Volume 4, Issue 24
When the President asked of the captive alien invader in the movie Independence, “What is it you want us to do?” He simply replied, “Die.”
They don’t want a solution. They want dominance. They want to install a Caliphate that would even dictate to Muslims a strict ideology. In their extreme religious perception, they want total control of all governments of this system of things. There is to be no compromise with infidels.
How do we respond to this theology of human slavery?
Today President Barak Obama said we cannot betray the very values for which America stands. These values represent protection, fairness and due process for all Americans, including American Muslims. In this, we can all agree. He went on to say, however, that ISIS terrorists are not religious warriors, but thugs and thieves. It is with this point that some leaders take question. ISIS claims a religious rigidity that, no matter how extreme, is in fact based on a radical ideology.
The President went on to criticize Donald Trump, not by name but by reference, for demanding that the term ‘Islamic terrorist’ be used in the description of the perpetrator of the this recent senseless violence. He argued that such a term is absolutely unproductive. He cited that it would not change our military strategy or make ISIS any less committed to attack us. He went on to advance that the shooter was inspired by ISIS, not recruited. What difference does it make in the tragedy of the lost lives? The terror attack was caused by ISIS influence. The President is intent on protecting the premise that we are not at war with Islam. This is in fact meritable. Yet leaders of Islam in the United States bear equal responsibility in condemning ISIS and declaring support for the Constitution of the United States, the very document that guarantees their first amendment rights to practice their religion.
Secretary Clinton issued a statement as a directive that we must continue to rely upon our partners worldwide to limit ISIS activity. She also denounced Donald Trump for his proposed ban on Muslims entering the country.
Donald Trump, in a speech, doubled down on a Muslim ban for immigration and criticized both President Obama and Secretary Clinton for failing to use the term ‘Islamic terrorist.’
In other words, President Obama’s emphasis is on protecting traditional Islam as a respected world religion with whom we are not at war. Secretary Clinton’s emphasis is on expanding and executing more coordination in foreign policy with Arab nations. Donald Trump’s emphasis is on keeping potential terrorists out of the country.
There has been criticism of Mr. Trump’s Muslim ban policy. How would it be enforced? Most passports do not include a declaration of religion. If a family is immigrating to the United States and one member of the family is a U.S. citizen, how would the non-U.S. citizen family members be treated in comparison to the family member who is a citizen, particularly if that citizen were a minor?
What would make sense is tracking all immigrants entering the United States from a country of visit or origin from a location suspected of supporting terrorist activity. If a person, including a U.S. citizen, travels to a dangerous area as designated by the State Department, that person would be subject to further scrutiny, including surveillance. This policy would be announced to the public. All would know the risk in advance. If you don’t want to be questioned, don’t travel to an enemy state or associate or communicate with a terrorist organization. It’s like your grandmother used to admonish you, “If you don’t want to get into a bar fight, don’t go to a bar.”
Further, incendiary comments on Facebook or other social media would be taken as evidentiary intent. It is the protection of the due process of our Constitution that allows questionable activity without penalty. Sedition must be proven. This is the explanation that FBI Director James Comey gave for closing the file on the Orlando shooter. They did the best they could.
There is a reason why terrorist acts of ISIS are less common in Arab nation states. They have no tolerance for suspicious activity. Of course, they do not afford all their citizens the same due process that we enjoy in America. Balance between an individual’s rights and the public’s safety must be achieved.
As this tragedy weighs on our hearts and minds, we will hear opinions from commentators that our country needs stricter gun control laws, that the problem is homegrown extremists, and that only citizen vigilance can thwart local terrorist activities. There will be great debate about prevailing injustices in the United States. There will be histrionics that America should never embrace a religious test. But certainly Sharia law can never replace the U.S. Constitution. One religious test that is fair is that all elected officials, civic and religious leaders, and citizens declare their undying commitment to the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Our Founding Fathers relied upon their faith to guide them in the establishment of binding principles for the pursuit of happiness for all peoples. The result was the Constitution. The United States is a great country. Our justice, in hope and reality, is unequaled. It is in these virtues of due process, equal protection, rule of law, and religious liberty, that we must place our faith.
This is our response to Orlando.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?