When those citizens within any nation who "sound the alarm" are labeled "alarmists" by the liberal element within that nation, and the alarm so sounded is concerned with a perceived imminent threat to that nation's security and welfare, and the nation is then persuaded by the liberal element to ignore and even ridicule that so-called "alarmist's paranoia," it falls to the realists within that nation to investigate the concerns of all. The so-called alarmists and the liberal have both concluded their assessments of the perceived threat and will not be persuaded otherwise without intervention that is nothing short of divine revelation. Liberal bias and conservative presuppositions cannot be trusted to provide accuracy and objectivity in a matter of such great concern as national security. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has sounded the alarm and the true alarmists are alarmed.
The liberal and the conservative tend toward extremism when standing face to face and confronted by opposing idelologies. In the presence of opposition one side will be tempted to reject the very ideals they hold dear simply to avoid consensus with their political foes. Our present situation in the United States illustrates this truth. As foolish as it appears and is in reality, the Democrats would rather see us lose the war in Iraq than have it won and freedom and democracy come to the Middle East under a Republican adminstration.
The mind-set of the liberal is not the mind-set of America but one could easily be persuaded that it is. It is no secret that the media in the United States is liberal and therefore an ally of the liberal politico. Though in the minority, they have the privilege of media personalities who "speak softly and carry a big stick." The liberal media giants appeal to the nation's passions and compassion and emotional and mental weaknesses rather than to logic and truth. How else can the editors at The New York Times justify publishing papers that jeopardize our national security? They cite America's "need to know." The American "bubba" responds, "Yeah, dats right." The Times used its freedom of the press and free speech as a cloak for its sin. The Times did not "use" the freedom of the press and free speech, they "abused" them; it was an act of treason.
U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., has sounded the alarm against what he perceives as an imminent threat against our nation. The object of his alarm is Keith Ellison, a Muslim who has been elected to office by his constituents in Minnesota. He is the first Muslim to become a U.S. Congressman. His being a Muslim cannot in anyway effect his seeking election to office or his carrying out the duties of an American Congressman; he is sworn to uphold our Constitution and has said he will indeed do just that. Our Constitution forbids the test of religion for anyone seeking office in the U.S. (Article VI, sec. 3). Representative-elect Ellison has responded to Goode's well-publicized concerns by assuring Rep. Goode that he wants the same thing for our nation as does Goode. I have posted an earlier statement on my feelings about Mr. Ellison's response.
With our current experience of and knowledge of Islam and its propensities toward violence in order to achieve its stated goals; and with our knowledge of Islam's tendencies toward equivocation to achieve those goals ("the end justifies the means"); and with the publicized statements by members of various Islamic organizations in the U.S. such as CAIR and the organization of American imams that their goal for America is to convert us to Islam and rule from the White House, Goode has a legitimate reason to be concerned and to sound an alarm. And the liberal American media and the liberal American politician have responded in true fashion, consistent with their biases. It seems that equivocation is the favored child of Islam and American liberalism.
When celebrity is all one needs to persuade an ignorant and decadent society to lean this way or that through public outbursts and accusations unsupported by any facts whatsoever, and that outbursts is met with much applause from the decadent, and the news media echo the celebrity's idiotic pronouncement by parroting her characterizations of a particular segment of America, then someone must sound the alarm; Rep. Goode has done just that. And the liberal American media have answered accordingly.
The Charlotte Observer of December 28, 2006, has this headline in their Opinion page: Our nation's values "Threat comes from Virginia congressman, not Muslims." Rosie O'Donnell Ali has found her soul-mate. The ignorance of Ms. Ali and the liberal American media is confirmed by their willful ignorance of the historically verifiable fact that Islam is as much a political body (if not more) as a religious one. The non-Muslim Islamic advocate and world reknowned religious scholar Karen Armstrong, documents in her book "Islam," the necessity of the political in the life of Islam. "Muslims developed their own rituals, mysticism, philosophy, doctrines, sacred texts, laws and shrines like everybody else. But all these religious pursuits sprang directly from the Muslim's frequently anguished contemplation of the political current affairs of Islamic society. If state instituions did not measure up to the Quranic ideal, if their political leaders were cruel or exploitative, or if their community was humiliated by apparently irreligious enemies, a Muslim could feel that his or her faith in life's ultimate purpose and value was in jeopardy." And even more succinctly "Politics was, therefore, what Christians would call a sacrament: it was the arena in which Muslims experienced God and which enabled the divine to function effectively in the world. Consequently, the historical trials and tribulations of the Muslim community-political assassinations, civil wars, invasions, and the rise and fall of the ruling dynasties-were not divorced from the interior religious quest, but were of the essence of the Islamic vision." In other words, in an Islamic constitution there will be no "wall of separation between mosque and state." The political is "sacred" to the Muslim.
When the Constitution of the United States is challenged by Islamists in America, and it is being challenged even now under the guise of freedom of religion and speech, the response to such a challenge will have to be from an informed and courageous and united Executive, Legislative, and Judicial body. The key to overcoming the encroachment of forces that desire our downfall is the Constitution. And the only reasonable way to prevent what Rep. Goode rightly sees as an imminent danger to our nation by way of our very own Congress, is to accept the notion of Islam not as a religion, but as a form of government that seeks to implement an Islamic theocracy in America; that is against our Constitution. While our Constitution protects all people from the government's interference in their religious matters, it does not turn a blind eye to subversive groups who use religion as a smoke-screen for their clandestine aspirations.
What I am waiting on now is a response from Rep. Goode to Keith Ellison's statements regarding all that has transpired since he sent his letter to his constituents. Will Rep. Goode be "sensitized" to Islam and by Islam? Or will he stand his ground? Will there be an investigation of Ellison's ties to particular Islamic groups on our own soil who have been shown to have ties to terrorists?
Is Rep. Goode, R-Va., the real threat to our values as the Charlotte Observer charges? It seems to me that the Observer is a greater threat than Goode. Why is it this liberal newspaper regards the free speech of an American Congressman a greater threat than the Islamic imams and clerics around the world who constantly call for the overthrow of our government and the death of "American infidels?" The liberal anti-America Americans are sleeping with the enemy and producing children more hellish than they. As Rep. Goode said, "Wake up, America!"
The Observer editor(s) who wrote this piece accusing Goode of being America's real enemy say that Goode's letter "is further evidence of the sad decline in Virginia's contribution to democratic thought." The attempt here is to compare Goode with the likes of early Virginians such as Jefferson and Washington. Both of these founding fathers are quoted supposedly to give support to the Observer's opinion of the absurdity of Goode's fears. But judge for yourself. "George Washington: 'Happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens.'" What George Washington said wasn't actually true then but his insistance on those living "under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens" is still a just expectation for our people. Oddly enough, this is the heart of Rep. Goode's concerns for our nation; that Islamists are not demeaning themselves as good citizens. How can one be a good citizen of the United States of America when one's subversive religion will not allow that one to pledge allegiance to the very nation he has been elected to serve? How can Ellison swear to uphold the American Constitution knowing full well that Islam forbids him from doing so? How can Keith Muhammad X whatever have brotherhood with imams one moment and agree with the Islamic leaders on the goal of replacing the Constitution with the Qur'an and sharia law and greet his constituents the next?
The liberal Charlotte Observer editor continues with a quote from Jefferson that again supports Rep. Goode's point more than theirs: "I am for freedom of religion, and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendency of one sect over another." This does not require any clarification. This is further evidence of the sad decline of truth in media. This is further evidence of the sad decline of the spine in America. The spineless, liberal, leftist, cowardly editor finishes with this brilliant and chilling conclusion: "But it seems to us the threat to them is Rep. Goode, not the imaginary Muslim horde envisioned in his letter." Ask Holland, Germany, The Netherlands, the UK, and France about the "imaginary Muslim horde." Ask the government of the Philippines about the imaginary Muslim horde, or Somalia, or Morocco, or Ethiopia. There are clearly times when a nation needs an alarmist or two and men and women with backbone and knowledge who will stand up and sound the alarm. America has been blessed with many such men and women but do we hear them?