Your tax dollars at work in the Twin Cities

Unbelievable. This is an unconscionable violation of the separation of church and state. Someone needs to get slammed in the court system and raked through the coals. This requires justice. Religions should not be endorsed in schools, and certainly not a religion that, if some kid tried to represent the Prophet visually in art class, would mandate a stoning or beheading. I, for one, am against cutting kids heads off in school . . . in more ways than one.

My, my,....

Who would have "thunk" that Minnesota would have had a "State" sponsored, terrorist training camp, disguised as a school?? You see, folks, "ONE STEP AT A TIME", they're taking over right under our eyes, under the guise of, "freedom of religion", etc. Who wants to bet, that soon they will have a new gym, dedicated to "Barak Hussien Obama"!!!! Never, in my craziest thoughts, would have thought that something like this would be happening in my "old" home state!! But, just when you thought Minnesota was ceasing to amaze you, they holler "SURPRISE"!!!! If heads don't roll over this issue, then I know Minnesota is sailing off into the sunset! UNBELIEVABLE!!!!! Schmitty53, YOU, made my day. Thanks for the info! Oh, by the way TLJ, I thought the "Muslims" leaned to the left??

A little paranoid I think.

You guys are to easy!

Charter school makes changes after Islamic accusation.

Story and video at,

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S408718.shtml?cat=1

Oh well we all slip sometimes. I want to thank you for this article. Its so unreal that this could go on for so long before someone had the guts to come forward. A big thank you to the paper for doing the story.

Like I said, I'm not thrilled about my tax dollars funding a school like this. My comment was geared more toward the people who think a school with students praying to a god other than theirs = the downfall of civilization.

I hope the following will shed some light on a much bigger picture than just this school. The school is just a baby step in a much larger plan. For me it's a little sad that some people are content with just reading the local news and don't want to bothered with what takes place past the population sign.

This is an excerpt taken from an article by By Steven M. Warshawsky titled

Will Islam Dominate the Future?

Islam also is a totalitarian political ideology, akin to communism, that is fundamentally inconsistent with Western understandings of individual freedom, sexual equality, material prosperity, and representative government, not to mention our Judeo—Christian heritage. Since 9/11, just five short years ago, the conflict between the West and Islam (especially in Europe) has become much more pronounced, and much more violent.

Granted, most Muslims are not terrorists. Nevertheless, it is clear that many Muslims, including some portion of those living in the West, sympathize with terrorists and support the global jihad. As Robert Spencer, Andrew Bostom, David Yerushalmi, and many others have explained, the jihadist impulse is found throughout Islamic theology, history, and culture.

Islam divides the world into the House of Islam (dar al—Islam), where Islamic law(sharia) reigns supreme, and the House of War (dar al—harb), where sharia does not yet prevail. Muslims are enjoined by Allah and Muhammad to wage war upon the House of War until it is brought within the House of Islam. This religious—political project — and not the P.C. troika of poverty, tyranny, and discrimination — is the root of jihad.

It should not be surprising, then, as Steyn emphasized in a recent column, that the vast majority of Muslims worldwide feel primary loyalty to their religion ('Pan—Islamism'), instead of to the particular nations in which they live. For example, according to a recent poll (cited by Steyn), only 8 percent of Muslims living in Great Britain consider themselves British first, whereas 81 percent consider themselves Muslim first. Given the stark differences between what it means to be British and what it means to be Muslim, these poll results portend a disastrous future for the British nation. Indeed, given the gulf that exists between Western culture and Islamic culture, the growing size and influence of the Muslim world portends a disastrous future for us all.

Steyn emphasizes that, with birth rates among native Europeans well below 'replacement level' (2.1 children per woman), the Western populations in these countries will shrink with each new generation. At the same time, millions of Muslims are moving into Europe (naively welcomed by the existing governments as a source of labor to maintain their lavish welfare states), and are having many more children than their neighbors. Steyn reports that Western women in Europe have an average of 1.4 children, whereas Muslim women have an average of 3.5 children. The result is a 'baby boom' among Muslims that, within our lifetimes, will completely change the European countries in which they live. Steyn's analysis (though not original) strikes me as right on the mark (no pun intended).

Yet after spending page after page highlighting the demographic disaster that awaits Europe (and to a much lesser extent the United States), Steyn fails to state the logical conclusion, which is that Muslim immigration must be stopped. Period.

If one believes, as Steyn clearly does (with strong support from the evidence), that Muslims as a group not only are not assimilating into Western culture but are actively hostile toward the very principles upon which our societies are built, then it is 'suicidal' (a term frequently used by Steyn) to permit millions of Muslims to take up residence within our countries.

Of course, such a blanket policy would be unfair towards the many individual Muslims who do not share the militant worldview of their co—religionists. Nevertheless, if 80 percent of Muslims cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of the Western nations in which they live (to use the British poll numbers cited above), then the only rational policy is to exclude Muslims altogether. However, nowhere in America Alone does Steyn dare utter this obvious, if uncomfortable, truth.

I rarely agree with Katherine Kersten. But I applaud her for making this story known to a lot of us who don't reside in the Twin Cities area. Our founding fathers wanted us to have freedom of religion but not at the expense of the country. They wanted us to have freedom of speech to assure that all sides were being heard in every debate. But when any religious group and especially one that our country is currently at war (after all, how many times have you heard of a Lutheran hijacking a plane!) uses our laws and rights to promote their world wide vision which curses the infidels (us), then it is high time to make sure every one is playing by the same rules.