DEFENDING THE WEST
'Political sensitivities' before life and liberty
Exclusive: Pamela Geller tells of latest acquiescence to Muslim violence in U.S.
Last Friday, according to Arizona’s Casa Grande Dispatch, “an explosive device was detonated … by the back door of the U.S. Social Security Administration office, shaking downtown Casa Grande, but no one was injured.” The perpetrator was a Muslim, Abdullatif Aldosary. You would think that a Muslim detonating an IED in a government building in Arizona would be front-page stuff, or that national security agencies would be at heightened alert, but you would be wrong. The FBI is not treating it as a terrorism case because of “the political sensitivities involved.”
Translation? They fear insulting Muslims. They’re not properly prosecuting the sworn enemies of the U.S. for fear of giving offense to Muslims who are supposedly on our side.
And the media? What media? Where was CNN? When a bacon sandwich is 100 yards from a mosque, they issue a special report, and it would be on the front page of the New York Times. Perhaps they would dedicate a Sunday special section to “Islamophobia,” and President Obama might take to the airwaves to shake his boneless finger at us. But this, a Muslim using an IED to bomb a government building in Arizona, garners little to no media.
It’s astounding how in the tank the Shariah-complaint media have become, and how far they have gone down the rabbit hole of whitewashing Islam and downplaying jihad. But even worse is the fact that Obama’s FBI will not prosecute Aldosary on terror charges, so as not to hurt the feelings of jihadists. The Shariah-compliant FBI, too, is now enforcing the blasphemy laws.
We have lost our minds and our souls to this vicious enemy – have we no stomach in the defense of humanity and freedom?
And those of us who still have the testicular fortitude to cover jihad-related news are marginalized, demonized and accused of inciting “Islamophobia” and/or “anti-Muslim backlash.”
Contrary to the “Islamophobia” claims, I think the American people have been enormously tolerant and kind to Muslims in America. Considering what this nation has been through at the hands of the global jihad, it is amazing how generous America has been. Despite 9/11; the thwarted Times Square bombing; the Portland Christmas tree bombing; the Christmas underwear bomber; the massive plot to bomb New York City subways on the anniversary of 9/11; last week’s arrest of Muslim brothers in Florida who were plotting to use a weapon of mass destruction within the United States; last week’s arrest of an Islamic cell in California that was plotting to kill Americans overseas and in the United States; the plot by a Massachusetts Muslim to fly remote-controlled model planes packed with explosives into the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol; and so many other jihad plots in America over the last few years, there has been no backlash. None.
Think about it. Jihad attacks thwarted on an almost weekly basis, and the American people have not responded. What a testament to how civilized and tolerant we are as a culture and a society. All the blood, toil, treasure and human life fighting an enemy both here and in the ongoing wars in Afghanistan and, to a much lesser extent, Iraq, and still we welcome Muslims to our shores, in our communities and cities. But what do we get in return for our kindness and tolerance? False accusations of “backlash,” “intolerance,” “bigotry” and retribution against innocent people from Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas groups in the U.S. Why aren’t Muslim groups in the U.S. directing their barbs and arrows at the jihadists and not at their victims? It’s telling. And it’s not just the media, law enforcement and national security agencies – it’s our courts as well. There have been over 20,000 deadly jihadi attacks worldwide since 9/11, with thousands dead, displaced and mutilated, but as far as many judges and local governments, the real crime is … telling the truth about this and using the word the killers themselves use to describe their actions. The attempts by local governments to ban our anti-jihad ads were bad enough, but this is a crime: Prosecutors in the trial of the Muslim jihad terrorist Mohamed Mohamud, the Portland Christmas tree bomber, are asking the court that they be allowed to use the words “jihad” and “martyrdom” to characterize Mohamud’s jihad.
Mind you, the jihadi, who is on trial for plotting to detonate a car bomb near a 2010 Portland Christmas tree-lighting ceremony at which 25,000 people (mostly families – women and children) had gathered, used the terms “terrorism” and “jihad” himself when speaking with undercover agents. So Muslims slaughter in the cause of jihad, but the kaffir is not allowed to speak of it. Mohamed Mohamud refers to himself as a jihadi and to his holy war as jihad, but using such terms are “controversial” or “inflammatory” (exactly the same words these quislings used to describe my “savage” ads).
It’s as if the prosecutors have to ask permission of the court so as not to … blaspheme under the Shariah. Seriously, this is Shariah adherence in an American court.