Posts Tagged → muslim
Did the last humorist die yesterday?
Blazing Saddles was a movie that still defies categorization. In 1974, movies in America were highly regulated, and there were all kinds of seemingly artificial limits placed on what you could and could not see, or say, for people of all kinds of age groups. OK, normal people recognize that foul language, violence, and nudity are not appropriate for young people, but the censors then went far beyond these basic limits.
Somehow, Blazing Saddles made all kinds of end-runs around the film censors, without showing any naked bodies or using four-letter words, while still carrying a very adult social theme. One word in particular that is used throughout the movie is “The N Word“, and it is used to great effect in stabbing racism against blacks straight in the eye. And that’s the beauty of good art. Left to function properly without censorship or outside meddling, good art maximally tells its story and makes its best point.
Blazing Saddles may be funny, but it also addressed racism straight on in a way that has never been done since. And it moved the discussion about race relations farther ahead than all of the serious blather about feewings ever could. You couldn’t make Blazing Saddles today, though, because of the censorship, and so you’d never benefit from its valuable message.
This subject of censorship and free speech has been brought to the fore by (among other direct assaults on free speech) recent revelations that PC Woke book publishers are going through existing books by Roald Dahl and other authors and actually, unbelievably, incredibly, re-writing them to fit today’s snowflake boo-boo word fearing man-child.
It seems that today’s censors and book burners are the same people who are publishing books, and they have taken it upon themselves to be like the scientifically illiterate church censors of old re-writing Galileo’s scientific theories. They are destroying important art in the name of protecting people. These same people today would never have allowed Blazing Saddles to be released, because of the “hurtful” boo boo words nonsense.
This is civilization-destroying stuff, because when the people who publish the books are also burning the original books and then re-writing the books, you really end up with, in effect, no books worthy of being called books. Real books of original creative content carry real messages and real information, real insights, not artificially dumbed-down, white washed, or filtered content that misses the entire purpose and point of the author’s original work.
Yesterday a man named Norman Steinberg died, at the age of 83. He was the humor-filled screenwriter for Blazing Saddles, among other funny and powerful message movies. I wonder if he died of old age or of a broken heart, because he surely must have been America’s last humorist. Today’s censors say that no one is allowed to say or depict certain things (except for pedophilia, or cross-dressing, or biologically impossible and socially implausible gay/trans/etc beings which all seems all the rage among the Left), because somewhere in the universe a person’s feewings will be hurt.
Today’s censors don’t mind hurting the feelings of religiously observant Christians, Muslims and Jews, the people who keep modern society functioning, but God help you if you hurt the feelings of some pathetic 20-year-old weenie college kid somewhere. Burn that book!
You couldn’t build America today with all of the outrageous and useless regulations (which I had a direct hand in when I worked at USEPA in Washington, DC) weighing down our nation, and you couldn’t film or write Blazing Saddles today, because of all of the censorious book-burning crap coming out of Hollywood and from the supposed caretakers and curators of American culture.
Rest in peace, Mr. Steinberg. Wherever you are now, I hope you have been able to travel across artificial boundaries and achieve your highest and best abilities and purpose. Lord knows, you couldn’t do any of that here on earth today.
Today’s cultural censors would never approve this silly poster because of the gun (“guns are bad”), the rope (supposed violence), the horse (supposed animal abuse) etc
Joe Biden, domestic terrorist in chief
On January 6th, Joe Biden gave an outrageous speech, where he accused everyday law-abiding patriotic Americans of being terrorists. American citizen taxpayers who legally oppose Biden’s blatantly illegal and often ultra-violent government overreach were singled out for criticism and threats of further official violence.
His Department of Justice has labeled as “domestic terrorists” understandably angry parents attending school board meetings to voice their disbelief at the daily anti-taxpayer teacher-led insurrections against parental oversight of publicly-owned government schools.
The US military has recently put out a policy paper warning of “patriot extremism” as the number one threat to America. Not Islamic jihadism, or Burn Loot and Murder (BLM) arson and murder. But peaceful Americans who follow the law, revere the Constitution, and who believe in the first principles of a free America as it was founded, why we are “domestic terrorists.” According to Biden’s lawless Marxists illegally occupying our government offices, anyhow.
Biden’s military leaders are aggressively (and illegally) purging from the US military anyone who is a patriotic American, as defined by someone who believes in a constitutional republic, as America was founded. Such is the love these patriots hold for America that they are considered a dangerous threat to Biden’s Marxist revolution against America, and so they must be ejected from the military.
As recently as today, Biden’s FBI is still unwilling to say just exactly how a well known violent Pakistani jihadi entered America, or why he just targeted a synagogue in Texas, where he held hostages until he was killed yesterday. The FBI still won’t say that this jihadi’s official Islamic hate for everyone who is not Muslim, and especially for Jews, is the blatantly obvious cause of this infiltrator’s armed hostage taking at Congregation Beth Israel of Collyville, Texas.
But Joe Biden will stand aside and allow millions of unvetted, unscreened, unvaccinated, mask-less illegal aliens to pour over our southern border. So many from all around the world have crossed since last year that the Taliban recently threatened to unleash 2,000 suicide bombers inside America if America takes any steps in Afghanistan to save the lives of the many Americans the Biden Administration abandoned there. So weak is our wide-open southern border that our worst enemies have thousands of people here, ready to blow themselves up right here on our soil, in our shopping malls, our grocery stores, our churches and synagogues. This means you and your family are at great risk, dear reader, thanks to Joe Biden’s domestic policies.
If we are going to be honest about this situation, the truth is that Joe Biden is the real domestic terrorist. He has done more to foment domestic terrorism against everyday Americans than anyone else. He has done more to unleash illegal official violence against law-abiding Americans, going so far as to take and hold political opponent prisoners and hostages inside disgusting Washington DC dungeons as I write these words.
No one has done more to promote and visit domestic terror upon Americans than Joe Biden, the domestic terrorist in chief. And as today is Martin Luther King Day, we take heart from MLK: “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” Every American remaining with an American heart should be disobeying the lawless Biden Administration, whose unjust actions are actually against current law.
This billboard was displayed across Pennsylvania after Biden’s Afghanistan retreat debacle
On 9/11, W proved R vs D a false choice
Earlier this month, on the 20th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 plane hijackings and subsequent terrorist attacks against the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and the Flight 93 crash at the Shanksville “battlefield,” past president George W. Bush gave some remarkable remarks.
“W” said that today’s law-abiding America-first patriots, who are American citizens with a First Amendment right to peacefully protest, some of whom peacefully protested at the January 6th Washington DC rally against the stolen election and media lies, are the same as the Muslim terrorists who used the jets to destroy over 3,000 Americans on 9/11.
Yep, a supposedly “Republican” former president used his unique opportunity not to promote unity among increasingly fragmenting dis-united Americans, not to promote a sense of solidarity among Americans and other Western Civilizations against the forces of evil that attacked America on September 11, 2001, and who still seek to destroy our freedoms and turn the planet into a shariah-compliant hellhole.
Nor did “W” talk about the racist, violent domestic terrorist groups ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter, whose members have caused billions of dollars of happy-vandal damage and murder across American cities in the past year.
Instead, “W” used the poor behavior of a couple hundred people, some of whom were BLM members and Federal Bureau of Investigation employees instigating violence outside and inside the US Capitol building, to attack and mischaracterize everyone (roughly half a million to a million people) who was peacefully protesting on January 6th, and he used the murderous behavior of the 9/11 terrorists to smear everyone who was not only at the January 6th protest, but who had voted for Donald Trump and who also thinks that America ought to be first and foremost about its citizens and our Constitutional rights.
No other speech given by any other public figure on American soil could have been less accurate or more divisive than W’s ten minutes of infamy at the Shanksville field, that I helped conserve for moments expected to be better than this.
Setting aside all of the Bush family globalist loyalties and warmongering money making at the life-and-limb expense of America’s young warriors, my own takeaway from his speech is that he proved once and for all that there is no real material distinction between the Democrat Party and the Republican Party. Not on the whole. Not really in any deeply meaningful way.
Based on his comments at the Flight 93 memorial, W might as well have been any present-day Democrat Party politician engaging in the dehumanization of their American political opponents.
Both main political parties are run by people who stand firmly against the survival of America as a free constitutional republic, rooted in individual liberty and minimalist government. Both main political parties are run by people who believe they are elite, an entitled aristocracy of sorts without even the noblesse oblige of old, meant to rule over an increasingly disenfranchised, enslaved pool of serfs. Both main political parties increasingly oppose individual freedoms and support increasingly powerful government, with all of the personal invasions and masked thugs that a powerful surveillance state can muster.
W proved that the choice between Democrat Party and Republican Party is a false choice. We can see that these two political parties are really just two well-heeled street gangs battling each other for the spoils of war, taxpayer money, power, and control. Neither party is committed to the individual freedoms of We, The People.
A 1960s philosopher whose name I presently forget, Eric something, quipped “Both the Left and the Right want you to obey them. But the Left also wants you to love them.”
And how right he was! Supposedly representing the American “right,” RINO W makes it clear that neither he nor his fellow Republicans give a damn about what we citizens think of him or them. They think we American patriots are just the same scum of the earth as the Taliban, ISIS, and al-Qaeda terrorists.
At least the Democrat Party is trying to persuade us that their censorship, suppression, lies, stolen education, vote stealing, government spying on us citizens, armed FBI Gestapo thugs at our doors over made-up political accusations, and innocent American political prisoners held in solitary confinement without access to medicine or lawyers and with no formal charges (or no real formal charges that are not laughable, like trespassing) is really for our own good and safety.
I would say of the two political parties, at least the Democrat Party gets an “A” for effort, for cooing lies into our ear. The Republicans are flat-out contemptuous of us; they don’t even care to try to get us to love them!
President Trump Earns the Nobel Peace Prize
Right now I am watching the peace agreement signing event between Israel, Bahrain and United Arab Emirates, put together by President Donald Trump.
This is a majorly historic moment on Planet Earth. Because for seventy years at least, the simple ability to sit down and talk things out eluded the Muslim Arab population, regardless of country, regardless of age, regardless of religious observance, regardless of educational level or political office. The simple fact is that Muslim Arab culture simply had no room for free Jews. No room in their hearts, no room in their ears, no room in their heads.
Even in Egypt, which signed an agreement with Israel during the President Carter administration, the notion that peace had been achieved was never taken seriously. Egypt was worn down from repeatedly losing huge military campaigns to tiny Israel, and America offered enough financial incentive for Egypt to move into a different approach to existence. It wasn’t love for Egyptians or Israelis that led Sadat to sign the treaty with Israel. It was his yearning for political stability.
After seventy years of one-sided conflict brought on Israel by the Muslim Arab inability to think broadly or modernly, only President Donald Trump was able to step outside the standard lines that had been drawn up among the combatants. Just as only President Trump has been able to step outside the artificial lines drawn up by Washington DC elites, to finally and uniquely advance the material interests of all Americans.
So if President Barack Hussein Obama was entitled to get the Nobel Peace Prize for merely getting elected, and for having achieved nothing that promoted peace, then how much more does today’s true peace agreement entitle President Trump to also receive the Nobel Peace Prize!
And while we are on the subject, how could Israel’s prime minister Bibi Netanyahu also not deserve the same award?
Signing ceremony broadcast live just moments ago, posted as a screen shot from my computer, complete with a dummy “Press ESC to exit” for those Jews who love a seditious political party more than they love peace
Time to create Kurdistan out of Iraq
Now that a slim majority of the Iraqi parliament has voted to demand the full exit of American everything from Iraq, it is time for America, the liberator and vanquisher of Iraq, to decide what to do next.
Note that Iraq is roughly 60% Shia Muslim, who identify closely with Shia-majority Iran. That 60% of Iraq’s population lives in a relatively small region adjoining Iran, and despite holding such a small geographical area, about 15% of Iraq’s surface area, the population dominates the entire country.
One of the enormous mistakes made by the Bush administration when invading Iraq were these assumptions: 1) Iraqis will welcome Americans as liberators the same way Europeans welcomed American GIs in World War II; 2) Iraqis will be forever grateful for America’s liberation of Iraq, and they will therefore become a key ally in the region; 3) Iraq was, is, and will be fertile ground for planting western-style democracy, thereby creating some form of democratic government that will naturally cooperate with America and other Western nations.
These assumptions were rightly questioned at the time of the Iraq invasion, and they were further questioned during the occupation and subjugation of the native jihadis there. In recent years a kind of quiet war of careful positioning has followed, and so the newest assumption was that America had been successful in all ways, and had brought lasting peace to Iraq. And so, the thinking has gone, America can just pull up stakes and move everyone back home.
Not so fast.
Being anti-war is understandable if it applies to unjust wars, unwarranted wars, stupid wars, wasteful wars, and artificially inhibited wars, all of which applied up front to the American invasion of Iraq and then the occupation. Perhaps the most dispiriting aspect of the Iraq occupation was the ridiculous “rules of engagement,” created by Bush and further tightened by Obama, whereby our own troops pretty much had to bleed before they were allowed to return fire against aggressors. These insanely restrictive rules of engagement inhibited American forces from doing their job effectively, quickly, and safely. These rules led to years of IEDs and snipers killing and badly wounding American military personnel who were in Iraq to bring peace and prosperity to Iraqis, and to an anti-warrior culture at the Pentagon back home, whereby devoted fighters like Navy SEAL operations chief Edward “Eddie” Gallagher were often held to impossibly impractical standards for conduct on the field of battle against merciless enemies. And then made an example of by desk jockeys and armchair generals.
Almost all of those IED and sniper attacks on American forces could have been prevented by having either no rules of engagement, or rules of engagement that greatly and quite naturally favored the interests of our forces over vague concerns about perceptions and lingering “feelings” of Iraqis.
However, the rules of engagement stayed on and what was done was done; now twenty years later, America has spent trillions of taxpayer dollars and tanker trucks of American blood to bring peace and prosperity to yet another group of Middle East/Near East/ Muslim people who really don’t value peace and prosperity, nor democracy, either. None of these things that Americans and Europeans value are valued by Muslims, plain and simple. This is proven by the lack of peace, the lack of prosperity, and the lack of democracy or the rule of law in every..single…Muslim country.
So now that the vanquished are demanding that the conqueror leave Iraq, what should America do?
Our main options are to stay and fight all over again, or to appease the Iraqi government, which is now largely a Shia proxy of Iran’s theocracy, or to turn and leave.
Staying and fighting is unappealing, because we did that already, at great cost. The “no blood for oil” cries of the initial invasion were prophetic, as America stupidly declined to take any payment of any sort for our efforts. Not even in abundant Iraqi oil, which could have been easily and fairly shipped home to offset our huge investment in Iraq’s freedom and stability.
Appeasing the Shia-led Iraqi government is also unappealing and impractical, as appeasement never works, it just delays the inevitable conflict while our enemy prepares overtime for violent conflict. Thus prolonging the inevitable.
Finally, America can turn and leave, pulling up stakes and bidding farewell to Iraq with a “pox on your house” tossed over our shoulder as we send everyone home. This option has the greatest emotional appeal, and for good reason: Those who love and cherish American military personnel are loathe to see them sacrificed once again or any longer in the pursuit of vague, poorly defined, or improbable geopolitical goals. And the oil-less Iraq war and occupation was nothing if not poorly defined with vague, improbable goals at huge cost. But leaving cold turkey is a terrible option, because it will mean America invested trillions of dollars and thousands of wonderful young men for nothing. Not even for oil, and yet we will be in a worse position than we were when we first invaded.
A fourth option exists, and will take some creativity to implement. But it is doable, and is the best of all our options, because it allows America to meet all of its geopolitical and strategic goals at minimal cost to our servicemen and taxpayers.
This fourth option is to subdivide Iraq into new states, based on ethnicity and or religious makeup. Similar to how Pakistan was created out of India in 1948.
We will support those new states that share our interests, and we will harass and undermine those states that ally themselves with our sworn enemies, like Iran (and yes, theocratic Iran has been America’s sworn enemy long before Israel had a dog in that fight). Thus, breaking up Iraq into Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish states will allow us to more easily identify and help our friends, and more easily isolate and fight our enemies. It will take the vast majority of Iraq’s Shia Muslims and keep them in the smallest geographical area of Iraq where they already live. It will also enable America to finally begin to take payment from the vast oil fields that are mostly surrounded by pro-America Kurds. Most of Iraq’s geography is already divided up along ethnic and sectarian lines, so the new state lines on the map can be pretty easily drawn to match.
By creating the modern Kurdistan, America will implement several goals. First, we will be placing most of the existing oil fields in the hands of a people who have been and who still are naturally inclined to ally with America. America will benefit from the oil not going to Iran, and we can always set up a long-overdue financial debt repayment program with the Kurds, in oil or in oil receipts.
Second, we will be undermining two of the most dangerous states in the region, Iran and Turkey, both of whom have openly demonstrated clear goals of regional domination at any cost and with any method. Recall that Turkey has been quietly allied with ISIS, and also has been openly in pursuit of genocide against the Kurds while lusting after their oil fields. Iran’s ideological threat needs no explanation, as they openly wish to explode many nuclear bombs across America, and for years they have been quietly exploiting our open southern border in preparation to do just this.
In the spirit of the times, I propose the creation of Shiastan (capital city of Najaf), Sunnistan (capital city of Baghdad), and Kurdistan (capital city of Kirkuk) in response to Iraq’s declaration of war against America.
Source: Ohio State University Department of History, which in turns attributes the US government
9/11’s meaning then and now
Today is the 18th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, known as “9/11”.
From October 2001 to October 2003, I worked closely with the National Park Service and with the families of the Flight 93 victims on protecting the crash site, two solid hard-working years, so that it could eventually become a national memorial without worries of losing the physical sense of what the surrounding ground looked like the moment the plane flipped upside down and did a nose-dive into Tim Lambert’s spruce grove.
And for those two years no one ever blamed the victims of 9/11. Nor did anyone try to scapegoat anyone else for 9/11. Solemnly we focused hard on protecting the landscape so that future generations would know and remember not only what happened, but why and by whom. Like a battlefield, which most Americans properly see it as.
However, for a lot of Americans today, the ‘why’ and and ‘whom’ parts of 9/11 are now strangely flipped around.
In a recent conference about 9/11, panelists blamed guns, the NRA, whites, Christians, and a lack of open borders for 9/11. No, I am not making this up. Blaming the American victims of 9/11 is the actual state of mind among many liberal leaders today. At the conference, they refused to mention Islam, Muslim terrorists, or hijacked planes. Instead, they used the event to call attention to their favorite failed policy goals, not to heal the wounded nation or to discuss lessons learned about how to avoid a repeat of 9/11.
And let’s be honest: Open borders will lead to not just one more 9/11, but many more acts of mass terror against Americans. You could fairly argue that the coast-to-coast illegal alien crime wave already is a form of terrorism, or that the liberal policy assault on law enforcement and the resulting mass shootings is a form of terrorism. But what is meant here, and what is the worst, are carefully planned and targeted acts of mass murder. Like what happened on 9/11.
Eighteen years ago 9/11 heightened our awareness. It made Americans feel vulnerable. It taught us that our best intentions and most open-minded policies are seen by most people outside of America as signs of weakness, of decadence, of a lack of willpower to survive, and they were then exploited to our disadvantage. Our federal government at the time properly took revenge on the Taliban and al-Qaeda, mostly hiding in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan. But then that same government mistakenly tried to implement a repeat of the World War II Marshall Plan, where America re-built the nations we had invaded and occupied. The post-9/11 attempted rebuilding of Iraq and Afghanistan was overly optimistic, because these Muslim countries are not European. They share none of the values or culture of WWII Europe, and they are immune to our culture and values.
And so now, instead of learning lessons from 9/11 and using them to protect America, we have an entire American political party that has inverted 9/11 and turned it into another forum and stage for promoting policies that have zero to do with 9/11 or preventing something similar from happening again.
Today in America, to one political party, the military veterans who fought to protect America by taking the fight to Iraq and Afghanistan are now the threat to America, not orthodox Muslims following the Koran to the letter of the law. And the patriotic friends of those veterans are the threat to America; the religious Christian friends and family of those veterans are the threat to America; and the hunters and target shooting friends of those veterans are also the threat to America.
Everyone but the actual perpetrators of 9/11, and their supporters like US Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, are that political party’s scapegoats for 9/11.
For radical Muslim Ilhan Omar, on 9/11 “Somebody did something.” That’s it, that is her whole take on 9/11, and her political party agrees with her.
And now her political party is coming hard after you and me.
Looks like a whole lot of people missed the lessons-learned part of 9/11. Probably because they don’t care about them. And that right there is the real lesson learned for the rest of us: 9/11 only means something to people who actually care about America staying America.
The Prayer Heard ‘Round the World
About a week ago, a Pennsylvania state representative dared to make a Christian prayer in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, a building filled with beautiful religious symbols and statements from the Bible writ large upon the walls and the ceilings.
The world then exploded around her, condemnations filling the empty spaces at every corner of her life and space. Her prayer was labeled “Intolerance” by the fake news PennLive/Patriot News (which published a viciously anti-Christian article and then deleted every online pro-Christian comment afterwards, which is going to be our next essay here).
What is strange about all this anti religion sentiment is that mere minutes before Rep. Stephanie Borowicz made her public prayer, in the official time and place allotted to her, a fellow Muslim representative was sworn in. By an Imam using the Koran. No boos or hisses followed that religious event. The negativity only resulted from and surrounded a Christian speaking as a Christian in a building built by Christians in a state founded by Christians in a nation – the world’s freest and most successful- founded by Christians, and based on the Hebrew Torah and the Christian Testament, together or separately otherwise known as the Bible.
Everything about America, from our concept of law and order to our stop signs and street lights to our universal education and safety net for the destitute to free speech and tolerant free religion, are based on the orderly rules laid out in the Bible by God. Simple as that. Without Christianity, there is no America, no freedom, no big opportunity, no tolerance. Yes, Christianity started out as an offshoot of Judaism, but it is its own religion. It is the repository of all of America’s basic, founding principles and values. America has always been about shared values, shared goals, despite different theologies among its citizens.
If you take away Christianity, you no longer have America. No doubt, that anti-America goal is behind most of the negativity surrounding Borowicz etc et al. People complaining about Christianity are essentially declaring war on America. They no longer share values, goals, or a common vision of what it means to be an American.
Today, in the establishment media and its one political party, God is out, the US Constitution is out, the First Amendment freedoms are especially out, Christians are very, very out, and fake victims and even fakier minorities are forced in and falsely elevated and valued above everyone else (how can a group of people 1.3 billion strong be considered a minority anywhere on our planet?). This situation is not right, but it is the fight we find ourselves at this time and place. Freedom is never free, world-wide it is uncommon, and every generation has had to fight to hold onto it. America is still a majority Christian country, and if those Americans wake up, there is still time to save the nation from the physical and cultural onslaught exemplified by the negative response to Rep. Borowicz’s simple prayer.
Whether Christian theology speaks to you, or not, and whether or not a person believes that Christianity will save your soul, or not, is a matter of a particular faith. One thing here is absolutely certain, and that is only Christians and Christianity can save America. Whether America’s Christians are up to the task is the question before us. Our nation’s armed rebellion against British tyranny started quietly in a church pulpit. Rep. Borowicz made a prayer heard ’round the world; pray that it resonates further.
About that New Zealand mosque massacre…
Once again, liberal ideas have resulted in terrible results, and yet, the people who promote those ideas blame everyone else for their failures. Now it is a mass shooting in a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand.
The massacre did not happen in a vacuum.
New Zealand has the same kind of stupid, ineffective “gun control” that anti-firearm activists have demanded for everyone everywhere: No handguns, mass registration with the goal of eventual mass confiscation for a gun-free society (except for the police and security services controlled by the liberals). Had the members of that mosque had access to handguns, like our concealed carry laws permit here in America, then they could have defended themselves against the lone attacker. But nope, anti-gun activists require these bodies and blood in the street in order to make the emotional case for yet more anti-freedom, anti-safety gun elimination.
Sorry, mosque members. I am sorry that you were martyred by the same leftists who have brought so much destruction to everyone else across the planet.
And then, so many questions come to mind, like:
Did that mosque serve as a launching point for public or private anti-Christian, anti-Jew hatred and bigotry, as so many other mosques do around the world?
Did that mosque have members who were actively engaged in denigrating and materially undermining Christianity and Western countries from within, as so many mosques do? Did they take advantage of New Zealand’s freedom and democracy to achieve non-democratic results?
Was that mosque a security risk for New Zealand? Does it harbor violent terrorists or proponents of Islamic terrorism?
Was the mosque officially silent about the non-stop bloodbath perpetrated by Islamic jihadists against innocent people around the world, notably Christians living peacefully in Paris and London and Antwerp?
Was the mosque officially silent about the obvious danger that Islamic jihad represents to the entire world?
Did that mosque serve as a center for spreading Islamic terrorism, as so many other mosques do around the world?
These questions and many similar ones must be asked, because if any of them are affirmative, then the massacre could be construed or even understood as an act of self-defense by the perpetrator, acting on behalf of his vulnerable countrymen who are paralyzed by leftist political correctness and an inactive government run by people willing to sacrifice the entire nation on the altar of “understanding” a fascist, totalitarian ideology that is mutually exclusive with the openness and tolerance New Zealand and every other Western nation stands for.
Here in America, Muslima Terrorista Suprema Linda Sarsour used the massacre to publicly explain exactly what is at the heart of this civilizational conflict. She explicitly blamed “white Christians” as the source of all evil on Earth and of being the biggest threat to all civilizations. In other words, when some mosque somewhere gets a taste of its own medicine, suddenly jihad against Christians and whites is openly justified. As if jihad against Christians and Christianity has not been ongoing for 1,300 years! No wonder Westerners are phobic of Islam; they are afraid for very good reasons.
Here in Harrisburg, the local JCC issued a Marxist screed about the shooting, decrying, among other ridiculous things, “Islamophobia” and “bigotry” (no, not the explicit anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, anti-Hindu bigotry of the Koran). One wonders if the regular, normal, hard working members of the many various JCCs and Jewish Federations around America will ever tire of underwriting the Marxist march of their institutional professionals, who seem to specialize in delivering sappy Yiddish entertainment to elderly people and Marxist-everything-else for everyone else. In the past it was Margie Adelmann, now it is Jen Ross, the “professional Jews” who represent the very worst of secularism and controlling, destructive leftism. Neither of them was or is responsive to JCC members who want them to stop politicizing everything in the name of Marxism and political correctness.
They, too, are on a jihad, parallel with Linda Sarsour, the rest of us be damned.