From "A Proposed Constitutional Amendment" by Pedestrian Infidel:
With analysis and commentary from Ben at A NEWT ONE
A note from Radarsite:
In the previous article "Fighting Back: The 28th Amendment" we presented Pedestrian Infidel's controversial "28th Amendment", together with analysis and commentary from Ben at A Newt One. As often happens, the discussion in the comments thread has taken on a life of its own. This, I believe, is one of the most important debates that we in America can be having at this particular moment in our history. The decisions we make now will shape the very future of this great country. Here, then, are the unmoderated comments. If new comments pertinent to this crucial conversation come in, I will add them to this article in the order in which they came.
Looking back at how many easements upon our existing laws have developed into protective and interpretive sanctions for violators, your summary questions are quite appropriate. Look at how some cities, states, and commonwealths have become autonomous regions, (bucking the REAL ID, sanctuary cities) almost reverting back to the Articles of Confederation. When does a trickle become the flood?"
But do we have the collective will to enact it? Right now, the answer is No. Will we ever? Or will we have to experience some further horrendous outrage to reach this point of national resolve? We shall see. But time is running out."It's one thing to lament the burden of 'big government', but to watch disintegration of its most basic tasks and the erosion of basic rights and freedoms by 'counter-discrimination' ordinances should be humiliating. Actually, it is. That's when we must ask, as you have, over and over again. "Do we have the will...?
April 25, 2008 9:27 AM
Yeah, let's legislate the way people think! Great idea! So hyprocrtical of you to embrace America and how great we are and then say that we need to rid this land of Islam. Personally, I don't think any of you have a damn clue what it means to be an American. You embrace America and then try to trample on everything it is about. Unreal.
And by the way, your correclation between the Italian mob and Islam is soooooooo a stretch! Get a clue!
April 25, 2008 9:39 AM
Roger W. Gardner said...
Thank you Shawmut. Your comments are always interesting.
April 25, 2008 9:39 AM
Roger W. Gardner said...
Brilliant argument SF. Thank you for your erudite contribution to the discussion.
April 25, 2008 9:44 AM
I have to disagree with this or any proposed amendment like it. As much as I see the threat of Islam and the Jihadist war, I see this proposed Amendment as worse. Change the word Islam to any of the following: Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Wiccan, Christian and see if you would pass it then. I know that you or the author wouldn't do that, but there are those who would and there lies the problem.
As a Jew I find it very similar to the Nazi's Nuremberg Laws. If this can be done to Muslims, it could be done to me next. The Pandora's Box this would open ultimately leads to genocide. That is why I could not support such an amendment, even if it meant that we would lose this war. The price to our freedoms, the precedent it sets is too evil, and would ultimately destroy the very nation we are striving to save.
April 25, 2008 9:51 AM
Maggie M. Thornton said...
I see Islam as a government which whips its people into submission. I agree with much of this proposed amendment, in spirit.This is the American way, and I know there are those who will disagree with me.I have no objections to Muslims, unless they are illegal, but Muslims must never expect to live under any type of Islamic law, here in America. That includes their back alleys, where Imams rule.Muslims are not free - their own philosophy doesn't allow it. It is like nothing we've ever been up against. It is a new day. No matter how moderate, it is no different than Islamic Hamas or Fatah or PLO, the list goes on - they don't change their charters and constitutions - we don't believe one thing they say. They have sworn to kill us, and I plan on America having the last word - and having it before it is too late.
April 25, 2008 3:57 PM
Roger W. Gardner said...
Thank you both Findalis and Maggie. I have only known the two of you for a short period of time now. But it has been long enough to appreciate the fact that you are both intelligent women of integrity. Your contributions here on Radarsite are very valuable to me.
In this present discussion I would have to agree with Maggie; I think that she states the case perfectly. However, the point of view that Findalis holds is certainly reasonable and valid and worth responding to in depth. Here, then, is my response.
Just a few months ago I, too, would have thought this type of approach much too extreme, but more and more, as I see the enemy winning battle after battle in our courts and in the arena of our American culture, and I see our woefully ineffectual -- or outright collaborationist responses, I find myself coming round to this take-no-prisoners stance. I understand the arguments against enacting such legislation, but what are we actually doing now? Close to nothing, it seems to me.
Unless I misunderstand it Findalis, basically your objection is based on the classic "slippery slope" argument. But that much-used analogy has never won me over, simply because it always presumes a certain helplessness, an inability to control one’s own fate. There are after all such things as brakes. Fighting back effectively doesn't mean that we have to automatically become fascists. We had a precedent for this national dilemma in WWII. And I use that as a pertinent guide for our present circumstances. For more on this argument see: http://radarsite.blogspot.com/2008/04/in-1942-some-112000-japanese-were.html
In short, we did away with almost all civil rights for suspect immigrants. We imposed censorship, set up military tribunals, shot suspected spies, opened internment camps, instituted rationing, and indulged in unabashed propaganda. We took stringent defensive measures -- including what we would today call "racial profiling". But everything that we did was, in my opinion, justified by the circumstances. However -- and this is the relevant part of the argument -- immediately after the war, rather than continuing our helpless slide down this 'slippery slope' to fascism, we quickly corrected course and returned to our traditional constitutional democracy. And, we successfully sowed the seeds to democracy in those nations we had defeated. But, we were only able to do this because we had won the war. Had we lost the war, these finer points of moral conduct would have quickly become moot.
I’m sorry, but I just can’t buy into the argument that it’s better to lose this war than to lose what we stand for. I believe that what we stand for is not all that vulnerable. It has withstood the test of time and innumerable challenges in the past and I believe it will withstand those challenges that we face today, just as it withstood them in 1945.
We are, as you well know, fighting a ruthless enemy who knows how to use our constitutional protections against us. They know full well how reluctant we are to fight back with those drastic weapons we eventually used in WWII. This is a tremendously important discussion, and one can only wish that we were having this same discussion today in the halls of Congress.
Unfortunately, this is not the case; so far at least, this discussion is still relegated to the virtual world of the blogosphere.Thank you once again for your always thoughtful responses. I’m beginning to think that these comments, these arguments, are so important that they deserve an article of their own. rg
April 26, 2008 3:32 AM
I believe that all we have to do is to take a page from Australia; If you come to our country, understand that we are a Christian Nation with freedom of religion and individuals as founded by our forefathers, You are expected to obey our Laws and learn to speak English and Integrate in our socio-economic way of life .. If NOT willing to do this well STAY THE HELL OUT!!!
April 26, 2008 6:45 AM
Roger Guy: Personally, I don't think we need an Amendment because it could lead to a path we really don't need to "explore". However: The discussion is crucial. For the idiot that thinks Islam is AOK, drop dead. It isn't AOK. Islam is a POLITICAL system based in the Shar'ia Law and there is no other "religion" acceptable.
As is socialism/communism diametrically opposed to the United States Constitution, so is Islam. Our FEDERAL REPUBLIC, operated under democratic principles cannot coexist in the same country with either socialism, communism or Islam. One must give to the other.Islam is a selfish and intolerant political system, as is socialism and communism...or the Mob for that matter.
CAIR officials have claimed that Shar'ia Law will "rule the United States by 2050". I have written and discussed this on many levels with many people. Since that proclamation was made, the lads that uttered the statement have since been deported after having been found to have connections to HAMAS and Hizballah. Imagine that.
No. No Amendment...just discussion and remove the Dhimmicrats from Public Service...like Condi. After all, she said we couldn't use the term "JIHAD" or "JIHADIST" anymore.
April 26, 2008 8:53 AM
Over the past twenty-four hours this notion has been ricochetting in the hollows of my mind, leading me to temper my approach.Many seem to be of a mind, and with me, deeply fear, that Western Civilization (Judeo-Greco-Christian - no particular order or rank) is threatened by a blood-lusting 'movement' that has chosen from its inception to grow by the sword. (Note; I employ the term 'movement' not religion.)One of the measures that is customarily taken in the drafting of a law is to guarantee its applicability, not just for its immediate purpose, but as well for it's utility in the future.(Does anyone remember the "Attorney General's List"?, HUAC?, The Palmer Raids?...Think of the Salem Witch Trials.)Don't panic, I'm not going sophistic!
April 26, 2008 10:26 AM
The trouble with this war, and yes we are in a war, is that most people suffer from APATHY. A few weeks ago I went to a counter demonstration against our foes. We were hoping for at least 100 people. 10 showed. We sit and complain, but are too lazy to spring to action.
April 26, 2008 11:30 AM
I don't think we could ever get this passed. However, I think it is a good idea. If it does nothing but stir discussion and head us in the right direction, that's a start. But that's not enough. Discussion never stopped any enemy.
April 26, 2008 11:46 AM
Findalis said:"We need to organize. The Jihadist is already organized. He is organized through his mosque. We are loosely scattered, contact minimal. No wonder he feels strong. This message must be taken to our Churches, Synagogues, Civic Groups."he is organized through his mosque..And right there is the key to this problem.The islamists are not fighting an organised, homogenous entity in Western societies, rather a fragmented, selfish apathetic and uninformed mass which is easy to divide and conquer.
April 26, 2008 12:13 PM
The 28th Amendment must be a last resort. If we attempt to pass it now, it will fail. The Media will crucify us for the attempt.We first must organize. Our enemy is very organized. His mosques, schools, community centers can rally the troops. They are very attuned to the what the media says, and will scream, cry and carry on a temper tantrum to get their way.We are scattered. Our churches and synagogues refuse to allow such organization against the enemy. They cry these are the moderates, not the Jihadist. This is wrong. This could be us next.And so, we have no where to rally, no where to congregate except on the impersonal atmosphere of the internet. We post, we blog, but we cannot organize to plan strategy. We are leaderless. We lack intelligence. Not in the mind, but the intelligence of knowing what the enemy is up to. We cannot plan out counter attacks to the Jihadist's attacks, since we do not know where they will launch these attacks.Some argue that the Church should be the place to start. I agree. Now go to your Minister or Priest and try to convince him. Then tell us if he will agree. There are some churches that are in the forefront. They are condemned by the liberal media as being too far to the right.So until a leader arises and organization commences, we will fail in our attempts.
April 26, 2008 3:46 PM
SF: there is one train of thought that needs to be controlled; that which reads: "You are an enemy of Allah, who commands me to kill you, confiscate your property & enslave your wife and children.". That train of thought is at the core of Islam. It is inculcated in every Mosque, Madrassa & Islamic Cultural Center. Closing Mosques and other Islamic institutions where their bloodthirsty doctrines are inculcated and their activities are organized is critical. Preventing further Islamic immigration is critical.As critical as they are, those tasks can not be performed because Islam is presumed to be a religion and "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". The law is cut and dried. There is no test of eleemosynary mission or historical track record. The content of the Qur'an can not be considered, nor can Moe's sunna. What the Algerian Ambassador told John Adams when asked why they attacked our shipping can not be considered. Its a religion and that settles the matter. Islam is a religion.
April 26, 2008 6:32 PM
Islam is not a religion, neither is it a "religion of peace". Let's get that straight right from the beginning. Ample evidence exists to show Islam for what it really is.While I read your comments I am appalled at some of the dhimmi attitudes I see. This is not meant to put the blame on any one person but this attitude seems to permeate the average American and those in trusted leadership roles including elected officials.Note: for an insightful discussion of dhimmis I submit this interview at FrontPageMagazine.com; http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=77D37794-BF74-4BD5-9AD4-D8736FDC82BB
April 27, 2008 7:20 AM
First off, several points leap to mind and get caught in my tiny tiny brain. They slingshot, ricochet, spray shrapnel - like bullet bumper cars nigh unhinged - smashing and bashing each other in a mad rush to get out.
April 27, 2008 9:34 AM
While we rally here, we don't hold our elected officials' feet to the fire. We don't make our views known to them. Only the Jihadists and Liberals do. Thus our officials believe that this is US public opinion, even when polls say otherwise. We must make our views known loudly to them. We must write, call, e-mail them. From the Federal government on down to the Local level.When a Muslim commits an "honor killing", we must demand that this be considered a First Degree Murder and the Death Penalty be given. When Muslims plan the bombing of American landmarks (such as the Liberty City Thugs). We must indite them as traitors and convict them under treason laws.And when CAIR and other organizations call themselves Peaceful, the authorities must investigate every member, every donor, where every penny came from and went. Then close them down for sedition and treason. We must use our existing laws against the Jihadist. And when he cries: "But we are a Religion of Peace!" We hold his feet to the fire and point out how he defines peace and how we define it.
April 27, 2008 1:38 PM
Roger, this is indeed a fascinating debate. I have real reservations about placing legal limits on freedom of worship. Obama is talking about universalisation of religion and a new 'constitution' of the North American Union has already been constructed at their website which states that a new religion will be instituted called 'One-Faith' which will be completely regulated by laws laid down by the United Nations.
While I see the need to monitor Islamists of course, if you start regulating one religion as a belief system and outlawing it, this will then give the Left precedent and legal grounds to outlaw Christianity in the same way.
Once we allow them to control our right to religious freedom, it's all over. Everything else will quickly go down the sinkhole.
Just my opinion.
April 27, 2008 2:23 PM
Muslims Against Sharia said...
Muslims Against Sharia Urge Support for Sue Myrick's "Wake Up America" InitiativeWake Up America
1. Investigate all military chaplains endorsed by Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was imprisoned for funding a terrorist organization.
2. Investigate all prison chaplains endorsed by Alamoudi.
3. Investigate the selection process of Arabic translators working for the Pentagon and the FBI
.4. Examine the non-profit status of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
5. Make it an act of sedition or solicitation of treason to preach or publish materials that call for the deaths of Americans.
6. Audit sovereign wealth funds in the United States.
7. Cancel scholarship student visa program with Saudi Arabia until they reform their text books, which she claims preach hatred and violence against non-Muslims.
8. Restrict religious visas for imams who come from countries that don't allow reciprocal visits by non-Muslim clergy.
9. Cancel contracts to train Saudi police and security in U.S. counterterrorism tactics.
10. Block the sale of sensitive military munitions to Saudi Arabia.Muslims Against Sharia urge every American to send a letter of support to Congresswoman Myrick. Sample letter is provided below.==========================The Honorable Sue Myrick230 Cannon House Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20515Phone: (202) 225-1976Fax: (202) 225-3389Dear Congresswoman Myrick,As an American who is concerned with the issue of terrorism, I applaud your efforts to prevent radical Islam from infiltrating American society. I wholeheartedly support your "Wake Up America" plan, as well as other initiatives of the Anti-Terrorism Caucus. You bring honor to the title of United States Representative.Groups in America such as CAIR and MAS and groups overseas like Hamas and Al-Qaeda need to be shut down for their support and/or perpetration of terrorism. We hope that people recognize this threat to our society, and as well, recognize what you are doing to stop it.Sincerely,SignatureNameContact info (optional)==========================Please print out, sign, and mail or fax this letter to Congresswoman Myrick at the address / fax above. Feel free to modify the letter as you see fit.http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/04/muslims-against-sharia-urge-support-for.html
April 27, 2008 5:43 PM
Roger W. Gardner said...
Hello again to Muslims Against Sharia -- Welcome to the debate and thank you for your input.rg
April 28, 2008 4:08 AM
wow what a fascinating debate!
April 27, 2008 6:14 PM
Churchill's Parrot said...
No amendment necessary. What is needed is good old “Federalist Papers” style persuasion/marketing re: the proposed Amendment’s Article I:“The social/political/ideological system known around the world as Islam is not recognized in the United States as a religion.The practice of Islam is therefore not protected under the 1st Amendment as to freedom of religion and speech.” This is simply common sense. Unfortunately, common sense is a tough sell these days as we have spent 40 plus years filling young minds with sentimental hogwash and leftist double-think. Regardless, even if the soft-minded cannot grasp that Islam is NOT a religion and thus deserves none of the protections there given under the Constitution; your Founders, their predecessors, and cohorts were well aware of potential abuse of the concept of freedom of religion – the depraved justifying their depravity as “religious expression” - and accounted for it. Thus many State constitutions contain language further delineating what will and will not be allowed in the name of religious freedom. A rather typical example exists in the New York state constitution of 1777: "The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever hereafter be allowed, with this State, to all mankind: Provided, That the liberty of conscience, hereby granted, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this State." Once again, this entire debate is made mute were Americans (or British, or Canadians, or Australians etc. etc.) to have the slightest awareness of their own histories and the greatness there of. Such awareness provides not only the legal justification but the motivation for protecting our mutual philosophical heritage against all enemies of Liberty no matter how cleverly crafted their fraudulent guise. The Amendment is unnecessary, but the debate essential.
Carry on! Cheers, Charlie
April 27, 2008 6:52 PM
What ever you do, don't send a form letter. I used to work for a congresswoman and we disregarded form letters. Send a letter to your own congressman or woman, your senator expressing support for Rep Myrick's Initiative.http://findalismonkeyinthemiddle.blogspot.com/2008/04/wake-up-america-initiative.htmlCall, send an e-mail or snail mail. Let your voice be heard. I sent letters to my Congresswoman Melissa Beam and My Senators Richard Durbin and Barak Hussein Obama.Take a guess which one won't respond.
April 27, 2008 8:56 PM
Roger, what is there for me to add when experts like Dean, Ben, and Snooper have posted. I wish I knew the answer. While I agree with what the amendment is after, I wonder if there is another way to accomplish the desired result without taken that path to get there. I will continue to work to get out the truth about Islam using Dean, Ben and others who are experts in the field.
Roger you do an outstanding work here, and keep up the great work!!!CP
April 28, 2008 7:39 AM
This is a long overdue debate amongst not only our side, but the whole nation needs this debate.Unfortunately the PC Police will have kittens if this and similar issue were to be discussed or debated in the traditional media forums. We must not make waves they would scream. It is racist talk they would scream. You are a bigot they would cry.And so, the nation is quiet on this issue and the Jihadists grow in strength.I wonder what tragedy will it take for this issue to be brought to the forefront? Will a dirty or nuclear bomb going off in a major US or European city do it? Will the forcing of a European nation to adopt Shar'ia law as their law do it? Or will the silence just grow?
April 28, 2008 12:28 PM
A note from Radarsite:
With a normal post, I would at some point post a final "summing up" of my thoughts on the subject of the article. Here, however, I think any attempt by me to "sum up" this wonderful discussion would be both presumptuous and unnecessary. I feel that just by having this important debate we are actually accomplishing something. People are listening and watching. They are interested. You might be surprised by some of the readers we have picked up. In the words of Deb from Right Truth: " If it does nothing but stir discussion and head us in the right direction, that's a start." I believe we have, in our own small way, made this start here. Now, according to Ben of A Newt One: "Keeping this debate alive and growing is up to you."
Therefore I have a suggestion. To all of you who have commented here on this debate who have websites of your own I would ask that, if you believe that this debate is as important as I do, make reference to it on your sites. Let's get as many people involved in this argument as possible. Maybe, just maybe, we really can make a difference.
I personally feel even more motivated to become actively involved in this battle. I have just written an email to my Congressman asking him what he is doing to protect us from this looming menace. If he answers, I'll post his answer. I intend to write more emails like this in the coming days.
You are almost all creative thinkers and writers. If anyone has any suggestions as to how we could disseminate this debate out further, please let me know. Who knows what we can accomplish?
On a personal level, this discussion has done me a great service. It has forced me to look very closely at my convictions and my opinions and perhaps reevaluate them, or reenforce them. To my mind this alone makes our debate worthwhile.
I intend to keep this article open for further comments as long as necessary; I will continue to post them (above this message) as soon as I receive them. Thank you all for your active participation in this conversation. But thank you most of all for all the work that you have put into this subject in order to formulate those opinions. If only our own Congressional leaders would do the same.
Voted by: gophub