Minority protests by Muslims are not very worthwhile in substance

Frankly, it is offensive to me to hear from and read about some self-appointed leaders of these “minority groups” rant and rave about how it is so terrible what some of the Republican presidential candidates have said about them – particularly the way they manage to misrepresent and falsely state what the speaker has said.

In the September 24 issue of the daily news(?)paper in Tulsa, there was a story headlined: “Groups call for candidates to cease anti-Muslim rhetoric.” The credit was to Barbara Hoberock of the World Capital Bureau. There was a sub-headline that read: “Recent comments promote Islamophobia, a Muslim advocacy organization says.”

Of course, groups, per se, are inanimate organizations and cannot or do not say anything. It is the leaders, whether self-appointed or properly elected or appointed by higher up groups, that do the saying. The same, it should be remembered, is true for political parties, college fraternities and sororities, churches, adult fraternal organizations and yes, corporations.

It is my opinion that the individuals making any such strong statements should be held accountable for their pronouncements or complimented if the words are deemed good. But, it seems that those who profess to represent minority groups they think have been wronged for the most part spew venomous words, twisted to obtain a different meaning and even which could be considered to foment and encourage rebellion and/or rioting.

Such has been the case in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland, in recent months. There have even been documented instances of rioters being flown, bussed or driven in from out of state for these recent riots. And numerous sources have stated that the funding for these is primarily coming from one George Soros, the reclusive billionaire.

The referred story quotes Adam Soltani, executive director of CAIR, as having said the comments, of presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson, M.D., promote Islamophobia. Frankly, in my sources, the referred to statement of Dr. Carson was that he could not support a Muslim for president since such a person could not consider the Constitution the law of the land because his/her only source of law is the Quran and its Sharia law. He also stated that it would be all right if the person would commit to obedience to U.S. law and renounce Islamic law. Of course, because Islamic law requires believers to lie to infidels, their oath would not be binding.

Frankly, it seems to me that the actions of the dedicated followers of Islamic law are the ones who engender Islamophobia and/or a serious fear of Islamic terrorists simply because of the wildly brutal actions of those resorting to terrorism and slavery. Because of those actions, one can state that they have only brought it on themselves.

Actions such as the caging and burning of the Jordanian pilot (while he was still alive), massive beheadings of Christians even by young children, and the wanton destruction of historically valuable relics of ancient civilizations and their religions.

The history of these actions is very long and, by the way, even includes the slave trades of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries by the Barbary Pirates, who were Muslims. Being seamen, it was their ships that brought the slaves from Africa to Britain and finally America. Human life means less to the Muslim extremists than it did to the Nazis in Germany.

Also covered were remarks made by leaders of Hispanic groups advocating citizenship rights of illegal invaders, who by violating the law to be here illegally really deserve no “rights.”

These groups, in my experience, particularly La Raza, have practiced violence from the beginning and, unfortunately, have not been put down by law enforcement.