So how’d that meeting between Rep. Joe Walsh and the Muslim Community go?

If you have time, check out this post before continuing as this is an update. The good news is that Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) did not apologize during his meeting with nearly one hundred Muslims from his community, led by Moin “Moon” Khan. The bad news is that, as expected, not much was accomplished and, if anything, Walsh may have ceded some ground.

Via Chicago Sun-Times:

Moon Khan, a Republican Party precinct committeeman in DuPage County and member of the York Township board of trustees, was one of about 80 people who attended an “intense” meeting with Walsh Friday night in the back yard of Khan’s home in Lombard.

“It was a very, very intense meeting, and he did not change his mind,” Khan later said of Walsh.

The meeting was called after Walsh alleged there is “a radical stream of Islam” in the U.S. that threatens the lives of Americans — including residents of Addison, Elgin and Elk Grove — at a townhall meeting in Elk Grove.

At the meeting Friday night, Khan said members of the local Muslim community “are young, American-born-and-raised individuals who share the American dream of a life of liberty, peace and the pursuit of happiness. They are your teachers, doctors, nurses, engineers, policemen and hard-working Americans that [are] productive members of society …”

“Your recent speeches have created catalogues of issues for the Muslim community,” Khan told Walsh, according to a transcript of his remarks.

Of course, Walsh is right about a ‘radical stream of Islam’ but he didn’t seem – based on the Sun-Times report – to understand how and where that ‘radical stream’ masks itself. In short, the man who organized the meeting – Moon Khan – once chaired an Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) Committee. As a Muslim Brotherhood front, ISNA is itself an entity that is based on a ‘radical stream of Islam’. By not knowing this or acknowledging it, Walsh’s quiver was certainly a few arrows short (assuming the Sun-Times report is accurate and he didn’t bring up ISNA / Muslim Brotherhood groups).

The Sun-Times then quoted Khan from a transcript of the meeting:

“We want to ask the congressman why he is the only person who sees the ghost of radical Muslims everywhere. Why did not his colleague, Congressman Peter Roskam … raise such alarm? We did not hear such warnings from U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, not to mention the Democratic members of Congress. You are running the idea up the flag, and nobody is saluting it.”

The reason the comment about ‘ghost of radical Muslims’ may have been effective is that, based on the Sun-Times account, Walsh waded into nebulous territory by not getting specific about what groups comprise ‘radical Muslims’. Those groups include CAIR, ISNA, Muslim Students Association (MSA), every group named in the 1991 document entered into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial, and other like-minded groups. These groups are under the Muslim Brotherhood umbrella and instead of saying ‘radical Islam’, Walsh missed a huge opportunity by not focusing on radical Islamic groups that are proven to have pledged to work for the destruction of the United States from within. The fact that the guy he was debating – Khan – worked for ISNA at one point was golden opportunity missed by Walsh.

“We would also like to know if you found any radical Muslim in this gathering. If yes, please tell us, how did you detect that? Do you have a device like a metal detector that you rotate around and find Muslim radicals?”

No, just your serving as a chairman for a Muslim Brotherhood front group that is listed as an entity that wants to bring America down, Mr. Khan. Can you talk to us about why you did that?

Khan said he and others “are here to pick up the stones that have been thrown at us by the congressman, and turn them into the milestones of tolerance.”

That’s what we call veiled sarcasm masquerading as taking the high road. Until westerners learn that words like ‘tolerance’ and ‘dialogue’ are code words used by stealth jihadists who have studied our culture for decades and know full well how to exploit political correctness to their own advantage, those westerners will lose every time.

Khan allegedly said that Walsh came across as being on defense. Despite Walsh’s refusal to apologize, this is precisely why he likely lost the debate. Offense would have required getting specific; based on the Sun-Times report, Walsh did not do that and was likely throwing punches in the dark.

Read it all.


, , , , , ,