Muslim leader condemns Myrick anti-jihad plan!
April 30, 2008 1:23pm CST
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020830.php "'Myrick's latest attempt at fighting terrorism is nothing more than a fear campaign,' said Jibril Hough, a spokesman for the Islamic Center of Charlotte. 'It is nothing more than a new McCarthyism, or Myrickism. As Muslims, we have become expendable as politicians like Myrick seek political gain.' "Myrick said she wants the group to give a point-by-point rebuttal of her plan." Yes, that would be most interesting. What could Jibril Hough say? Let's go through the Myrick Plan and see: 1. Investigate all military chaplains endorsed by Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was imprisoned for funding a terrorist organization. Alamoudi is doing 23 years for funding jihad terrorism. Is it possible that some of the military chaplains he endorsed shared his jihadist views? Can Jibril Hough explain why not? 2. Investigate all prison chaplains endorsed by Alamoudi. Same question as for #1. 3. Investigate the selection process of Arabic translators working for the Pentagon and the FBI. An FBI whistleblower has reported that Arabic translators there cheered the 9/11 attacks. Can Jibril Hough explain why this should not be a cause for concern? 4. Examine the non-profit status of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The Council on American-Islamic Relations has had several of its officials convicted on jihad terror-related charges, and was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case. Can Jibril Hough explain why its tax-exempt status should not at least be examined? 5. Make it an act of sedition or solicitation of treason to preach or publish materials that call for the deaths of Americans. Objections, Mr. Hough? 6. Audit sovereign wealth funds in the United States. If these funds may be used to conduct warfare against the U.S., what exactly is Mr. Hough's objection? 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. It is demonstrably true that they do. Does Mr. Hough endorse this? 8. Restrict religious visas for imams who come from countries that don't allow reciprocal visits by non-Muslim clergy. This is simply in the interests of mutual tolerance and understanding, is it not, Mr. Hough? 9. Cancel contracts to train Saudi police and security in U.S. counterterrorism tactics. Given ongoing Saudi financing of the global jihad, what exactly is Mr. Hough's objection? 10. Block the sale of sensitive military munitions to Saudi Arabia. Same question as #9. But I doubt that Hough will provide a point-by-point refutation, for the same reason that John Esposito will not debate me. What can they say? "Muslim condemns Myrick plan: Senator says she welcomes dialogue on anti-terrorism proposal," by Jim Morrill for the Charlotte Observer (thanks to Twostellas): A spokesman for a Charlotte-area Islamic group Monday accused U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick of leading a "fear campaign" with her proposal to curb the expansion of radical Islam. Myrick, a Charlotte Republican, proposed a 10-point "Wake Up America" plan this month that, among other things, calls for investigations into the selection of the Pentagon's Arabic translators and some Muslim military and prison chaplains. "Myrick's latest attempt at fighting terrorism is nothing more than a fear campaign," said Jibril Hough, a spokesman for the Islamic Center of Charlotte. "It is nothing more than a new McCarthyism, or Myrickism. As Muslims, we have become expendable as politicians like Myrick seek political gain." Myrick said she wants the group to give a point-by-point rebuttal of her plan. "I'd be glad to have a dialogue with them," she said. "The whole point is that we're trying to get people to work together." Myrick's proposal has also drawn criticism from the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations. One of her proposals was to investigate the group's nonprofit status....
• United States
30 Apr 08
...he's objecting from a standpoint of political correctness.. which if we go with that flow, couldn't that be very dangerous?? It kind of reminds me of people would say things like "what would the neighbors think?" - My point being it didn't matter what terrible things went on in the house and family! No what mattered was the neighbors never find out.. It has just dawned on me that political correctness in some way is like that. I definitely don't think safety (of us or other nations) should be based on political correctness ruling responses and policies..