« Poor animal shelter | Main | Immigrant education »

March 17, 2011

Expand hearings on Muslims to Christians

Rep. Peter King of New York has opened up a salvo on Muslims. I am not so sure I have a dog in that race. What I want to see King also investigate is the radicalization of young Christians by far-right evangelicals. These are the guys who post on the Web about how dumb President Barack Obama is, saying other hurtful things.

They post racist comments and hate threats on such mainstream forums as Yahoo, Google Buzz and Craigslist.

Since the election of the first African-American president, right-wing hate groups have sprung up like grass in spring. One of these domestic terrorists tried to bomb a Martin Luther King Jr. Day parade.

Of course, there are a lot of left-wing extremists, but I don’t know whether Mr. King knows that there are a lot of Christian extremist terrorists as well. Let’s make the congressional hearings fair and investigate them, too.

Joseph T. Walker
Kansas City, Kan.



Thanks for getting back with me Matt...many people (mostly democrats) just want to think of these worries as "silly"...I am glad there are other like minded people like Rep. King who are not afraid to be ridiculed and called silly on this issue...as you state "mosques in this country need to be further investigated and in fact are a significant percentage of the money that is funneled to terrorists organizations."


LL, yes I do and long overdue, additionally the mosques in this country need to be further investigated and in fact are. a significant percentage of them funnel money to terrorists organizations. The FBI has been on this a while.


Matt...I agree that islamic extremism is a real threat to both north america & europe...Ryan has continually battled with me on this subject...saying that absolutly no threat exists...it is comforting to hear someone else speak up on this thread discussing this issue...I don't believe you have ever given your opinion regarding Rep. Peter King of New York's hearings on the radicalization of muslims in America...do you think this is a good idea?

Ryan Roedel

If you're right about the breeding, Matt, then we should probably keep on eye on the Latinos...most of which are Catholic. And I just realized....I meant verses...not versus. I wasn't comparing soccer matches.


Ryan, respectfully, you are wrong about the threat of Islamic take over particularly in Europe. patience, competitively high birth rates and demographic change are all part of the plan. when a nation has 1/30th the land mass of the U.S. or less, that nation owes no acquiescence to the notion usually proposed by social engineers that they must now step aside, accept the "trends", and embrace a new and entirely different multiculturalism, it is simply non incumbent upon them. Once a significant voting block is established, in what direction do you honestly think the cultural and political trends will go? Yes all faiths have had violent struggles, but again Islam started out by the sword from the beginning by its founder and has never abated from that path. It is now the 21st century , there are no excuses. Furthermore the majority of the world's Muslims are functionally illiterate, upon attaining the advantages of a European education system and learning the Arabic Quran there is an established trend of radicalism. Add the Fire brand clerics littered throughout Europe and you have the perfect recruiting system. Before you perhaps judge me, know that I once believed all religions were on an equal moral footing. Over many years of study and contemplation I have come to realize that is both illogical and nonsense. This is not about race, it is about viewing different ideologies with a discriminate eye. This is not racism which is low browed and stupid. This is about survival and the preservation of our culture and I make no apologies for it.


Glad you had date night....my best to Mrs. Roedel...

Ryan Roedel

LL...it's called date night.

I agree that some verus of the Qu'ran could be used for fundamentalism or extremism. To me, it's no different than versus of the bible being used for the subjugation of women or slavery (back in the day) or the Crusades or the Inquisition. You need to keep in mind that organized Islam is about 700 years behind Christianity and well over 1000 years behind Judiaism. It's also over 2000 years behind Hinduism. The point being...those religions experienced struggles not unlike the struggles that Islam now faces.

To the last poster...I agree that all texts need to be examined without the fundamentalist mentality. In the hands of poor, uneducated white people, the bible becomes a platform for white supremacy (terrorism). In the hands of poor, uneducated Muslims, the Qu'ran becomes a platform for terrorism. In the hands of Zionists...the Hebrew Bible became a platform for terrorism.

I don't think it's as simple as some think. There are a lot of societal complexities involved.

There is no threat, IMO, of some Islamic takeover of American or European culture. Attacks, such as 9/11 only further strengthen our resolve. We have law in this land. That law is based on secular fundamentals. It's not under threat by extremism. Extremism, on all sides, is the response against that rule of law...IMO.

If lines are continuously drawn...then we just keep with the "us" and "them" mentality. If that is the mentality we want to continue, then no honest dialogue can exist, IMO.


Ryan...never seen you stop so quickly when speaking about something you're so educated in (and excited about)...but maybe not "all knowing" afterall,,,hmmmm??


Clearly for Muslims to claim victim status is obscene when they believe the contents of the Quran particularly the foundation chapter "THE COW" they are not only bigots they have the building blocks of genocide in their hands which is the cause of the terror.

There is an erroneous perception Muslims become terrorist because of trigger moments i.e. Radical Cleric(s) come riding into town, or intense whispering in Prison cubicles, etc

If this were the case we non-Muslims would all be aware of neighbors and distant relatives suddenly turning into terrorists.

This simply does not occur for the reason we have not already textually constructed other as evil via the text we base our beliefs on.

To simply say all of a sudden a perfectly normal good Muslim boy turned to terror without the foundation already in place to accept such diabolical notions is absurd.

The reason for the terror is instruction from birth. This is the trigger which lends itself to the opportunity for terrorism when it arises.

Plato thousands of years ago gave humanity some good advice for harmonious societies delete text purported to be from Gods which informs evil action.

The fact is Muslims are already radicalized the reason being from the Islamic texts Quran foundation chapter "THE COW" onwards vilification of and justification of 'grevious harm' against other is the main theme.

This is why terrorists are good boys and girls coming from good Muslim families. It is that simple.

The radical Muslim clerics are not triggering anything they are simply providing the opportunity. The trigger has already been created by the basic Islamic text which forms all Muslims.

The fact all Muslims do not act on it is irrelevant for as we see enough Muslims do from generation to generation to perpetuate the terror against other.

If you read the Quran - Chapter "THE COW" which sets up the framework by which the Islamic text will be challenged, vilifies the perpetrators, sets them as less and then informs the remedy 'grevious harm' with the ultimate authority God authorizing all within, given this is an old recipe for genocide against other and the terror we clearly are experiencing would it not be rational to be rightfully concerned?

Also more importantly as we are all formed by textual constructs such as the Islamic text, there may just exist evil text informing evil action and we should seek it out be it secular or religious so we can change the future for humanity?

Everyone of us base our lives on less than perfect text. To target one without the other is rather hypocritical.

It should be about all text which vilifies other Religious or Secular not persons.

This means not just looking at Islamic text but other texts within our communities which are used to form new citizens and accept the fact finally ‘Freedom of Religion’ has been a curse on society because we are not able to easily challenge such Religious text which generates real evil against other without being erroneously labeled and censured.

Change the text forming our new citizen’s change the outcomes otherwise more of the same.


732 A.D. yes my fingers also go faster than my mind. I'v read the old testament. again violent beginnings by the founder for the purposes of spreading, Islam. All are guilty of extremism, crimes, inhumanity and apostasy at one time or another. Maybe the problem is that not enough lines have been drawn in the sand. Europe's problems are real and mounting. They need no permission or blessings from anyone to take steps to preserve either their culture or future, neither do we. History does happen to be one of my stronger points.

Ryan Roedel

Sorry....Cain and Abel...damn mind going faster than my fingers.

Ryan Roedel

If you want to read about the violent nature of Judiasm at its birth...read the Old Testament as well.

Ryan Roedel

Abraham had a wife...Sarah...and she could not bear children. God told Abraham that Sarah would bear children, but Abraham grew restless. So Abraham had a child with Sarah's Egyptian maid..Hagar. This child's name was Ishmael.

"Behold, you are with child, and shall bear a son; you shall call his name Ishmael; because the Lord has given heed to your affliction (misery). He shall be a wild ass of a man, his hand against every man and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell over against all his kinmen." Genisis 16:11-12

"And God said to Abraham, let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, harken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called. And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed." Genisis 21:12-13.

We are all children of Abraham. The cicular Cane and Abel.

Christianity is just as violent as Islam. The only difference is the side of the fence upon which you stand. So...holding a hearing on the radicalization of Muslims...draws a line in the sand. In my opinion...we already have too many lines drawn already.

Ryan Roedel

Okay...I never said people of "opposing" faiths were not hostile, at times, toward each other. The battle of Tours was actually 732 AD. Agreed...that was political more than religious.

I guess my frustration with all this is the fact that Islam is truly not at odds with the other religions of Abraham...to me. We are all "people of the book".

To say Islam was militant from its inception is to be aloof of the times and conditions in which Islam was founded. Arabic tribes were battling each other...much like your city states of Europe.

Look to bible versus to see Islam.

Steven Klein

Tours usually dated to 732 A.D. History not a strong subject for many Americans.


some of you miss my point, the initiation of a crusade or armed response was defensive as much as it was political, I'm not denying that, but it seems that that everybody's knee jerk response is "Well what about the crusades??!!" well what about them? how long a period of time would or should go without a response. was the pope infallible ? NO! were all parties involved angels? hardly! Was the persecution of Jews a stain on european history? yes! was defending against islamic infiltration unjustified? NO! Islam started out as much as a political competing ideology as anything. Islam is the only monotheistic religion that started out violent from the beginning by it founder mohammed. it is hardly logical or likely that Gabriel was the same entity in question as the 2 religions are anathema to each other. Judaism and christianity actually complement. By the 8th century Islam was indeed organized both on a military, political, and cultural level even though all tenants of their ideology may not have been codified. The battle of Tours was in 743 A.D. The precedent for armed conflict was well established by 1099. No one is without stain, but Islam is hardly the benevolent ideology many are trying make it out to be.

Ryan Roedel

The prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) received the word of God from Gabriel - the same angel who brought Mary the news of Jesus - around 621 AD. Islam actually became organized and began to spread around 750 AD. When was the first crusade again?

And to answer my own questions...European Jews were the first people attacked by the crusaders...call it a warm up. The pope was Urban II. It was politically...not religiously organized. How did the Christians respond during the 2nd crusade? What glorified and Godly acts did they demonstrate to the people they were "protecting"?

Seriously??? History??? The world is 3D...not 2D.

Ryan Roedel

I will contend...Matt...that the 4th crusade directly led to the fall of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. See....christians fought other christians in that one.

I do find it odd that you say that Europeans showed restraint since they were attacked for 4 centuries. The first crusade was waged before an organized Islamic religion was really 400 years old.

Ryan Roedel

I absolutely adore people who talk of revisionist history...

Ryan Roedel

When those civilized Christian europeans were given the green light for their crusade by the Pope (who was the pope btw?), people of what faith were the first to be attacked by those poor victimized and civilized europeans?

I love when someone talks about history....

About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright