Although it is slow to gain traction, Americans are beginning to see the signs of a part of the umma, the global Muslim community, which will forever be a thorn in the side of America and consequently that of all Americans. That is the issue of Muslim loyalty, especially Muslims in the military.
Liberals in America don’t see loyalty to ones former homeland or culture a problem. In fact, President Obama calls diversity in America one of our greatest strengths when in reality it is a threat of grave proportions. Immigrants who come to our country to become a part of it, to assimilate and to truly become Americans are not the issue and over the years legal immigrants who gave up their former life to become a part of our culture and society have added much to the development of this nation.
The ones however that come only for the benefits, welfare, special deals and perks while holding onto their citizenship of their birthplace, and who hold to an underlying desire to transform our nation into a mirror of their political philosophy, are a threat to America’s very survival. And nowhere is it becoming more obvious as in the case of Muslim loyalty to Islam and to other Muslims, placing their loyalty to Americans and America itself second.
When choices have to be made, one always chooses in favor of their greatest loyalty, whether it is to simple desire, family, religion, society, humanity culture and tradition, or to a country. We always make decisions based upon our strongest connections and priorities. Muslims have sworn their allegiance to Allah, Muhammad and the Muslim community. When push comes to shove, as it does on national security issues, they will always chose their faith over your friendship or their status as Americans.
In November of 2009, America got its first glimpse into what lengths Muslim Americans will go to when faced with the choice of loyalty to their sworn oath to stand for the United States or to stand against the United States when it clashes with Islamic principles.
Major Nidal Malik Hassan, an Army psychiatrist, had S.O.A. (Soldier of Allah or Slave of Allah depending on who you ask) printed on his business cards. He was known for his radical views against the Iraq war and the actions of the United States against his fellow Muslims and vocalized them in meetings he had while operating as an Army Officer. His rdical views were ignored out of a desire to tolerant of the religion of Islam even though it is an ideology contrary to American values.
During the attack Hassan was reported to have shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) as he fired his weapon. This was become known to Americans as a battle cry made as terrorists detonate bombs, or as Hassan did, fire their weapons in an attempt to kill in the name of Allah and the defense of Islam against a perceived aggressive enemy.
Sadly, after over a year of “investigation” our government cowardly decided to label Hassan’s killing of 13 people plus one unborn baby and the wounding of over 30 others as “workplace violence”. This exhibits the Obama’s administration’s reluctantly to see facts right in front of them. This is however in keeping with Obama’s mantra that we are “not now or will we ever be at war with Islam”.
With each new terrorist attempt aimed at our citizenry, a great portion of Americans are beginning to see that proclamation as less palatable.
More recently, the American soldier Nasser Abdo has said, “I don't believe I can involve myself in an army that wages war against Muslims. I don't believe I could sleep at night if I take part, in any way, in the killing of a Muslim.”
Abdo is stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky where some 5,000 soldiers are being deployed to fight in Afghanistan against the Islamic Taliban. He has made his choice as to which loyalty he is more commanded to follow. He refuses to go to war against his fellow Muslims even though the ones he is being sent to fight against are actively involved in the killing of his fellow American soldiers. Muslim loyalty trumps American loyalty.
In Abdo’s case he may end up in prison instead of Afghanistan for his “religious convictions”. Watch for liberal organizations to come to his defense as they are prone to do helping anyone taking a stand against America.
Do not soldiers take an oath to defend America if not verbally at least is that not the intent of enlistment in the armed forces in the first place?
What are Muslims taught about oaths in Islam? Islamic traditions found in the Hadith, one of the three sets of writings Muslim faith is based upon, states: “Abu Bakr faithfully kept his oaths until Allah revealed to Mohammad the atonement for breaking them. Afterwards he said, ‘If I make a pledge and later discover a more worthy pledge, then I will take the better action and make amends for my earlier promise’.”
In other words, an oath is good only as long as you don’t later decide there is something better to believe in, making it in effect useless and not worthy to uphold. In the case of military service such switching of loyalties is a threat to our nation security.
Really however, do Muslims ever switch their allegiances? In their hearts did they ever swear to protect America in the first place? Surely they knew where their priorities lay all along.
So what of Muslims serving in the armed forces? In my opinion, based on what I know of Islamic loyalty, I believe that every Muslim soldier who sees himself as a Muslim first and an American second, is a national security risk for sabotage, espionage and even overt attacks against their fellow soldiers.
Is this view supported by the Qur’an? In Surah 5:51 it states, “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your protectors: they are but protectors of each other. And he amongst you who turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guides not a people unjust.”
Qur’an 3:28: “Let not the Believers take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than Believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that you may guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (to remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.”
There are 14 such verses in the Qur’an admonishing Believers (Muslims) not to take for themselves friends, protectors or even helpers from among the unbelievers and to do so risks the anger and wrath of Allah. The exception being that you can make “fake” friends with unbelievers in an attempt to keep yourself from harm. Deception is widely promoted in Islam.
Qur’an 58:22 shows just how personal it can get. In part it reads: “You will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred.”
It doesn’t get much more personal than that. This verse says that you will not find love in anyone who rejects Allah or Muhammad, be they father, son, brother or other kin. The line between Muslims and non-Muslims is a pretty well-defined one. Only Islamic apologists who praise diversity at all costs and tolerance of every culture no matter how perverted seek to blur that line.
A Muslim soldier has dual loyalties, on the surface at least. Inwardly they have only one. A true Muslim never swears loyalty to anyone or anything above Allah, Muhammad, or Islam. Counting on their loyalty to America can be a devastating decision as the Fort Hood shootings proved emphatically.
Muslims were however killed in the attacks of 9/11 and the Qur’ans admonishment against Muslims killing Muslims seems to contradict the idea that Islam permits such killings. However, if you will notice a fine detail in the above mentioned verse 5:51 it says that when Muslims choose associations with unbelievers they become “of them”. This phrase erases all obligation to take care not to kill other Muslims. Once they become one of “them” they themselves become fair game.
This principle was defined in Muhammad’s time when a specific attack was planned for nighttime. His officers were concerned that in the darkness innocent children or women might be inadvertently killed. Muhammad told them not to worry about it because they were “of them”. Collateral damage is acceptable in the advance of Islam through conquest as lines of morality are erased. September 11, 2001 proved that.
Should Muslim soldiers then be restricted to non-combative positions so as not to be placed in a position of having to kill fellow Muslims? Even that will not work as working in the food industry, administrative positions, motor pool or hospital workers gives aid in one form or another to soldiers who will be fighting Muslims. They see this as aiding and abetting the enemy. They will be viewed by Islam as coconspirators in the attacks upon Muslims on any field of battle. The only option is not to allow Muslims to serve in the United States Armed Forces in any capacity.
Muslim loyalty does exist, but only for Islam. If a Muslim says he will defend America against his fellow brother, Muhammad calls him an apostate, a traitor and worthy of the same fate as the unbeliever. So why do they continue to call themselves Muslims if they have indeed turned their back on Islamic teachings? Because in their heart they have not abandoned Islam.
Muhammad’s words recorded in Bukhari 8,73,70 makes it plain. “Harming a Muslim is an evil act; killing a Muslim means rejecting Allah”. Simply put, for a Muslim soldier to kill a fellow Muslim is an act of rejecting Allah and without loyalty to Allah, one is not a Muslim.
In Bukhari 1,2,12 Muhammad explains “True faith comes when a man’s personal desires mirror his wishes for other Muslims”. Since a Muslim’s desire is not to be killed, he cannot seek or participate in the killing of other Muslims and still be a man of faith who follows Islam.
Simply put, Islam divided the world into two camps, dar al Islam, the land of submission of which Muslims are a part, and dar al harb, the land of war, everyone else. It is an impossibility for a Muslim to be a part of both worlds, promoting Islamic goals and purpose on one hand and being a participant in war against those very ideals on the other hand.
But can be believe them if they say they are Muslims yet loyal to America? Hardly. Islam is deceptive is anything at all. The principle of Taqiyya, Sacred Deception, allows for Muslims to lie to non-Muslims in the advancement of Islam. We have already seen that an oath is little more than a convenient lie told to deceive since the oath can be retracted when another better idea or cause comes along. Muslims are forbidden to lie, cheat, steal from, harm or kill fellow Muslims. The courtesy does not however extend to you and I as unbelievers and kafirs.
Therefore, although Muslim loyalty does exist, it pertains only to loyalty to Islam and the umma, the global Muslim community. As such allowing Muslims to serve in the protection of the American ideal, society and community is like unquestioningly hiring known spies and saboteurs to fill our ranks. It is absurd and suicidal.
So it appears that the Obama mantra that we are not at war with Islam is as foolish as it is untrue. We are at war with Islam and every American Muslim (forgive the contradiction in terms) soldier in uniform is an enemy soldier behind our lines and needs to be treated a such.
Until and unless we treat Islam as the political philosophy it is, rather than as simply another religion, we will never be successful in the war against terrorism or in the effort to save America as the last free country in the world. It is a fight we cannot afford to lose and one we cannot win with the ranks of our armed forces filled with those loyal only to our enemy.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
The Idea of Muslim Loyalty and the Dangers it Poses to America
Labels:
Bukhari,
Fort Campbell,
Fort Hood,
Hadith,
Islam,
Koran,
loyalty,
military,
Muhammad,
Muslim,
Muslims,
Nasser Abdo,
Qur'an,
Quran,
soldier,
Taliban,
Taqiyya,
unbleievers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment