No, Sharon Angle did NOT say what the headline says. I am just doing my best to imitate a breathless PROPAGANDA headline from Yahoo "News" and the "Anti-American, Despicable Associated Press" (complete, official name).
Who did say what is in the headline? Well, a mainstream media "news" source--I think a network morning show--did an interview involving a leading overseas Muslim cleric. HE said that, in not too many years, a Muslim flag would be flying over the White House. No, he was not talking about a foreign invasion, but predicting that the Muslim RELIGION would take over the United States. And he was talking about a RELIGIOUS flag. Does it not bother you leftists out there--who often seem to consider Christmas an "establishment" of religion--that the worst THEOCRACIES in the world are Muslim (although Israel is a type of fairly tolerant theocracy)?
And what is happening overseas? In France, Germany and other places, Muslims are setting up communities run almost totally by MUSLIM LAW (not the law of the country where they are). There seems to be a trend, in Europe, for these Muslim communities to be so insulated and powerful that the secular government of the country does not dare interfere with them (like those polygamist cult towns in the United States in Utah and Arizona that the mainstream media likes to trash from time to time--trash correctly, except that those towns are hardly the danger that fundamentalist Muslims are to religious liberty). There is simply no doubt that a substantial portion of the Muslims in the world--maybe a majority and certainly the most energetic--favor a THEOCRACY as the religious/government system in which they want to live. Even in the more "moderate" Muslim states, there is not the kid of religious tolerance (including toward Muslims) that there is in the United States.
There are numerous indications that at least some Muslims in the USA are trying to do the same thing that is being done in Europe: set up areas run by strict Muslim law, regardless of the Constitution of the United States. That is what is wrong with the image of a "Muslim flag" flying over the White House. It is not that there is anything wrong with a Muslim President, but where are those people who keep bleating about a "separation of church and state"? Don't they see the danger to American principles here? This kind of news about Muslims in the United States is actually suppressed by the cowardly mainstream media, who make a fetish out of not criticizing Muslims (for fear of being labeled "anti-Muslim"). The mainstream media, of course, is not afraid of criticizing Christians, or of being thought of as "anti-Christian" (as I, for one, think of them).
Yes, you have had many news stories--if not so many in the mainstream media--in the United States about Muslims in some areas wanting--and getting--the "right" to run PUBLIC schools in a way to comply with the Muslim religion. I have HEARD Muslims on TV say that there is nothing wrong with this--that they just want the government to accommodate their religion as is their "right". Oh? It is actually MY view that the Constitution does not tell you how local school districts should be run. Yes, I would actually support the "right" of a local school district to "accommodate" the Muslim religion--inserting the religion in the public school. However, that is NOT the law of the United States, as presently interpreted. And I don't think it is a good idea (just because something is constitutional does not make it a good idea). What is it about not even allowing the Ten Commandments in public schools that you don't understand? yet, the mainstream media is willing to let much more intrusive insertions of the Muslim religion into the "state" be totally ignored.. Have I told you that these people--the "journalists" of the mainstream media--are the most hypocritical people to ever walk the Earth? I know I have.
There is, therefore, no doubt that Muslims--at least in some places--are tying to push local governments to "accommodate" the Muslim religion--which often means inserting the Muslim religion into officially approved pubic institutions. You can argue whether this is an attempted "takeover" of American towns, but it is happening. Muslims, of course, have a right to seek political power. however, given the Muslim theocracies in the world, and the strong theocratic inclination of so many Muslims, should there not be SCRUTINY of whether Muslims are pushing to violate the present interpretation of the U.S. Constitution (not to mention violate good policy in terms of avoiding imposing a religion on people)? Such scrutiny seems clearly in order, although persecution of Muslims is not in order. To many Muslims, however, "persecution" seems to mean not allowing them to impose their religion on everyone else.
Enter Sharon Angle. She was ASKED, at some sort of rally, something about whether she was aware that Muslims are doing--or threatening to do--what I describe above--in the United States. Sharon Angle answered the question by saying that she understood Muslims had "taken over" at least two towns (citing, according to the LONG AP/Yahoo News story a town in Michigan). Now Sharon Angle did not say the marines should invade. She simply agreed with the person asking the question that this was disturbing, and worth keeping an eye on. And she was right--whether she got the details of the towns right or not. You might remember that President Obama keeps getting details wrong--like whether you will get to keep your present health coverage or how a surgeon charges $30,0000, $40,000, or even $50,000 dollars as a surgeon fee for an amputation, because he won't do preventive care (1 to 3 thousand being about the charge for an amputation in a world other than bama's, and the surgeon not even being the person who does the preventive care). The mainstream media never picks at the details of what Obama says the way they pick at the details of what Sharon Angle says. That is because the mainstream media is CORRUPT, and acting--in this instance--as an agent for the Harry Reid campaign (as the mainstream media acts as agents for Democrats all over the country).
Yes, on Thursday evening, this was the AP story which was THE featured picture story on Yahoo "News", with this breathless headline: "Senate candidate says Muslims have taken over American towns". The disgraceful story itself was a complete parsing of what Sharon Angle had said as if this were the most important issue in Nevada, and in the country.
You might remember that Harry Reid immediately came out against the Ground Zero mosque--opposing President Obama--after President Obama called it an issue of religious "freedom" (before refusing to comment on the wisdom of putting a mosque near Ground Zero).
Is the "issue" of Muslim takeovers of American towns a big "issue" in Nevada? Is Harry Reid in FAVOR of such takeovers? Does Harry Reid think that we should not worry at all about Muslims trying to impose their religion, in violation of American tradition? You can see where this is going. No, this is NOT a big issue in Nevada. And if it were, it would NOT help Harry Reid.
Yet, there is no doubt this was intended as a Yahoo/AP HIT PIECE trying to attack Sharon Angle. WHY is this a Yahoo featured "picture story"? Only because Yahoo is CORRUPT, and part of the mainstream media "machine" putting out propaganda. But it shows you how out of ouch these people are that they think this helps Harry Reid, and hurts Sharon Angle. This could hardly have been the most important thing that Sharon Angle said at that rally. She probably had some things to say about the economy, and the real issues in Nevada. But by leaving the impression that this is the worst thing Angle had to say, the despicable Yahoo, and the equally despicable AP, did their best to HELP Sharon Angle. This cannot hurt her at all, and this mainstream media fetish with "persecution" of Muslims has to represent one of the strangest disconnects between a "business" and its "customers" that has ever existed. The Ground Zero mosque is a perfect example of just how out of touch our mainstream media are with the public.
No, we are not at war with Islam (as a religion). But a good part of Islam is at war with us, and with ur values and traditions. The public is unwilling to ignore that. The mainstream media is. My own explanation is that much of the mainstream media is so ANTI-AMERICAN that they promote any propaganda that seems to support the idea that the people of the Untied States are racist, bigoted evil people (referring, of course, to the people not in the mainstream media, or on the left).