The MSM is anxiously parroting that Naveed Afzal Haq, who reportedly announced Friday’s Seattle atrocity with the memorable words

I’m a Muslim American; I’m angry at Israel

(Muslim charged in Seattle Jewish slaying By Daisuke Wakabayashi Reuters July 29 2006)

is a U.S. citizen. However, it is a pretty safe bet his ancestors did not come over on the Mayflower. A more enterprising source (scroll down) suggests Pakistani connections .

A great deal could be said about this event, and the circumstances which gave rise to it. The VDARE.COM question, however, is:

Given the facts of the Middle East situation, and given the nature of the American involvement, is it wise or prudent to have significant Muslim immigration?

Poor Steve Steinlight tried to raise this question five years ago (triangulating against VDARE.COM in the process). His reward has been obscurity. But it remains a salient and valid question.

A Muslim terrrorist shot up the Seattle Jewish Federation, managing to shoot six women and kill one. This is fairly typical behavior for a Muslim terrorist, the unusual theing being that he’s an American, operating in Washington state.Details at Michelle Malkin’s site, also here.

Various Muslim types are condemning the violence, but of course, not condemning the Islamic ideology from which it sprung. In fact, against all the evidence, they say things like this

“I am sure faith has nothing to do with what happened — we don’t know that person. We don’t know what his motive is.” [Hisham Farajallah, president of the Islamic Center of Washington]

That’s from an article titled Interfaith community expresses solidarity[By Debera Carlton Harrell, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, July 29, 2006] in which various Seattle clergy talk about how this is going to mess up their interfaith prayer breakfasts and such.

Nope, this is straight jihad stuff–the killer, Naveed Haq–shouted “I am a Muslim American, angry at Israel” before shooting at the women. So, if it’s jihad, then it’s a normal reaction for a Muslim, a genuine religious act, which is why many Americans are concerned about Islam.

Of course, the Muslim leaders couldn’t condemn Islamic theology if they wanted to, not just because they’d lose their jobs, but because if they did, there’s a strong possibility they’d be murdered (yes, in America) for “apostasy.”

But, the question is “Why is this happening here?” After all, America isn’t a Muslim country. Why, it’s the era of mass immigration, started by the 1965 immigration act, and strongly encouraged by all these clergymen.

For example, there was an interfaith service for peace in the Middle East held at St. James Cathedral in Seattle. This involved Catholics, Protestants, Muslims and Jews.

St. James Cathedral is the Cathedral church of the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle. Here is the what the cathedral staff [contact them] has to say about “immigrants rights.”

The Church Council of Greater Seattle, which represents 419 non-Catholic churches, [send them mail] has a similar page, but it’s under construction. However, the fact that “Immigrants rights” is a subpage of “Social Justice” tells me all I need to know about what’s going to be on it.

You will be happy to learn that according to the staff at the Seattle Cathedral, the following are “myths”

• Immigrants don’t pay taxes.
• Immigrants come here to take welfare
• Immigrants send all their money back to their home countries
• Immigrants take jobs and opportunity away from Americans
• Immigrants are a drain on the U.S. economy
• Immigrants don’t want to learn English or become Americans
• Most immigrants cross the border illegally
• Weak U.S. border enforcement has lead to high undocumented immigration

and the final myth is

• The war on terrorism can be won through immigration restrictions

Thanks, interfaith guys!

The reason they give for the fact that immigration restriction doesn’t curb terror is that the 9/11 hijackers had legal visas, the easiest thing for immigration restriction to restrict.

But here’s my suggestion, instead of interfaith dialogue, we could have “outerfaith.” “Outerfaith” dialogue would be where members of the religion of peace could could be encouraged to go back where they came from, and the church leaders who wanted to dialogue with them could use email.

I started to write a blog with my observations on this little gem [6 + 4 = 1 Tenuous Existence | An illegal immigrant couple with six children were already living in poverty. Then the quadruplets arrived. They're still in a daze. By Sam Quinones, Los Angeles Times, July 28, 2006 ] in today’s LaTimes, but one gets weary of saying the same things over and over about the consequences of the fact that the President of the United States refuses to secure American borders or enforce American laws.

Except it seems, the ones that benefit illegal aliens and employers.

So…VDARE.com readers being as educated, astute and insightful as they are, I thought we would try something a little different.

I hope that you, the VDARE readers will write your own thoughts on what is contained in the news story from Los Angeles and send them to me…[email me]I am always curious about how others who are paying attention view the dissolution of our Republic.

Maybe we can post some of the letters on this. 200 words max please. (It is good practice for the letters to the editor of your local paper that we hope you are sending!)