By Rabbi Aryeh Spero

After each incident where a Muslim massacres and shoots up innocent citizens on American soil, be it in the military or outside the military, the same refrain is always repeated: “But not all Muslims are dangerous.” Ultimately, that assertion prompts the media and most in government to make the false leap that the act just performed in the name of Islam has nothing to do with Islam or that person's belief in Islam. 

Because the American people are a good willed and fair people, they are inclined to accept this refrain and not pinpoint the blame for these killings on the Islam that inspired that particular devout Muslim to do what he did. Furthermore, because we as a people do not want to blame everyone in a large group for the sins of individuals within it, many are exonerating Islam and Islamists for the sins committed in the name of Islam by jihadists -- even when they yell Allahu Akhbar.

People are so afraid of being labeled “Islamophobic” that they hide their eyes from the truth and undeniable facts in front of them and end up betraying their very own intelligence. But this evasion of the truth will be our downfall inasmuch as one cannot defeat an enemy one is unwilling to name, and one will not protect oneself from the plans and machinations of members of a particular group if one has been convinced that members of that group do not pose a danger.

The sociological mantra in this country after World War II has been not to “generalize” about groups or members within a group. So as to preclude generalization, it is necessary, therefore, to divide Islam and followers of Islam into two separate groups. Yes, it is true, not all Muslims pose a danger, but equally true is that all radical Muslims are dangerous. All fervent Muslims are dedicated to the implementation of Shariah Islamic law over the Western countries to which they have emigrated, and the eventual submission of Western countries to Shariah. They strive at dissolving sovereign constitutions in behalf of what Muslims consider the ultimate and only legitimate law:  Shariah. Another core belief of fervent Muslims is that infidels -- Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists -- voluntarily convert to Islam or, later, capitulate to it in response to acts of terror and horror perpetuated by the radical Muslim. 

That being the case, once it has been determined that an individual is not a neutral Muslim but a radical Muslim, it's the duty of those in government and in business to remove that individual from operations that bring him into the proximity of innocent Americans and co-workers. Leaders in government and in business are responsible to ensure that those within their purview are protected from acts of aggression, that not only our life be protected but that we be shielded from the aggression of in-your-face proselytizing and harassment common to many radical Muslims interfacing with normal citizens. 

Fort Hood was not the first military installation to be attacked nor the first where military and government leaders failed to protect the lives and daily routines of citizens from radical Muslim aggression. It has happened on several military bases and at recruitment centers. Up until Fort Hood, the media and government were able to cover up the radical Islamic background and motives behind these killings. And when uncovered, they insult our intelligence by telling us the person was just "crazy" or "lonely" or a "misfit".

So who can be defined as being a radical Muslim? It is anyone who inheres and extols the notion that Islam is the only way and that eventually Shariah should become the law over Western countries and the citizens therein?  For such individuals, Islam is not a “religion of peace”, since their understanding of Shariah is that Islam is allowed to force its religion and law on people if those people do not accept it voluntarily.  Such is a subversive ideology -- sedition -- requiring that government protect citizens from its very harmful effects and proponents. Once it has been determined that a Muslim subscribes to Shariah, that person should not be allowed, as was Nidal Hasan, to work in any of our agencies, be it the military, law enforcement, education, or any other agency. He or she will probably use that position to undermine our interests and transform that institution into a foothold for Islam so as to eat away at the foundations of American life in behalf of Islam's cultural conquering of America.

Similarly, once it has been determined that a Moslem is a true-believer, he should not be allowed to board an American airline or a plane heading for the United States. The Nigerian Muslim who just the other day decided to blow up all 300 passengers on the Delta flight bound for Detroit should not have been allowed to board the plane, period, given that we already knew his fervent Islamic beliefs.
 
The "equalizers" in the liberal media as well as the liberal ideology that “everybody is the same” have infected our sociology and our national dialogue by claiming that radicals are found in every religion and that Islamic radicals are no different than any "fundamentalist". But the truth is that radicalism in Islam is quite dangerously different from the mere fervency among devotees of other religions. Radical Islam, which possibly constitutes 300 million Muslims (approximately 20 percent) has as its core belief the requirement to (1) kill infidels who do not submit; (2) impose Shariah Islamic law over those unwilling; (3) conquer the lands all over the world by first weakening them culturally and socially; (4) ensure all individuals submit to the will of Allah as they see Allah’s will.  All of this is done with the help of "al taqiyah", which allows for a two-faced approach to the non-Muslim: smiling and hiding his/her intentions and even lying in the service of Islamization.

Al taqiyah was successfully employed in the last days of 2009 to blow up one of our installations in Afghanistain; a Moslem feigning friendship and cooperation entered our facility without first being searched -- because we believed him. Al taqiyah, Islamic-sanctioned lying, works, especially when tried against gullible and good-willed Americans.
 
Contrary to what the liberal equalizers assert and want us to believe, there is no movement today within Christianity or Judaism that calls for the forced submission of citizens of the world to its religion, nor for the massacring of infidels who do not voluntarily accept the religion, nor a religious imperialism requiring that the whole world live under the minutiae of all its customs and rituals. Fundamentalist Christians and Orthodox Jews, while lovers of the Scriptures, do not share the bloodthirsty designs of radical Muslims. Indeed, so viral is this ideology that its perpetrators here have been middle class, well paid and members of professions. 

Shariah Islamic law is not only not our law, but, offensive to the decency and the values we in the Judeo-Christian world have developed over the last 2000 years. Among other things, an adherent to Shariah, as today taught, believes in “honor killings” or punishment of wives and daughters. And though the radical Muslims who believe and practice such brutalities may only be 20 percent,  that is 20 percent too much when it begins to happen frequently in England and even now in America. The very probable risk to one's very life should take precedence over the farcical importance we seem to give "not offending". 

Shariah Islamic law sanctifies and legalizes too many barbarisms, thereby making it far worse than routine crimes committed but which are universally understood to be wrong. Anyone who subscribes to Wahabbi Shariah is dangerous and should not be allowed to hold any position affecting other people and our country’s future. Nor should they be allowed citizenship inasmuch as they directly threaten and work towards the destruction of our country and the death of our citizens. Nor should their clergy on these shores be allowed to preach, and incite, the overthrow of our government, democracy and our way of life. We should block their English-language websites encouraging American Muslims to kill their neighbors and the citizens all across this land.

We have in front of us the option of not committing suicide. Radical Muslims as well as those in Muslim organizations headquartered in D.C. --  wearing those fancy suits and trying to intimidate and silence us by calling us Islamophobic when we merely recite a truth evident to all -- must be stopped before they infiltrate even more segments of our society and betray us, subvert us, and perform more Fort Hoods. 

Radical Muslims have a saying: “Westerners love life, we love death.”  Hopefully we in America love life more than we fear political correctness or fear being called names. Otherwise, it will be said of us that out of lack of our own self-regard we chose suicide. Failure to speak the truth about fervent Muslims is not only appeasement but the first indication that a society is undergoing Islamization itself: the prohibition to criticize Islam.

Our lives should be more important than our fear of being called a name or of appearing “unfair.” We should choose in favor of our lives.  The greatest threat to our society and to our lives comes from radical Muslims: every single one of them.