Thursday, December 03, 2015

The Ugly American Muslim


“They are not the Jews fleeing a Nazi Holocaust. They are the Nazis trying to relocate from a bombed out Berlin.” Daniel Greenfield writing as Sultan Knish about importing Syrian “refugees” from war-torn Syria,
in his article of November 29th,

The Ugly American, a novel by William J. Lederer and Eugene Burdick, published by Norton in 1958, is about how U.S. foreign policies were badly tailored to oppose Communism in Southeast Asia. It is set in the fictional country of Sarkhan, which was supposed to be a roman à clef for Vietnam but actually resembles in description Burma (aka its Star-Trekian planet name, Myanmar; go figure). I have not read the novel, and do not plan to. The novel was followed in 1963 with its cinematic doppelganger, The Ugly American, starring Marlon Brando as the chief protagonist. I do not plan to watch the movie, either.

Critic Bosley Crowther, apparently a fan of Brando (I certainly am not) in his April 1963 New York Times review of the movie cautioned:

As you might well expect, Mr. Brando is at the top of his form when the script and George Englund's direction are most firm and plausible. We must add right here that the screenplay written by Stewart Stern bears little or no resemblance to the novel of William J. Lederer and Eugene Burdick on which it is "based." Mr. Stern kept the title, the locale and the general skepticism of the book—well, at least, a little of the latter—and threw the rest away.

A principal point of contention, in the novel, at least, was that the American embassy staff, including the ambassador, did not speak or read the Sarkhan language, nor know much about the country’s customs and ways. That’s “why” we lost Southeast Asia to the Reds. The Reds paid attention to these little details and exploited them to the hilt. There was no sincere or substantial “outreach” on our part. We didn’t bother to “understand” and “respect” a backward and stagnant culture.  So, we lost Sarkhan.
Syed Farook, just an ordinary American Muslim guy (imilap.com)

The success of the novel (seventy-six weeks on the best-seller list and five million copies sold) led to more portentous developments, at least as far as the U.S. was concerned. Michael Meyer wrote, in his own July 2009 appraisal of the Lederer-Burdick opus in the New York Times, “Still ‘Ugly’ After All These Years,”:

One person it inspired was John F. Kennedy, who mailed a copy of “The Ugly American” to each of his Senate colleagues. The book’s epilogue argues for the creation of “a small force of well-trained, well-chosen, hard-working and dedicated professionals” fluent in the local language — not unlike the Peace Corps, which Kennedy proposed in 1960.

And, it became the Peace Corps. Later in his review, which devolves into Meyer’s reminiscing about his own time in the Peace Corps, he notes:

A half century after “The Ugly American,” the United States has another young president urging us to connect with the wider world, only this time he has lived in it. “I know that the stereotypes of the United States are out there,” Barack Obama recently told university students in Istanbul. “And I know that many of them are informed not by direct exchange or dialogue, but by television shows and movies and misinformation.”

We can blame Hollywood and the MSM for that. Meyer opines:

The book was originally commissioned by W. W. Norton as nonfiction, but an editor suggested it might be more effective as a novel. “What we have written is not just an angry dream,” the authors note in the introduction, “but rather the rendering of fact into fiction.” Yet the book’s enduring resonance may say less about its literary merits than about its failure to change American attitudes. Today, as the battle for hearts and minds has shifted to the Middle East, we still can’t speak Sarkhanese.

Which brings us to the Ugly American Muslim.

We can't speak Arabic, or Farsi. We know little or nothing about the Koran or its companion texts, unless they were translated by Barney Fife, as George W. Bush’s must have been.  We deny that Islam is a virulent totalitarian ideology garbed in the vestments of a primitive, brutal religion, bent on conquest. We deem Islamic “culture” a civilization. We refuse to fight it, acknowledge its danger and depredations and fourteen-century old rap sheet, and claim that its most consistent practitioners are just “extremists” or “radicals” who have “hijacked” a “peaceful religion.”

In short, we can't speak Sarkhanese after about half a century of the Sarkhanese waging war on America and the West.

We are not talking here about an ambassador to Sarkhan who eschews the necessity of learning something about the natives and their quaint customs. That would describe real-life roving upper-class twits like Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary Hillary Clinton, mistress of snake oil. We are talking about the Sarkhanese living right here in the U.S.A. who have a custom of killing Americans when the little Muhammadan birdie in their heads tells them it’s time to abandon their comfy American life-style and give their all for Allah, even if it means dying. Its other name is “Sudden Jihad Syndrome."

And President Barack Obama, who hates the country he is chief executive of, wants to bring in 10,000 Syrian “refugees,” knowing full well that a goodly percentage of them will be ISIS or Al-Qaeda fighters posing as put-upon victims, the rest being mere passive ballast. Ten thousand, at least, or more. Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s confidante and vice-campaign manager, wants to “let them all in,” that is, any and all Muslims and other haters of America who wish to come here posing as the “oppressed.”   

Take the late Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and the late Tashfeen Malik, 27, All-American Muslim citizens (or at least Syed was a citizen) whose lives seemed no different from those of non-Muslim American citizens. His wife, reportedly a pharmacist, was of Saudi-Qataran origin. You’ve probably encountered their like in supermarkets, seen them load a shopping cart with Pampers (they had one child), seen them gassing up at a convenience store, seen them drive off to  work in the morning from a brand new house, and have even exchanged friendly greetings with them. Such a benign and blameless existence.
San Bernardino – The The Muslim Jihadi way: Trading Existence for Non-Existence and calling it “Peace.”

Until they show up at your Christmas party and begin the killing. They murdered 14 at the San Bernardino Inland Regional Center and left 17 or more wounded.

It turns out that Farook was a Sunni Muslim of Pakistani origin, born in Chicago. The Daily Caller of December 3rd reports:

Farook’s father, also named Syed Farook, told news outlets that his son was a devout Muslim. On a dating profile at the website DubaiMatrimonial.com, Farook stated that he identified as a  Sunni Muslim.

Mailk is thought to be from Qatar. Farook had been employed by the Inland Regional Center for five years. He performed food-service health inspections. He liked to read religious books and target practice in his backyard (in suburban California??). He and his wife were just ordinary American Muslims who collected a small arsenal  with which to attend a Christmas party or some other event held by infidels.

Greenfield warned in his “Syrians are a Terror Threat” column against bringing in Sunni Muslims from Syria. But Farook was born here. It didn’t make much of a difference. The Muhammadan birdie said it was time to kill. All Muslims have similar birdies in their caged minds. Islam makes it so. Greenfield wrote:

Syria is a terror state. It didn’t become that way overnight because of the Arab Spring or the Iraq War.

Its people are not the victims of American foreign policy, Islamic militancy or any of the other fashionable excuses. They supported Islamic terrorism. Millions of them still do….

The Syrians were not helpless, apathetic pawns in this fight. They supported Islamic terrorism.

A 2007 poll showed that 77% of Syrians supported financing Islamic terrorists including Hamas and the Iraqi fighters who evolved into ISIS. Less than 10% of Syrians opposed their terrorism. Why did Syrians support Islamic terrorism? Because they hated America….

If we bring Syrian Muslims to America, we will be importing a population that hates us.

The terrorism poll numbers are still ugly. A poll this summer found that 1 in 5 Syrians supports ISIS.  A third of Syrians support the Al Nusra Front, which is affiliated with Al Qaeda. Since Sunnis are 3/4rs of the population and Shiites and Christians aren’t likely to support either group, this really means that Sunni Muslim support for both terror groups is even higher than these numbers make it seem.

And even though Christians and Yazidis are the ones who actually face ISIS genocide, Obama has chosen to take in few Christians and Yazidis. Instead 98.6% of Obama’s Syrian refugees are Sunni Muslims.

This is also the population most likely to support ISIS and Al Qaeda.

And now the question to ask is: How many born-and-raised in the U.S.A. Sunni Muslims are there now? If Obama brings in thousands of Sunni Muslims, regardless of their true origins, Greenfield argues, he’ll be importing the Syrian Civil War and all its attendant horrors. He’ll be bringing the war to the U.S. Are there Sunni cells ready to go into action when their “brothers” show up? There are dozens of Muslims enclaves in this country, and jihadi training camps. Muslims have been slipping across our Mexican border posing as Mexicans and other “refugee” South Americans.

Note that I do not refer to Muslim Americans. I don’t subscribe to hyphenated American collectivism or tribalism. You’re either American, or you’re a Muslim. You can’t pledge allegiance to two antithetical political philosophies at one and the same time. The American philosophy of individual rights, freedom of speech, private property, and the idea that you own your own life, cannot be reconciled with a philosophy that denies those tenets and seeks to extinguish them wherever it sets up shop.

Finally, Greenfield reminds us:

It only took 2 Muslim refugees to carry out the Boston Marathon massacre. It only took 19 Muslim terrorists to carry out 9/11.

If only 1 percent of those 1,300 Syrian ISIS supporters put their beliefs into practice, they can still kill thousands of Americans.

And that’s a best case scenario. Because it doesn’t account for how many thousands of them support Al Qaeda. It doesn’t account for how many of them back other Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas that had widespread support in Syria.

Nor does it account for all the home-grown Muslims of whatever stripe or origin who have yet to hear their little Muhammadan birdie. They are they Ugly American Muslims. These are the American Muslims we should fear. Every Muslim now in this country, and those seeking entry, ought to be subjected to a loyalty test: Are you Muslim first, and American second? Will you renounce or repudiate Islam, or not?

Call it a loyalty test. Or a lie-detector test. Call imposing it “Islamophobia” or “profiling” or ethnic or religious screening. Call it whatever you wish. Because, you see, you can't have your religion and eat America, too.

Obama’s plan to salt this country with adherents to Islam must be checked and foiled. He does not have this country’s best interests in mind. He wants to hurt it.

No comments: