June 14, 2006
Marine Corps Builds Mosque in Pentagon
Simply unbelievable.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
From FrontPageMag.com:
We are at war with militant Islam, but you wouldn't know it from the Pentagon, which is busy erecting a shrine to Islam just five short years after Islamic terrorists destroyed a good chunk of its own building and killed more than 100 of its occupants. Worse, it's consulting on the project with a Wahhabi-educated cleric posing as a moderate.I'm in shock. Just what in the world is the U.S. military brass thinking? Political correctness has obviously gone too far.Last week, military brass -- along with representatives from the terror-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations -- dedicated the first Muslim prayer center for the Marines as a symbol of the military's "religious tolerance" and "respect" for the faith the enemy uses to attack us. Already, plans are in the works to build by 2009 a bigger mosque at the Marine base in Quantico so Muslim service members can have a "proper place" to worship, and one that "honors their religious heritage," officials say, not realizing that the mosque can also be used by the enemy to build a Fifth Column inside the Marines.
The idea for the center came from Navy Lt. Abuhena Mohammed Saifulislam, a young, smooth-talking Muslim chaplain, who wanted a permanent place of worship -- and "education" -- for the growing number of soldiers who are interested in -- and converting to -- Islam.
There's more at the link.
[Update 06/15/06]
In response to my email, the author of the FrontPageMag.com article (Paul Sperry) provided clarification indicating that the title of this post is incorrect. The subject mosque is being built at Quantico, not the Pentagon.
My interpretation of Sperry's piece was mistaken and was based upon statements that a shrine to Islam (prayer center) was dedicated last week and that a "bigger mosque" is to be built at Quantico. If a "bigger" mosque is being constructed, I allowed myself to assume that a smaller mosque, dedicated last week, already existed in the Pentagon.
Apologies to the readers and thanks to Vinnie for noting the error.
From Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
10:11 AM
| Comments (39)
| Add Comment
Post contains 354 words, total size 2 kb.
1
If there is a christian chapel at the Pentagon, there should be a mosque, providing that a sufficient number off the military folk working there are Muslim. How is this different from the chaplains who are Muslim? Do you oppose that as well? I doubt it is PC motivating this, although it may be PR. Also, our military, particularly DIA, has been heavily recruiting people who can speak Arabic, Urdu, Farsi, and Turkish. Guess what? A lot of people who fit that profile (as well as lesser language groupings like Indonesian) are Muslim. Thank God we are recruiting them. According to several military blogs, having a translator is key to success on the ground in Iraq. It can keep a lot of innocents from dying on their side, and save some lives on our side as well.
Relax. This is a good move. May do something to help the international damage caused by Boykin.
Posted by: jd at June 14, 2006 10:25 AM (aqTJB)
2
Mike: Maybe its not a shrine to MILITANT Islam or Islamic terrorism, much as the Christian crucifix is not a shrine to fellows like McVeigh, Nichols and Jim Jones. Just a possibility.
Posted by: glenn at June 14, 2006 10:27 AM (UHKaK)
3
Jim Jones claimed to be a christian, though his following numbered in the hundreds-- not the MILLIONS that adhere to radical islam sects like wahabish, salafism, etc. It's not just a few blokes.
Also, McVeigh and Nichols never mentioned Jesus at all, so it's hard to see where Libs constantly get off using the two as examples of "christian terrorism." Are the pickins so slim? They must be.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 10:35 AM (8e/V4)
4
Not to mention "christian terrorism" isn't even an issue. Islamic terrorism IS. So again, where do Libs constantly get off even comparing the two? Is it to remind us that christianity has blood on it's hands two (as jd claims). GREAT! And also irrelevant. That's why islamic shrines in the Pentagon is news, and christian shrines aren't.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 10:49 AM (8e/V4)
5
JC: down boy. True, I have no information as to whether or not McVeigh and Nichols actions were motivivated by religion. I think they were just your garden variety nilhists pissed off by Waco and Ruby Ridge. But that was not my point. My point is they were likely Christian by birth/rearing, yet do not represent practitioners of Christianity. The same could possibly be said -- possibly-- of the militant sects of Islam such as the Wahabists. They do not represent what could well be Muslim allies. Keep in mind, the surest way to win will be to mesh with the Muslim populations which we can, not to alinate them across the board.
Posted by: glenn at June 14, 2006 10:50 AM (UHKaK)
6
>>>But that was not my point. My point is they were likely Christian by birth/rearing,
In other words you have no point. Which was MY only point. lmao!
If, on the other hand, you want to argue that not all muslims are dangerous terrorists and we should make friends of them, then fine. A perfectly legitimate line of reasoning.
But the baseless and oh so tired Lib talking points about "christian terrorism" are so SCHTOOOoooooOOOOPID and retarded I'm amazed you people can tie your shoes in the morning. And frankly, quite tiresome. No offence to you, but it gets boring dispelling Lib ignorance day in and day out with no end in sight.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 11:07 AM (8e/V4)
7
hey Jd, wake up and smell the Caliphate?
We're talking about a religion that believes you're either a Muslim, in subjugation or dead.
Building a Mosque in a wino alley is victory for the religion, as long as it's actively attracting people, and teaching the word, this will be seen as a great victory, America putting a Mosque inside the Pentagon.
Perhaps we should build one in the White house? or perhaps on top of Lincoln's crotch in the memorial?
It's limpwrists like yourself that is building the Caliphate, behind the Jihadi's doing the headcutting.
Posted by: davec at June 14, 2006 11:14 AM (CcXvt)
8
>>>It's limpwrists like yourself that is building the Caliphate, behind the Jihadi's doing the headcutting.
I suspect you're right. The Caliphate will eventually be established by force of numbers, not through terrorism. And you can thank the multi-culti Left for that. I'm thinking by the end of this century western culture is kaput if we let the Lefards have their way.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 11:22 AM (8e/V4)
9
Okay, wait a minute. I'll get lambasted for this, but I agree with jd. I think it's a good sign that we're recruiting these people and that they are coming to us willingly and we must offer them the same opportunities we offer Christian or Jewish service members. You may say, "But this is the PENTAGON!"
I say "Exactly!"
JC said himself, "If, on the other hand, you want to argue that not all muslims are dangerous terrorists and we should make friends of them, then fine." That's what I'm saying. Why should we ostracize those who WANT to help us by denying them a basic benefit such as a place to worship? If you think it will go unmonitored like many mosques elsewhere, you're not paying much attention. This is the safest place to have one.
Posted by: Oyster at June 14, 2006 11:35 AM (ULAbo)
10
Hmmm...insurance?
If the Pentagon is attacked, it will be obvious to everyone that the attackers endangered or destroyed a mosque. There's a little upside.
Posted by: See-Dubya at June 14, 2006 11:42 AM (eby9C)
11
JC: Yes, that is the one and only point I was attempting to make (the christian terrorism angle is all yours.)
It is only pragmatic (i.e. in our interests) to find ways to team with the reasoned Muslim populations against those less reasoned - and vice-versa. Again, we went to Iraq in the name of LIBERATION and generally recognize the Muslim faith. As we invite as many reasonable Muslims across the globe into our culture as possible, this mosque could possibly be one more way to do so. I believe that's how we win.
And again, thank you for generously bringing your reason, your practiclity, your moral clarity and your intellectual superiority to the table!
Posted by: glenn at June 14, 2006 11:46 AM (UHKaK)
12
Oyster:
Only if you believe their loyalty to the United States, and the armed forces supercede that of their religion. I would rather rip out a Christian Church, and tell the armed forces to take it up the road to any public church than put in a road to victory in the Pentagon, a sign of America's power.
This is dhimmitude, with magnitude, adopt the Muslim religion, and embrace it. You do not have to believe that their religion is equal to your own, it's treatment of women, and your right to practice your religion and freedoms is held counter by it, next they'll open up a commie recruiting office.
Posted by: davec at June 14, 2006 11:57 AM (CcXvt)
13
The last figures I read showed about 16,000 Americans murdered in the USA last year. Quite frankly I am a lot more worried about being killed by a christian Ameican than by a fanatical muslim Arab.
Posted by: john ryan at June 14, 2006 12:05 PM (TcoRJ)
14
the question of loyalty arises whenever a strange religion is admitted to the American creed. It certainly did for many Jews, who were accused during the McCarthy era and later of having dual loyalties. It occurred with Catholics, who were believed by many, particularly born-agains, to have allegiance to Rome first, Washington second. And it arises with muslims. Not all Muslims will be loyal, I'm sure. But the benefits to granting them religious equality outweigh any risks. Also, it is in the Constitution.
And no, we shouldn't have a mosque at the White House, unless a future Muslim president wants it in his house. We didn't have a confessional when our only non-protestant president was in there, did we?
Oyster, it is REALLY going to hurt your reputation here if you agree with me more than once. Of course, since you don't hesitate to lambaste me when I'm dead wrong...
I don't think there is a prayer of any caliphate being constructed in America. I very much doubt if there ever would be one built in the middle east. It is a retro, anti-modernity fantasy. Even in Afghanistan it faced determined resistance, and was beginning to collapse of its own internal contradictions. Any new caliphate would have to confront the yawning chasm between persian, turkish, and arab nationalisms, with Kurds thrown in for fun. It would also have to confront Shia and Sunni conflict, and probably not peacefully. Finally, it would have to address modernity itself. As they are finding in Kansas and Missouri, pre-modern attitudes about science inspired by adherence to interpretations of ancient texts is in direct conflict with scientific progress. This works with even greater force in Islamic societies, one reason they remain incredibly backwards economicially and technologically. If you teach hours and hours of memorizing the Koran, and very little about physics...you inherit a lot of poverty, particularly when the oil runs out.
Don't be so naive as to believe Al Qaeda's PR. We need fear no caliphate.
Posted by: jd at June 14, 2006 12:12 PM (aqTJB)
15
Without the fear of a caliphate, most people here wouldn't have a reason to get out of bed in the morning. C'mon, JD, don't spoil their fun.
Posted by: Venom at June 14, 2006 12:27 PM (dbxVM)
16
venom,
likewise for Libs and "Bush" taking away all their fweeeeedoms!!! waaahaaa!
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 12:39 PM (8e/V4)
17
Yup, both sides are guilty.
Posted by: Venom at June 14, 2006 12:50 PM (dbxVM)
18
It is a retro, anti-modernity fantasy
why, you just summed up Islam.
You might want to break out a map once in a while JD and check where Islam is the majority religion, then see how many of those countries adopt the philosophy of Islam jurisprudence, even in western countries they request Sharia, in the U.K, Canada, France etc. countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand are becoming hotbeds of radicalism.
See, you have your Liberal Glasses™ on again, you don't have to believe in the Caliphate, while there are thousands of Muslims amongst us that do, as do a lot of the "guest" Muslims to the U.S. In countries with a majority of Muslims they want the Caliphate, despite the incompatibility with the different sects of Islam -- remember the sign held up in New York "Islam will dominate" (flag over White House) even being free here they want to enslave you.
You have to think Jd, if the Russians had played Communism off as a religion, instead of an ideology, you'd likewise want to built them a shrine inside the Pentagon too, despite it being as incompatible with democracy as Islam. Where is that famous line you libs like to bring out about Republican support for the patriot act, something about trading liberty for security?
May I suggest if you want to embrace Islam in the course of multiculturalism, you can start by slicing off your clit.
Posted by: davec at June 14, 2006 12:52 PM (CcXvt)
19
Venom,
I think the threat of a Caliphate is probably overblown. But I think raising the issue is valid in order to point out what the motivations behind islamic terrorism are. It's not "poverty", nor "Israel". Nor the neocons. It's the Caliphate.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 12:53 PM (8e/V4)
20
and ps., davec is right. Even though the Caliphate may be utter rubbish fantasy, untold thousands of muslims don't think it is. It's real to them, and that's what counts.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 14, 2006 12:55 PM (8e/V4)
21
Wow! Sometimes a simple thread topic can trigger wondering all over the place!
I don't have a problem with a mosque in the Pentagon - it's an easy accommodation and good for morale.
On small facilities, we all usually share the same structure, or private homes are used.
On large facilities, there are often several churches on site (often depending on funding and contributions/donations.
You should all be concerned more with a movement afoot for a number of years now (from the left) to end military expenditures on anything religious, and even remove churches from military/government facilities in the name of Separation of Church and State.
Posted by: hondo at June 14, 2006 01:34 PM (MVgHp)
22
Of course they need to build a mosque in the Pentagon - they need a safe place for the bomb-makers to assemble and a place to cache weapons, with tall minarets for snipers and from which to direct the mujahadin.
Posted by: DirtCrashr at June 14, 2006 01:56 PM (pmP8H)
23
Gotdamnit, this stuff pisses me off. These parasites are always "smooth talking" and they are playing us for fools. Build a mosque at the Pentagon? Why are we such frikkin pansies we can't just say, "Stick you Pentagon mosque idea up your nose!" Is that so hard to say? Enough with the bending over backward to show we more tolerant than the next guy. Muslims deserve no tolerance.
Posted by: Richard at June 14, 2006 01:57 PM (U+YqD)
24
And these sonofabitches at CAIR are the worst of the lot. I want to gouge out my eyes when I hear these guys talking their crap.
Posted by: Richard at June 14, 2006 01:59 PM (U+YqD)
25
Most cancers start from a few cells. This is just the thin edge of the wedge. May as well have a scientology room and a shrine to Hitler too, why not please everyone?
Posted by: Jester at June 14, 2006 03:08 PM (TuAMG)
26
john ryan, you, and jd are so messed up in the head. You are not going to get killed by a Christian in America unless you attack one in their home. Of course, if they are Amish, they will not stop you from screwing the goat; Although, they think it is wrong for you do so.
Posted by: Leatherneck at June 14, 2006 03:48 PM (D2g/j)
27
davec, it's not that I don't understand many viewpoints here as well as yours. Because I do. Actually, it was my first reaction, but it doesn't stay with me once I think about it. You said, "Only if you believe their loyalty to the United States, and the armed forces supercede that of their religion." On the other hand I would ask if you're sure that they're more loyal to their religion than the source of their freedoms and opportunities, the United States. I'm certainly not denying that there aren't fanatics here in the US, but I think I can safely say that most Muslims have integrated better here than Europe. We already have Muslims in our military and they're over there fighting too. I don't think we should punish that.
========================
jd, what reputation? ;-)
Posted by: Oyster at June 14, 2006 05:13 PM (YudAC)
28
As an emailer pointed out, the shrine isn't being built in the Pentagon.
It's being built at the Quantico Marine base.
Fickle blog skimmers, you are.
Posted by: Vinnie, Editor In Chief Pro Tempore at June 14, 2006 06:13 PM (/qy9A)
29
Oyster:
The problem is there already has been one attack against fellow soldiers by a Muslim, Sgt. Asan Akbar when he threw Grenades into the tent of his officers. LGF had some choice quotes also from the Muslim soliders, check that out.
I'm not sure about the integration issue, I know that in public they say a lot of things, in private, or in their mosques they say another.
Even "moderates" dodge the "does Israel have the right to exist" or "are israeli citizens legitimate targets" questions, and why shouldn't they, their religion tells them jews are the sons of pigs and monkeys.
Posted by: davec at June 14, 2006 06:48 PM (CcXvt)
30
Yes I am very fickle. Why is there a need to build one anywhere in a non-muslim nation? Try building a church in Tehran or Mogadishu and see how far you get...and before you give me the freedom of the west argument, consider how much of your own culture and beliefs have been compromised by being too liberal with minority viewpoints.
Posted by: Jester at June 14, 2006 06:48 PM (TuAMG)
31
I googled number of Muslims in US military and one newspaper article in a Seattle paper estimated the number at somewhere between 4-12,000, a very small number indeed, and most of those are blacks who converted from another faith or were not born Muslim. The number of Muslims from other sources is tiny. The number actually fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan is even smaller, basically nonexistant.
I agree with davec here, and doubt that anything positive can come from encouraging Islam in the military. My view is that Islam is a cancer which sooner or later will have to be dealt with, and the sooner the better, as an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.
Posted by: jesusland joe at June 14, 2006 07:12 PM (rUyw4)
32
I'm aware of the attack by Akbar and I knew you would bring it up. Did we respond by throwing all Muslims out of the military? Did some Muslim soldiers have choice words? I'm sure they did. But a very important aspect of our society is based on Think what you want, and even say what you want, as long as you don't act on it in a way that harms others. Yes, Akbar acted on it and it took everyone by surprise, but there's been no indication that anything remotely similar has happened again.
Sometimes we're going to put our hand out and pull back a stump, but not always. And each time we get hurt, we become smarter. One thing you have to remember is that the military is not a democracy and if fanatic teachings with messages of "kill the infidel" occur in a military base mosque, there will be hell to pay. They will be very closely monitored. I'm not worried about it. What I DO worry about are the Saudi financed mosques in our neighborhoods.
As far as their feelings about Israel and Jews? Yeesh, there's a ton of people here (we won't even talk about Europe) who are not Muslim and they feel the same way.
Posted by: Oyster at June 14, 2006 07:25 PM (YudAC)
33
Anyway, it's past my bedtime. G'night.
Posted by: Oyster at June 14, 2006 07:31 PM (YudAC)
34
No damn muslim should be in our military or stationed at the pentagon. Stupid, stupid, stupid. The Marine Corps brass must have joined the Navy.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 14, 2006 07:52 PM (s/5ju)
35
I have a feeling John Ryan is either a muslim or a muslim wanna be. He sure as hell isn't a Christian or American. Friggin retard.
OUTLAW ISLAM NOW
Posted by: greyrooster at June 14, 2006 07:55 PM (s/5ju)
36
Get em out of the military and get the clerics out of US prisons. These guys are "educating" inmates on the injust American system that is responsible for their incarceration. They're preparing hard core criminals to join their jihadi brothers in the war against the US. Our prisons are basically taxpayer supported islamofascist training facilties.
Posted by: Richard at June 14, 2006 08:30 PM (7KF8r)
37
Did anyone consider the possibility that the Q-town mosque is a 'honey pot'?
Suppose it does take in Wahabbis and has some radical elements.
Are you telling me there's no way there are no loyal American Marines attending that mosque?
How better to infiltrate than to do so from within such a tempting target?
Just an idea. Back to your anti-Muslim screeds.
Posted by: Allan at June 14, 2006 08:54 PM (wWKro)
38
OK, my head exploded--I agree with Hondo. Of course, he knows that this already happens in the military.
Dave---I actually think your analogy to Communism is apt. I think those who argued we should permit the widespread teaching of Communism, presence of Communist books, and teachers who were commies were right. Free societies appear more vulnerable, but they harvest hidden strengths.
And the quote you're looking for HELPS my side, not yours: those who would trade liberty for security will receive neither, or words to that effect.
I didn't say lots of Muslims didn't believe in the Caliphate. Lots of Americans believe that israel is the key to the second coming, and the rapture is coming as soon as a major middle east war breaks out. Both beliefs shouldn't be given any more credence than the basic respect you give to religious beliefs of others. In the case of Islam, when they use violence to bring about that fantasy, we'll kill some of them.
But it remains a fantasy.
But dave, how typical to portray someone who supports religious freedom as someone who wants to become Muslim, ie, an enemy. Get some new arguments, ones that have intellectual heft.
Posted by: jd at June 14, 2006 11:02 PM (S6U60)
39
and the quote you're looking for HELPS my side, not yours: those who would trade liberty for security will receive neither, or words to that effect.
It might,if I wasn't referring to your comment that "Thank God" we're recruiting Muslims, they save lives as translators.
Thank God we are recruiting them. According to several military blogs, having a translator is key to success on the ground in Iraq. It can keep a lot of innocents from dying on their side, and save some lives on our side as well.
Did I say you wanted to become a Muslim, have you taken a class from Micheal Moore:
if you want to embrace Islam in the course of multiculturalism
didn't see the word "convert" nor "become", so what were you ranting on about "intellectual heft" again?
Posted by: davec at June 15, 2006 12:44 AM (CcXvt)
44kb generated in CPU 0.09, elapsed 0.1863 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.1762 seconds, 288 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
119 queries taking 0.1762 seconds, 288 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
