Coming to Lowell

For John, BLUF:  I thought there was a little "over acting" today, on the show.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

On City Life this AM there was a little dustup over refugees from the Middle East.  As background, SecState Kerry wants to take 85,000 refugees the first year and 100,000 the next. Given the number of locations across the fruited plain for such folks, that probably work out toward 1,000 here in Lowell.

This raises lots of questions, such as are we going to get funds from the Feds for schools and housing and for acculturation?  It also raises questions about different mores?  For example, do those refugee families with more than one wife get to come in?  Or is the the second or third wife sheared off and sent elsewhere?  Not every family coming out of Syria or Iraq includes multiple wives, but some will.

But, back to City Life, I thought we were going to have a replay of the Ben Carson Controversy, wherein Dr Carson said a Muslim couldn't be President of the United States. Here is Dr Carson's explanation:

“I do not believe Sharia is consistent with the Constitution of this country,” Carson said, referencing the Islamic law derived from the Koran and traditions of Islam.  “Muslims feel that their religion is very much a part of your public life and what you do as a public official, and that’s inconsistent with our principles and our Constitution.”

While not every Muslim thinks and acts this way, there are a number who do, even spokesmen for CAIR.  But, there is always an exception to test the rule.

Carson said that the only exception he’d make would be if the Muslim running for office “publicly rejected all the tenets of Sharia and lived a life consistent with that.”



Fair enough.

It is all about Sharia.  If you follow Sharia you accept that it is the basic doctrine.  Not the US Constitution.  There is no First Amendment.  There is Sharia.  If you like Sharia, then vote for a real Muslim.  If not, don't.

Sharia?  Here is a line from Wikipedia (underlining mine):

In its strictest and most historically coherent definition, sharia is considered in Islam as the infallible law of God.

Back to City Life.  Producer John McDonough said, speaking of refugees, not the Muslims, meaning, in my mind those who are making a mess of the Middle East.  Those who believe the Iranian Leader when he says "Death to America, Death to Israel."  You say, that is Iran, not Syria.  And who is supporting Assad in Syria?  Iran.  Those who have quite different views from most in this nation about the treatment of women and children.  Remember, we thought Iraq was Westernized.  Ready to be more like us.  Turned out it wasn't true.  Shia and the Sunni are not getting along, still.

But, the real divide in Islam is not between Shia or Sunni.  It is between those (1) who wish to strictly impose Sharia, (2) those who wish to strictly impose Sharia and killing lots of people to do it is acceptable, and (3) those who wish to see some sort of a "reformation", and (4) also that group which wishes to live per Sharia but do not wish to have it imposed from above, but to live in peace with others.  The first group is like the Wahhabis in Saudia Arabia.  The second group reminds me of Joseph Stalin.  The third group reminds me of Aataturk.  The fourth group reminds me of the book, Oceans of Ink.

Groups 3 and 4 are OK.  Groups 1 and 2 are toxic, lethal.

We need to make distinctions.  Intelligent, informed, compassionate distinctions.

Some will come to America to be Americans.  Some will come to wait out the terrible carnage in Syria (and Iraq).  Some will come because they thing it is best for us Americans to adopt Sharia.  Thinking about this is not showing prejudice.  It is showing prudence.

I appreciate my Muslim Jeweler.  Unlike some buying wedding cakes, I accept he doesn't wish to work on my Rosary, for religious reasons, and that is OK with me.  He is a good citizen, trying to do the right thing.  As a License Commissioner I know he wants to do the right thing.  He is a fellow US Citizen.  If I thought he was seeking to subvert our form of Government I would be upset with him.  But, I have no reason to believe that.  He is just another Lowellian, albeit a Blow-In.  God Bless the Blow-Ins.

Regards  —  Cliff