In Defense of Herman Cain's controversial position

View previous topic View next topic Go down

20110802

Post 

In Defense of Herman Cain's controversial position




I did not write this and cannot take credit.I have also blocked out the author's name because it was sent as a private message. It's worth reading every word!

Re: Kathleen Parker’s 7-24-11 op-ed article in Washington Post, “The Education of Herman Cain”


"Dear Ms. Parker:

During some 18 years as an assistant state attorney general, I occasionally litigated constitutional issues before a federal judge who famously cautioned attorneys to “give me citation not conversation.” He would have excoriated you for sanctimoniously declaring that “As dozen’s have noted, [presidential candidate Herman] Cain’s anti-mosque position doesn’t jibe with the U.S. Constitution he aims to defend.” Who are these “dozens” who maintain that the building of a house of worship is always protected by the First Amendment regardless of the political intentions of the builders?

Let me give you some citations addressing your unfounded criticism of Cain’s position that communities should be empowered to thwart mosque construction:

1. Kyl, John and Schumer, Charles, “Saudi Arabia’s Teachers of Terror,” Washington Post, August 18, 2003, p. A 19. This article, inexplicably removed from the Washington Post website is available at http://www.islamdaily.org/en/saudi-arabia/1625.saudi-arabias-teachers-of-terror.htm. The authors, a Republican and Democrat Senator unequivocally declare that the Wahhabi movement within Islam “seeks our society’s destruction.” These Senators then discuss the “alarming” findings of their subcommittee. and note how Wahhabism uses mosques and other facilities to indoctrinate “mostly young people” with a hateful ideology that serves a political agenda which seeks nothing less than “world domination.” The authors also note how Osama bin Laden was a Wahhabi as were all of the September 11th hijackers.

2. Lewis, Bernard, The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror, pp. 119-136. The author identifies the dangers of the “marriage” of Saudi oil wealth and Wahhabi teachings. He notes how the Muslim Brotherhood has received these teachings. He also illustrates the threat of Wahhabism by asking the reader to imagine the Ku Klux taking over Texas and then using its considerable oil revenue to wealth to promote its ideology.

3. McCarthy, Andrew, The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America. The author, a noted federal prosecutor, details activities of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and other groups inside our country. He relates documentary evidence of subversive schemes and notes how the Brotherhood’s financial lifeline has consisted of billions of dollars of funding from Saudi Arabia. He also discusses the Holy Land Foundation trial which resulted in multiple convictions for terrorist funding.

4. 2009 Federal District Court Memorandum Opinion and Order discussing various evidence of subversive activity produced at the Holy Land Foundation trial and ruling that prosecutors presented ample evidence of association between ISNA and the Holy Land Foundation and Hamas.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/43380629/2009-order-on-Holy-Land-Foundation-unindicted-coconspirator-list


5. Silverberg, Mark, “The Silent War, Wahhabism and the American Penal System,” http://www.islamdaily.org/en/wahabism/4365.the-silent-war-wahhabism-and-the-american-penal-sy.htm. The author discusses Wahhabi proselytizing in prisons and cites ISNA as a Wahhabi-orientated organization

6. Article citing links between ISNA and proposed Islamic center in Murfreesboro: http://actforamericaomaha.com/jerry-gordon-speaks-to-the-pending-confrontation-in-murfreesboro-tn-over-the-islamic-cultural-center/

7. United States v. Rahman, 189 F. 3d 88 (2nd cir. 1999) . http://www.uniset.ca/other/cs4/189F3d88.html {Islamist religious belief not a defense to charge of seditious conspiracy, convictions sustained )


Given these citations, I have the following questions for you:


1. Are you aware that the Wahhabi version of Islam has become a dominant sect of the Muslim faith by virtue of its access to the oil wealth of Saudi Arabia?

2. Are you aware that the Wahhabi movement through groups such as ISNA and the North American Islamic Trust, has become a major sponsor of new mosque construction in the United States and has built hundreds of mosques and Islamic centers since the early 1970’s?

3. Do you believe that a movement which “seeks our society’s destruction” through seditious conspiracy should receive full protection under the First Amendment because it believes in God and cites other principles of religious faith?

4. Are you aware that the rise of Wahhabism in the 18th century was occasioned by the political decline of the Ottoman Empire as a unified mosque and state or “umma” and that the Wahhabist revival and rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1920’s were in response to the demise of the Ottoman Empire as a political entity?

5. Are you aware that even before the rise of Wahhabism, Islamic empires typically built mosques as monuments to military and political triumph?

6. Do you believe that a movement which believes in the unity of government and religion and the promotion of laws fostering such unity should receive absolute protection under the First Amendment’s “free exercise of religion” clause?

7. Do you believe that the First Amendment’s “free exercise of religion” clause would give the Ku Klux Klan an absolute right to build a church or “Christian Cultural Center” in a community that asserts the Klan’s ideology and history as reason to thwart the project?

8. Do you believe that the First Amendment should unequivocally protect construction of a house of worship supported by a group with ties to a foreign terrorist organization, particularly where the group has been named as an unindicted coconspirator in a major terrorist funding trial?

9. Should Americans be outraged by the actions of the Obama Justice Department in supporting the Murfreesboro Islamic Center and in suggesting that it is “ridiculous” to assert that Islam is anything other than a religion?

10. Should Herman Cain proudly stand by his concerns about Islam and the threats to our security presented by Islamists?

Unless you would answer questions 3, 6, 7 & 8 with an unequivocal “yes,” you ought to reconsider your statement that an anti-mosque position is contrary to the Constitution which many of us, including myself, took an oath to uphold. Unless you answer the other questions with a “no,” you ought to reconsider your assertion that concerns about the Murfreesboro mosque are neither “compelling” nor “urgent.”

Best regards.
******* "

avatar
Cain's The Main
Admin

Posts : 360
Join date : 2011-02-13

View user profile http://cain4pres.americantalk.net

Back to top Go down

- Similar topics
Share this post on: Excite BookmarksDiggRedditDel.icio.usGoogleLiveSlashdotNetscapeTechnoratiStumbleUponNewsvineFurlYahooSmarking

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum