ELDER PATRIOT – As I came of age growing up in New York City I used to listen to talk radio host Barry Farber. Now fifty years later I still remember him reciting this saying during every broadcast:
“Freedom for those who say freedom for all and no freedom for those who say freedom for some.”
Now, a half-century later Mr. Farber’s signature quote is more prescient than ever. Such is the enduring nature of truth.
Progressives and Global Elites have joined in telling us that we must be tolerant of the importation of Muslims from jihadist regions of the Middle East because they are dreamers seeking a better life in America. Among those labeling those who disagree Xenophobic are establishment politicians of both major political parties who are now seeking our presidency including Hillary Clinton, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, John Kasich, and Chris Christie.
They join in telling us that if we don’t accept these Muslim migrants and the high potential for civil disruption that many of them bring with them, we will be responsible for denying freedom to the members of this migrant community. Is this so or is this an attempt to create a moral quandary for those of us committed to protecting individual freedoms as guided by our Judeo- Christian beliefs and enshrined in our Constitution?
What facts about the Muslim immigrant community do we already know that can help us in understanding competing theories of our Constitutional freedoms? Let’s concede that many are seeking a better life for themselves by coming here, so were the German people who joined the Nazi Party in the early 1900’s. Certainly, we all acknowledge the Nazi’s lack of respect for the freedoms of all people led to the Holocaust and a World War. But, what of the Muslim immigrant community and their respect for the freedoms of others? We must measure the intentions of those who are coming and, just as importantly those Muslims who are already here.
From World Net Daily:
“According to a local newspaper report, Omar Ahmad, a founder of CAIR, told a conference hall packed with California Muslims in July 1998 that Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant.
The reporter paraphrased Ahmad saying, “The Quran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.”
When CAIR issued a statement in 2003 denying Ahmad made the remarks and claiming the paper had issued a retraction, WND News Editor Art Moore talked to the reporter and two of her editors and found that they stood by the story. Moore then spoke with CAIR national spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, who repeated the claim that the paper had issued a retraction. When Moore informed Hooper that the reporter and the editors stood by the story, the CAIR communications director ended the call. But he called back a few minutes later saying he wanted to amend CAIR’s statement to say that the Muslim organization was seeking a retraction. Three years later, however, when the issue came up again, CAIR still had not contacted the paper.
On April 4, 1993, Hooper told a reporter for the Minneapolis Star-Tribune: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.”
Hooper appeared on Michael Medved’s radio show in October 2003 and stated: “If Muslims ever become a majority in the United States, it would be safe to assume that they would want to replace the U.S. Constitution with Islamic law, as most Muslims believe that God’s law is superior to man-made law.”
This has been confirmed by recent polls revealing 51% of Untied States Muslims would prefer Sharia law to our Constitutional system of government. This measures the attitudes of those Muslims already living here who have been given a chance to assimilate.
We might well expect the coming wave of immigrants to be even less likely to be accepting of Constitutional law as our economy weakens and jobs grow more unattainable to this group and that will likely lead to a greater level of disaffection among them. Today, 21% of the Muslim community that reside here believes that at least some of the time suicide bombing can be appropriate.
For those who embrace freedom, Barry Farber’s signature quote gives us guidance into not just how we might protect the rights of those desiring to come here but guaranteeing that we are able to protect those rights for our children and our neighbors first.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact. Americans need to wake up and realize that Progressives and establishment politicians are attempting to use it as one.