The right must stop playing by the left’s rules in these war games in the information battlespace.
Ben Carson was speaking of a devout Muslim, a sharia-compliant Muslim, becoming President. The idea that we have to talk about “peaceful Muslims” every time jihad and sharia come up is a straw man argument. We don’t have to pat on the back every Muslim who doesn’t want to kill us. We expect that. That’s our bar. But the media insists. We don’t talk about “peaceful Buddhists,” “peaceful Sikhs,” “peaceful Christians,” etc. — so why must Muslims be treated like a special needs case? It’s the soft bigotry of low expectations.
“Geller, Islam critics: Carson ‘was right’ on Muslim president comments,” By Al Weaver, Washington Examiner, September 22, 2015
Ben Carson’s fellow Republican presidential candidates may disagree with his contention that he wouldn’t support a Muslim president, but activist Pamela Geller squarely in his corner.
Geller, a frequent critic of Islam, helped to organize the “Draw the prophet” cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, which was attacked in May by two men who were radicalized by the Islamic State.
“Yes, I support Carson’s comments. He was right,” Geller told the Washington Examiner Monday. “He was not talking about the religious component of Islam. Islam is not just a religion. It is a comprehensive system which deals with all aspects of human life and behavior; legal, religious, dietary, political, et al.”
“It is political Islam that poses a threat to our national security,” Geller argued. “It denies the freedom of speech, the equality of rights of women, and the equality of rights of non-Muslims, and contains other principles that contradict core constitutional principles.”
“A Muslim could not adhere to Sharia and take the oath of office honestly,” Geller said. “If he doesn’t adhere to Sharia, he is not a Muslim, and if he doesn’t take the oath honestly, he would be a traitor.”
“Dr. Carson is correct because the teachings of Islam, which define being a Muslim, are not compatible with the presidential oath of office,” conservative columnist Diana West told the Examiner, echoing Geller. “The simple fact is, Islam outlaws the very liberties the president is sworn to protect.”
Carson also received support Monday from Geller’s colleague Robert Spencer, the director of JihadWatch.org, who said the 2016 hopeful turned his detractors into “poster children” to show just how right he is, pointing to Islam’s contradictions of “important Constitutional principles.”
“Carson was right,” Spencer wrote Monday before warning him that “the media sharks, ever eager to do the bidding of Hamas-linked CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and other Islamic supremacists, will be circling – and hungry.”
Not all in the field agree with Geller and Spencer though. Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum, says that Carson needed to make a distinction between Islamists and Muslims in his Sunday comments.
“Too often, people speak of Muslims when they mean Islamists, which is to say those Muslims who wish to apply the Islamic law in its entirety,” Pipes told the Examiner. “Had Carson spoken against an Islamist in the White House, I would enthusiastically concur. As is, I disagree with his statement against a Muslim president.”
Carson’s 2016 rivals have largely denounced his remarks. Most notably, Sen. Ted Cruz, one of the most conservative candidates in the field, argued Carson’s comments ran counter to the Constitution.
“You know, the Constitution specifies there shall be no religious test for public office and I am a constitutionalist,” Cruz told the Des Moines Register Sunday.
In addition Sen. Lindsey Graham, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Sen. Rand Paul both broke with neurosurgeon, although Paul expressed some sympathy with the skepticism.
Meanwhile, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Ohio Gov. John Kasich took aim instead at the questioning from “Meet The Press” moderator Chuck Todd, with the latter hitting the host for asking “hypotheticals.”
