
Oddly enough, I have actually sat in a café that catered predominantly to Muslims in Copenhagen with 2 Muslim men, discussing my experience in Afghanistan, where I talked at length about my positive experience as a Christian in that country. I’ve also done the same thing in Egypt and in East Jerusalem. Everyone was polite and respectful.
I’m sure you have. Taking the circumstantially exceptional as normal, is not an accurate depiction of the larger issues or greater reality.
Upload a YouTube video of you showing your ass while drawing Mohammed naked. Pan to pissing on the Koran, then squating to shit on the Hadith, then wipe your ass with the verse that says its a Muslim duty to kill the unbeliever. Pan to a a sat picture of your home and address.
Bet that will help you get on the list.
That doesn’t prove much – that would get you on the list of the insane SJW’s on Facebook or the anti-SJW’s on Reddit, too, and God knows the sorts of idiots that have taken to populating those systems.
Sorry. I don’t trust anyone motivated solely by religious ideology. The Muslim men you fought AGAINST also spoke of the “True Jihad” as their fight against what they considered blasphemy.
This guy may be crediting his religion for his impetus, but I don’t buy it. He is speaking from something older than religion – protecting your own is primal, not divine.
Assalammalakum (sp?) brother.
Assalamualaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu.
As I experienced it, using the “Peace be unto you” was appreciated, but did not denote that I was a Muslim. Actually using the “peace and mercy of Allah” tended to make Muslims think I was of their faith. But maybe that was just an Afghan thing.
Being called Gabriel (in Arabic: Jibrail) and having a son called Noah (Arabic: Noor) leads many to jump to the same conclusion about me.
In fact I’ve almost always had a very positive reaction when I explain to Afghans that I’m a Christian but that we share many of the same prophets, and that there’s a great deal of commonality between the Bible and the Quran.
Most of the time, they’re like: “Oh, I never knew that – well then I guess when your time comes you’ll probably go to heaven too, even if you have got the wrong end of the stick…!” 🙂
Great similarities between the Bible and Quran? If you view cribbing half of the OT, and then writing in the rest to get you, Muhammad, personally laid and motivate your people to war, then yeah, they’ve got a lot in common.
You might want to read the Quran and Hadith sometime, but odds are, you’ve never read the Bible all the way through
16V –
I’m not suggesting equivalence, and I’m certainly not looking to pick a theological fight with anyone…
While there a massive differences in the nature and content of the Bible, Quran and indeed Talmud / Torah, there are certainly also points of textual commonality. And indeed there is a limited degree of doctrinal commonality between all three.
My point being, simply, that a considerable number of the Muslims with whom I have worked in Afghanistan are much more positively disposed towards me as an avowed Christian than they are towards others who are openly atheist. I have also observed more openness towards avowed Jews, from Afghan Muslims, than I might have expected.
I can’t claim to have read the Bible or the Quran / Hadith cover to cover and in profound theological detail (and indeed that’s not a prerequisite to being a Christian, or a Muslim…).
But I would perhaps suggest that it’s well expressed in John 8:7 – “He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone…” I’m more than happy to accept and defer to your greater Biblical scholarship, if you assert such, but I maintain that my experience has been that professed Christianity is more of a cultural asset in Afghanistan than some of the alternative religious beliefs (or lack thereof).
Gabriel, I’m not surprised it worked out better for you, there is a concept throughout the Quran called ‘being of the book’. Which, when actually followed, means that you are afforded most of the rights and allowed to live pretty much like a fellow Muslim. Applies to Christians and Jews, the way it’s viewed, is you guys ‘received the scriptures’ first.
Don’t worry, Muhammad got them all perfected this time. At least for Muhammad anyway…
They’d be happy to kill me regardless though. I don’t believe in deities.
“As I experienced it, using the “Peace be unto you” was appreciated, but did not denote that I was a Muslim.”
JWT, exactly that was expressed to me in no uncertain terms, as I had asked someone if we would be considered disrespectful to use the greeting while wandering around Jeddah. Absolutely not, it is a greeting that means exactly what it says, has no connection to any religion, sort of like if an arab speaking little English learned to greet people with “good morning” in the US.
Larry you really have no idea what taqiyaa actually means…
Careful what one wishes for. A Musilm will tell you anything you want to hear.
Note. Basyouni could not be reached. This may be why. Article from 2011.
“When I look at what is happening in the world and you see that people are scared of Islam and Islamists, it makes me ask the question; was Mubarak ruling Egypt with Islam? They were ruling Egypt with secularism that came from the West,” said Vice President and Professor Waleed Basyouni in a recent interview. “Isn’t it the right of people that they live with Islam, their religion and allow it to guide them? The failure of these systems is an excellent example that these secular systems don’t work. It created corrupt dictatorships in these regions.”
http://www.investigativeproject.org/2590/almaghrib-institute-sharia-for-egypt-and-the-west
Translation. Accept Sharia and Muslims may stop murdering except for homo’s, women, non believers, and Christians.
It seems more likely you heard what you wanted to hear. He was 100% accurate in his statement. I didn’t take it as a statement on secularism as a whole, but, as he said, “in these regions.”
As far as the “isn’t it the right..” quote, I couldn’t agree with him more. I know it is certainly my right to live with Christianity, my religion, and allow it to guide me.
Agreed with the accuracy of the statement referencing Egypt. It’s the rest of the article that concerns.
The failure of democracy in the Middle East is because the west went the easy route in controlling a region through dictatorship. And I suppose, more efficient because the entire region cannot comprehend individual freedoms.
Every government using Sharia as a core principle is far removed from democracy and to pay homage to a group for endorsing 2A, when all other indicators show wanting to remove liberty and choice, one might reassess words spoken.
A well thought out and appreciated comment. Thanks
Yes, in this country you have the right to practice your religion and let it guide you…..except on college compuses, government property and offices, if you are a business owner, or something you say offends someone. You can practice and be guided by your religion in your thoughts, not your social or economic interaction, and you can practice and be guided in your place of worship. But nowhere else.
Other than that, it’s all good.
Your confusing separation of church & state with religious belief and how one acts towards others in society.
The dangerous precedent is allowing a religious belief to circumvent law. Don’t want to bake a cake for gays, great…next Honor killings, female genitaila removal, homo roof chucking, whipping for blasphemy is allowed in Islam.
Or perhaps a not so violent event such as sitting outside at a restaurant drinking a beer when 5 Musilms decide to counsel you on drinking in public. All a college PC will do is screech, a Mulism feels justified to kill you.
Don’t forget rape victims, they made the men do it, gotta kill them too.
There is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. There are people who call themselves Muslim, but they do not follow the Quran and Hadith, they do not follow the murderous, rapey, lying, disgusting ways of a 7th century horn-dog (and pedo, his wife Aisha was 9 when he poked her…). That “peaceful majority” of 1.2B, lives under the rule of followers of Islam, and would happily kill you for drawing a cartoon of the Pedo Muhammad.
The “extremists” merely follow the ‘revelations’ of ‘the perfect man’ and do exactly as the book of nonsense commands. Every country infected by Islam in any significant population is always run by the followers. There is no greater threat to the continued existence of Western Civilization than allowing the followers of a religion commanded to destroy it, in. The EU is finally admitting to itself the violence and destruction they bring. It’s an invasion, nothing less.
Not to mention the economic costs of a bunch of marginally literate peasants. It will take 3 generations, if ever, to get them to contribute a penny in taxes compared to what they took. Not that there will be a country left…
It been a thousand years, they’ll never “get” the western cultural value of democracy.
That is the problem, they are commanded to have a theocracy with no cultural values other than Islam. So, if they do what the book says…
It must be exhausting to live in constant fear of billions of people that you don’t even know.
Tell that to dead US Service personnel who died when Afghans & Iraqis turned on them.
Ironhorse, Who’s living in fear? Knowing what the civilized world faces, knowing those primitives who would make us disappear from this earth is somehow cowardice? Or should we be completely ignorant of history? How wilfully ignorant are you to believe that it can’t happen to us, that it can’t happen here?
Or are you just parroting your indoctrination?
Sad that apparently The Art of War is apparently no longer taught in most HSs. .
So you consider those who are not purely fundamentalist Christians to be non-Christian as well? How about negative atheists? Are they non-atheist? Trying to consider only pathways of belief that are the most explicit and literal of any belief system as “true” believers is as fundamentalist (and as likely to lead to extreme behavior) as those fundamentalist pathways of belief are.
Remember, for any given text (or tradition or even considered stance), if you have 3 witnesses, you can easily get at least 4 different interpretations. Generally most, or all, of those are as “right” as any others.
There are a dozen ways to make that comparison completely false, let’s stick with some readily apparent and non-controversial ones.
There have been literally dozens of rewrites of the NT alone, let alone the OT/Torah/Talmud. There have been dozens of translations, word substitutions, omissions, additions, creative interpretations of said rewrites. Don’t forget the Gnostics….
There is no one book to believe in, unless you really believe that of the hundreds of different versions, yours, yours got it all exactly right. “Fundamentalist Christian” is what, pray tell? Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Ethiopian, Lutheran, 7th Day Adventist? KJV, NLT, which one is it? Let’s not even get started on all the different authors of this ‘collection’ of ‘Gospels’, which often fundamentally disagree within the same book.
Save for self-correcting spelling and grammatical errors, there is basically one version of the Quran. One.
So, there’s a wide variation on what in means to ‘follow’ Christian/Judean texts, there’s no actual play involved in following Islam – you do it, or you don’t.
For the original parts of the Quran, there is but one author – Muhammed. There’s dozens of second-hand accounts of the life of ‘Jesus’, the guy didn’t bother to write a damned thing down himself, nor did he catch they eye of the contemporary historians who would have certainly heard of him, what with the miracles and raising of the dead and suchlike.
I could do this all day if I had the spare time. Believe whatever you want, as long as it’s not fundamentally required to destroy Western Civilization and the USA.
Islam is, if you follow the book.
It IS, indeed, controversial to say this, but it has been proven that the text of the Quran has changed over time. Furthermore Muslims also get more of their religious practices/traditions from the Hadiths than from the Quran. And there is far more variation in which of those is respected and/or viewed as true and which are not, as well as how they are interpreted, than there is in the various versions of the Bible. Furthermore, despite their supposed pure adherence to “the book”, local culture drastically alters how Muslims interpret and enact what the Quran and Hadiths say. Even something as small as a single word, like “jihad”, has drastically different meanings to different sects/groups of Muslims. And all of those sects/groups has a Quranic (and generally Hadith supported) reasoning behind their particular interpretation.
So acting like there is only one possible interpretation of the Quran is ridiculous; it is pure belief, and a belief that is in opposition to the facts available.
The fact is, Daesh follows a death cult sect of Islam, that is just as opposed to the mainstream understanding of the Islamic faith as Christian death cults are to the mainstream beliefs in Christianity or death cult sects of Buddhism are opposed to mainstream Buddhism.
The real danger in Islam is that their death cult(s) have gained such significant prominence worldwide and the technology available to them is so much more advanced than what was available to other prominent death cults (regardless of religion) in the past, that they have the potential to make a worldwide impact, where historic death cults could not.
So, you have a bunch of self-serving specious allegations, but you have no proof of them. Whoo-hoo, you are quite the ‘intellectual warrior’.
Seriously, do come back when you have a point you can prove with you know, facts. Until then, go find a corner to do whatever in. I’ve already explained the corrections of grammar and punctuation. Your “many versions” are only that, corrections of grammar and punctuation.
There’s been a hundred scholarly articles which state the same facts, do cite one that says something different. Because it’s nonsense, and I can shoot it down too.
My buddy who has a lot of foreign clients says that they are actually some of the most stringent supporters of our rights. Then again a lot of them have insight in to what it’s like to be without those rights. Talking to people who have been on the wrong side of a bad regime makes you really think about why statism is not a good idea.
Change can only come from within. Trouble is among Muslims, speak out for moderation and you get a call then a bullet. Submission is their culture and they have no love of democracy.
That’s the only hope for civilization – is to isolate them until they give up their murderous ways. Another 200 years might do it judging by current affairs.
Welcome to freedom, friend. We’re happy to have you.
I’d put him under surveillance as a possible collaborator. His “conversion” sounds too goody goody to me.
Stonings, beheadings, killing anyone who quits the religion, sex with children, honor killings, killing for drawing a Muhammad cartoon, just to get started. All are sanctioned by the Quran and Hadith.
Those aren’t my culture’s values. But why fight it? Just let the barbarians in, worked out great for the Romans…
I’m not entirely certain what one has to do with the other.
If he wants to embrace western culture and the freedoms our culture entails, then I welcome him. If he (or anyone else) tries to corrupt our culture with Sharia or other forms of totalitarianism, I would oppose him.
I have no argument with your proposition that if he embraces ‘American Values’, he’s as welcome as anyone to be here.
I have a buddy who claims to be ‘Muslim’. He’s picked the few verses of the Quran that aren’t about destroying everything Western Civilization values. He tends bar in a strip club. He’s either the poster child for taqiyya or he’s just an American with some baggage from his upbringing.
We also talk about the foolishness of hijab, sharia, and stonings. He knows what the Quran actually says, but he also knows it’s total shit and wouldn’t be caught dead in a mosque. I know he’d be by my side with a gun if Islam ever took hold in the US. Because, as an apostate, he’d be one of the first beheaded.
Difference is, this cat is wearing a beard and obviously actually believes. I sincerely doubt he’s embraced anything American but his right to have a gun.
>> he’s just an American with some baggage from his upbringing.
For vast majority of adherents of all religions, their religion really is just some cultural baggage from their upbringing, and they are not true believers if you apply their own scriptural standards. Also true of Christians, Jews etc.
In fact, Islam has a surprisingly lenient standard, because the only thing that is necessary to be considered Muslim (and therefore to be able to truthfully claim the same) is to believe in monotheism, and that Muhammad was the God’s prophet. Adherence to all the rules is then expected, and in Islamic societies enforced per Sharia; but not following those rules does not make one non-Muslim, so long as that core belief is preserved. So even in a state like Saudi Arabia, when they chop someone’s head off for murder, or stone them for adultery, theologically, the man is believed to have died as Muslim, and thus eligible for eventual paradise after a period of cleansing. It’s only disbelief or apostasy that earns you a permanent place in hell fire.
(ISIS believe otherwise, but their view is not even close to the majority – which is also why they’re derisively referred to as “takfiris” or “kharijites” by mainstream Sunnis, even the most fundamentalist ones.)
If you cant beat them? Join them?
Wtf?
Yeah i think a lot of people over looked that. Who does he want to beat? It makes me believe from everything I see and hear that indeed all Muslims want to take over and make everybody follow their religion or be dead. Sort of like Christians hundreds of years ago, sort of like Romans before that and like Greeks before them.
We have a winner for “observer of the clue in plain sight.”
Yeah, that made me pause and think, too. It’s kind of an odd thing to say in the context of a conversion story.
Meh. Not impressed, not convinced. He’s “fighting against ISIS”, but he won’t go over there to do it. He’s hiding out here and giving some speeches, which really only attracts his old world violence to our country.
Seems like he only became pro-2A when it mattered to him personally, after having been against it for others. Sounds like yet another know-it-all who wants to decide-it-all for everyone else. Patriot? Try sunshine patriot, at best.
It’s not a conversion but deception. Truth among themselves. Lie too others to smooth differences.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/taqiyya.aspx
Sounds like wolves in the meadow to me.
I believe Ronald Reagan’s quote,. “Trust, but verify.” applies, otherwise the Unicorns will lead you into a pitfall. Tribal mistrust is deeply rooted in Humanity and the overall situation with Islam and Daesh reinforces the instinct to reject this man’s Second Amendment “conversion” out of hand. How does he prove the truth of what he is telling us?
DerryM –
I agree with Reagan (and you!) that “trust, but verify” is a sound maxim in life.
But it is my belief, and seems to be that of many on TTAG, that self defence is a natural, fundamental human right. Now I’m not American, and where I come from we don’t enjoy the constitutional protection of that right as afforded by 2A… but it seems to me there’s an issue here:
2A, and specifically the “shall not be infringed” clause, seems to me to guarantee this gentleman’s right to keep and bear arms – and rightly so.
However a certain skepticism as to any individual’s motivations and possible future behaviour is healthy and may in fact be justified (or may be proved wrong).
Are you suggesting that Mr Qadhi should not be able to exercise his rights under 2A until he has “proven” the truth of statements? If so that would seem to me unconstitutional – even if it could potentially be rationalised or justified.
In my (once again, non-American) view, not only would it be unconstitutional, but it would also seem to be the start of a worrying slippery slope. If you have to “prove” that you are trustworthy or the ‘right sort of person’ to exercise a natural right, that opens the floodgates to denying the same and other rights to all kinds of undesirables or possible undesirables, until such time as they prove a negative (notoriously difficult!).
I apologise if I’ve misunderstood your view on this; and I’d be genuinely interested in your thoughts / clarification.
As I say, my personal belief is that self defence is a natural right and the 2A is one of the strongest legal defences of that right to be found anywhere in law. So on that basis I would approve of anyone exercising their right to keep and bear arms, including my enemies, or simply individuals whose motivations and beliefs are unknown to me.
Gabriel, I do think Mr. Qadhi should be fully able to exercise his 2A rights. After reading several comments expressing doubt that his “Second Amendment conversion” was genuine because he’s a Muslim, I found myself somewhat irritated.
The situation with Islam and Daesh is complicated and fraught with misunderstanding and misinformation, so I ask, “What must Mr. Qadhi do, if many of you will not take him at his word?” Does any credit he gets for being a fellow American get cancelled out by his being a Muslim? On what basis do we justify throwing out the proverbial baby with the bath?
I actually used to shoot at the same range the San Bernardino Jihadist frequented, and for all I know he may have been there shooting alongside me. Would I have denied him the right to shoot his AR-15 just because he appeared to be ethnically Arabic? Not a chance!
“Trust, but verify.” means for me that I allow everyone else to do as they will but remain wary of Unicorns leading you into a pitfall, and there are always Unicorns involved in every situation. I agree with your assessment of what is/is not Constitutional. This Freedom Stuff is never easy, but you must strive to be consistent or it becomes worthless.
Hope this helps.
Derry –
Very helpful, clear, and commendable. Thank you for taking the time to reply: there are a number of comments elsewhere in this discussion which are (or seem to me) at odds with rigorous adherence to 2A, and I wasn’t sure from your initial post where you stood on the issue.
Re: San Bernardino – yeeesh… But as you say, freedom isn’t easy.
Thank you again! 🙂
Do I smell goat piss, or is that a muslim?
There are three distinct segments concerning Muslims. Muslims are folks just like you and me. Islamist, the one who want to merge religion and state (Sharia) and Jihadist suicide division of the faith.
I can say my interaction with Muslims on an individual or 2-3 person level was very positive, however as the group got larger, the spoken view of the group became surreal. It’s as though they had the same thought and spoke the same way. For example Sunni’s in Kuwait firmly believed Israel had a manifest density to the Pacific ocean. As silly as that sounds, both politically and logistically, it was a very real concern for them. When asked what my religion was, I said none. Various discussion concluded because my parents were Christian, I too by birth was a Christian. This means a Middle Eastern person is yoked to a faith by birth, not by choice. It is impossible to bridge that cultural gap.
Yasir Qadhi & Basyouni (mentioned in this article) are Islamist and work for the US to evolve into an Islamist State. The political left are embracing Muslims and their culture in mistaken belief that our culture will absorb them. It won’t. The culture of our democracy is inclusion, the crossroad is how much do we tolerate before we lose the freedom & liberties we have.
PJ O’Rourke made much the same observation back in the 80’s when we had the dust-up with Libya. Taken individually, Muslims are quite charitable. Get them together in a group, stuff a Qur’an down their pants, and they become an unholy mob.
Hmmm…so he’s all for guns. And rights. Great. I support those rights. Ya’ know I had a slight falling out with my Arabic speaking son. He works for DoD. He told me I was too harsh in my outlook on the moose-lim “faith”. Part of hanging out in the Mideast. I’m in the trust but verify camp. I’ve had Muslim doctors and so have my kids. I also lived in Chicago for years,done business and had social interaction with Muslims(including my wife’s half-azzed black moose-lim relatives). Anywho I take a “wait and see” attitude. I don’t freak out from a head scarf…
WaterWalker –
As per my question to DerryM, above:
While I agree with Reagan that “trust, but verify” is a sound maxim in life, as I understand it 2A seems to me to guarantee this gentleman’s right to keep and bear arms.
Suspicion is perfectly legitimate – but are you suggesting that Mr Qadhi should not be able to exercise his rights under 2A until he has “proven” his trustworthiness, on the basis of his avowed faith as a Muslim, and his status as a member of the Islamic community?
If so that would seem to me unconstitutional – even if it could potentially be rationalised or justified.
Also, it seems to me, not only would it be unconstitutional, but the start of a slippery slope. If you have to “prove” that you are trustworthy or the ‘right sort of person’ to exercise a natural right, that opens the floodgates to denying the same and other rights to all kinds of undesirables or possible undesirables, until such time as they prove a negative (notoriously difficult!).
I think you share my belief that “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. On that basis I personally approve of anyone exercising their right to keep and bear arms, including my enemies, or simply individuals whose motivations and beliefs are unknown to me.
I would sincerely be interested in your thoughts.
“Interesting” web site when I clicked on your nom de plume Gabriel Carter. Is that some sort of black ops effort or are you some sort of covert ninja dude? Pro or anti Israel? Curious…
Umm… Unless your link got hijacked, it should have taken you to my company’s website.
We are (I’m the CEO and part owner) a British security / risk management business that supports a number of US DoS and DoD clients, and their British equivalents, mainly in Afghanistan. Although we also work intermittently in other areas of the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
I’m certainly no kind of ninja, although I travel regularly to Afghanistan with work and have spent a considerable time there over the past seven years. Nor am I covert: if you really want to you can find my photo on our website / search me on LinkedIn, etc.
Re: Israel, my position is pretty straightforward I guess. For better or worse the nation-state exists, and has a duty to itself and its citizens to protect its integrity and interests. Unfortunately there are ineradicable tensions that result from the mere fact of Israel’s existence, and its location, and perforce the country adopts a robust approach in dealing with what is (certainly if taken all together) a broad range of existential threats. Again unfortunately, this is to an extent self-perpetuating, as unless you kill-em-all when you have a war based on territorial or religious grievance, those who survive are likely to be pissed at you…
So in short, I am neither pro- nor anti- Israel. I absolutely assert their right, indeed duty, to act in self protection (including preemptive actions); and I regret that I’m unable to see any de-escalation of tensions in the near future.
Well that sure is a diplomatic answer. I think it’s entirely possible you could know my son. In his 40’s. He’s been all over the mideast form Kuwait to Egypt to Iraq to Jordan. In the USarmy and DoD. Doing what God only knows… I am eternally and 100% behind Israel. And Jerusalem-the city of the great king. Good luck in the hellhole of Muslim intractability…
If I haven’t met your son in person, I certainly have met and worked with others like him. My thanks to him for his service.
“Good luck in the hellhole of Muslim intractability…”
🙂 Haha! Thank you…!
You know, his official, public position is that self-defense is OK, because the overlords can’t always protect you, and the BGs at least include the folks who want to kill the off-messengers for god (but a different one from baby Jesus.) Some of those BGs specifically named him on the “better dead” list, so he gets the “protect yourself” thing, now.
So, deception operation, maybe. But, the PR value is significant, regardless. And any retraction or later inconsistency is only more good PR material.
Taking the convert’s assertions at face value:
“Well, welcome to the leading (classical) liberal, constitutional republic, where the government is a kind of group buying club for the things that we need to do together, to secure as much individual autonomy as we can get. From your ‘conversion’ you are beginning to get it. The US is fundamentally a *covenant*, more than territory or even swearing this or that to get a document saying “Yeah, he’s in.” The US is a covenant of ‘live and let live.’
Among other things, here we have freedom *of* religion, vs. imposed religion, or freedom *from* religion. You can believe as you wish, and act on those beliefs as you wish, short of using government or personal force to impose your religion on others. So, here, you can get yourself a gun to push back on the folks who say they want to kill you for disagreeing with their holy mandate. Here, if they come shooting at you, the rest of us are on your side not theirs. If you decide to go shooting people up in the name of, or to impose your preferred theocracy, well, you’ll be the one getting shot back at.
“We will work together to otherwise get left the heck alone.
“Like most ideals among humans, the ideal of the US charter is honored much in the breach. But, as you have discovered, striving for and partially achieving that ideal makes this a way, way better place than just about anywhere, and particularly has some advantages vs. places where the folks who claim a hotline to god have the government kill on their behalf. That may be good for them. It’s not so good for everybody else.
“Now, it’s not required, legally, or philosophically by our covenant, BUT the decorum of polite society (in a place where you are not required by law to be polite, only honest in certain dealings with others, and peaceful) inspires me to offer: ‘How may I, a non-believer, welcome you into our community in a way that is comfortable for you?’
Gabriel-My THOUGHTS are not printable. I’m not infringing on this Allah dude but I certainly will look at him with a juandiced eye. I walked out of a local tire shop a week after 9/11 when I glanced at all the death to Israel posters on the wall of said shop. I lived on the northside of Chicago where Hasidic/Orthodox Jews lived in close proximity to rabid Muslims. I’m also not going to war for others “rights”. If you feel the need-go ahead. I won’t defend to the death your “right” to anything. Defend your own self. I support Ted Cruz too. Constitutional conservative. As I stated I have had lots of dealing with Muslims-and my guard is up. Period…
WaterWalker –
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
I’m sorry to hear of your experience after the events of 9/11: ugly, and in basic human terms unforgivable (in my view). I have been fortunate enough to enjoy a much more positive aspect of Islamic culture, on the whole, but as is so often said, YMMV.
I’m certainly not trying to change your mind on any issues – broadly speaking I’m a conservative (in the British sense of the word) and respect absolutely your position, even if we differ on a few minor areas.
Anyway, thank you again for taking the time to reply. One of the best things about this site is the opportunity to exchange views with others whose thoughts are worth hearing. 🙂
The police have no duty to protect individuals, no liability if they don’t and lack the physical ability in any case.
Unlike a Muslim in Brussels, a Muslim in Cleveland can tell an ISIS supporter to pound sand and not be forced to foolishly rely upon the fairy tale of police “protection” of individuals.
A European Muslim is trapped between the real threat of violence and his own powerlessness to defend himself and his family.
How long does it take an immigrant to accept the entire US constitution?
I’m glad he accepts the second amendment. Now does he accept the first amendment to criticize his religion?
I will take this as a serious question.
Who knows when “immigrants” fully abandon their historical loyalties and cultures? Maybe not ever. There is no way to enforce the part of the citizenship oath about “… I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, State, or sovereignty, and particularly to __________ of who (which) I have heretofore been a subject (or citizen)”. No way to truly know if the renunciation actually happens. Except for one type of immigrant, who publicly announces that their religion rejects all secular forms of government, requiring obedience to a higher law. I think any immigrant (or any resident/citizen) who declares their religion is superior to all man-made laws, of any type, anywhere, makes irrelevant all other forms of law or governance will not ever accept the constitution. Can never accept the constitution.
Normally, it takes about 3 generations. Sure you’re an “Italian-American”, but that really means that you’re hooked up with the mob, not that you give two good flyin’s about Italy. (Unless it’s mob related, ‘natch…)
The reality is supposed to be we let a very limited amount of foreigners in, those who want to be (sorta) like “us” (since there isn’t a specific “us”). The parents work to belong, their kids straddle both worlds, and the grandkids are Americans.
We are in the unfortunate position of having misunderstood ‘diversity’ as being of a completely different society, not just some part of the united-ish whole.
I agree with you.
We are allowing people into this country who do not have any idea what freedom is nor do they want freedom.
Comments are closed.