We Can’t Watch Them All
I’ve read numerous accounts over the last several days featuring interviews with the friends and families of the Boston Massacre Muslims. The younger of the two brothers over and over was described as “quiet, friendly, charming, one of us, a normal kid, etc.”
Friends and family members repeatedly expressed disbelief and shock that he was capable of such a monstrous act.
These folks don’t seem to be aware of the disturbing picture they are painting of potential Islamic jihadists: there is simply no way to tell.
There is no way to distinguish the Muslims we have to worry about from the ones we don’t. Muslim leaders are of no help whatsoever, for they loudly accuse the West of Islamophobia anytime questions are raised.
Rep. Peter King said over the weekend that we must increase surveillance in the Muslim community. Of course he’s right. But increased surveillance wouldn’t have fingered the Boston Massacre Muslims. Not even their friends knew anything was amiss, even the ones who partied with the younger brother two days after the bombs went off. One of the brothers had even been investigated by authorities in 2011 and given a clean bill of health.
Rep. King’s recommendation raises a profound question. If we have to surveil and closely monitor every Muslim who enters the United States, why are we allowing them to immigrate at all? Dzokhar Tsarnaev demonstrates that every single Muslim male of a certain age who reaches these shores is a potential jihadist. We have no way of identifying the ones who might develop sudden jihad syndrome, which means we must watch them all. That cannot be done and wouldn’t work if it could.
I have advocated for some time that we suspend the practice of allowing Muslims to serve in our military simply because they, as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan illustrates, have a sacred obligation to kill their fellow soldiers as their first order of business.
I interviewed a prominent Fox News war-on-terror analyst, a former military man, about this on my radio program in the wake of the Hasan incident. I asked him point blank if Muslims should be prohibited from serving in the military. “No,” he said, “but we’ve got to watch them.” This is frankly absurd, that we would enlist soldiers we have to spy on from day one. If it’s a recruit whose ultimate loyalty is suspect from the moment he takes the oath, why are we enlisting him at all?
Speaking just for myself, it seems that sensible immigration policy would be to suspend Muslim immigration altogether on the basis of national security. Or as Andy McCarthy has recommended, at a minimum suspending immigration from Muslim majority nations (like Chechnya, for example).
Is this to accuse all Muslims? Of course not. We can be grateful to God every day that most Muslims in America have no intention of obeying the holy Qur’an’s command to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them.” The problem is we don’t know who those Muslims are.
This in the end is not about people, it is about ideology. It’s not about race, because the jihadists were both white, as genuinely “Caucasian” as it is possible to be. It is about Islam and its repeated directives to use violence in the name of Allah against infidel Christians and Jews.
Every Muslim believes the Koran is a holy book whose every word was dictated by Allah himself. This means that every Muslim has been told by his prophet and his god that he has a sacred duty to advance Islam at the point of the sword.
America’s greatest national security threat right now is that more and more Muslims might start taking those commands seriously. Two Muslims in Boston did, and three Americans are dead, 25 are missing arms and legs, and 176 are injured. It’s time to stop the lethal political correctness that blinds us to the true nature of Islam and to begin basing immigration policy on national security and sober truth.