In Human Events this morning I discuss the uppermost concern of the law enforcement, government, and media elites in the wake of the jihad attack at Fort Hood: the fear of an anti-Muslim backlash.
Backlash fever is sweeping the nation: thirteen Americans are dead and thirty-eight wounded in a jihad attack at Fort Hood, and our government's primary concern -- from the Chief of Staff of the Army to the Islamic pressure groups such as CAIR -- are focused entirely on ensuring that Muslims in the United States are not being victimized by a "backlash."Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared: "We object to, and do not believe, that anti-Muslim sentiment should emanate from this. This was an individual who does not represent the Muslim faith." She said that DHS was taking steps to "prevent everybody being painted with a broad brush." Not "taking steps to prevent another jihad terror attack." And she promised: "One of the things we'll do is make sure that we're reaching out to the state and local authorities within the US, because they often have better outreach to members of the Muslim community than we do."
The U.S. Army Chief of Staff, George Casey, likewise seemed primarily concerned about the safety of Muslims, not about the safety of the potential victims of the next jihad attack: "I'm concerned that this increased speculation could cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers. And I've asked our Army leaders to be on the lookout for that." Not "I'm concerned that there could be another jihadist among our Muslim soldiers. And I've asked our Army leaders to be on the lookout for that."
Casey added: "Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse."
So not having enough Muslims in the military would be worse than mass murder. And this man is the U.S. Army Chief of Staff.The media was mining the same territory. AP reported Friday that there had been "immediate" anti-Muslim "backlash." What happened? Did armed bands of furious Islamophobes throw molotov cocktails at mosques? Did ferocious white supremacists maul fragile little girls in hijabs on their way to school? Did angry bigots spit at pious imams quietly going about their business?
No.
Had there been any report -- any report at all -- of any innocent, random Muslim being attacked in a "backlash" after the Fort Hood jihad?
Nope. Not one. Americans are decent people. Americans believe people are innocent until proven guilty. But Ibrahim Hooper and his fellow thugs at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) need to be able to claim that hate crimes are being committed so that they can claim victim status for Muslims and deflect attention away from such small matters as the jihad at Fort Hood. And, naturally, the clueless and/or complicit mainstream media in their hip pocket.
And so we witness the strange phenomenon of stories of Muslims fearing a backlash soaring and the numbering of actual incidents of backlash remaining at zero. In the AP story, all that followed the announcement of an "immediate" anti-Muslim backlash were various stories about mosques and Muslims asking for special police protection, and the like. So in reality, the story should have been headlined, "Muslims claim victim status in wake of Fort Hood jihad attack."
The only actual incidents of "backlash" that AP could come up with were incidents of people calling the Fort Hood massacre a jihad attack -- as if it is "Islamophobic" and hateful to note that a man was shouting "Allahu akbar" as he gunned people down, and that he gave out Korans hours before he started shooting people, and that he expressed sympathy for suicide attackers.Is it unfair -- even racist -- to say then that he may have been motivated by the Islamic jihad doctrine of warfare against unbelievers? To CAIR and the media, yes.
The liberal media is one thing, but the government of our nation is quite another, or at least used to be. Napolitano and Casey should know better. If they do not confront the ideology that leads to such attacks, there will be a steadily-increasing spate of them. But apparently preserving "diversity" is a higher priority than national security.
"[T]he ideology that leads to such attacks" is called ISLAM. How do our leaders confront this ideology without confronting ALL Muslims?
Diversity is anathema to most Muslims. They want everyone worshipping THEIR god or paying protection money (jizya) for the privilege of following a different faith.
Janet and Casey are AINO's...Americans in name only...As Is Rasool Obama and his whole gang of AINO shahadict thugs...They are working for Allah harder than for America and Americans...They are more interested in protecting Mahound than they are Americans...It was a mistake to give these people power, now it is time to take it away from them...2010/2012...Or sooner...Sooner would be better...
Just as bright as declaring their objection to the "Kristallnacht", then adding that no anti-German sentiment should arise from those events...
Government in frigging full damage control mode:
Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength.
Ehm, how about 'security'..? For citizens and servicemen alike. Not much of a step from Diversity is strength to Ignorance is strength.
I'm wondering why taxpayers put up with such insolent incompetence...
yes we must have diversity at all cost
'AINO' - that's a good way to put it. If Big 0 was really American, a heartfelt outrage should be an immediate and tangible reaction to this. That he needs (metaphorically) to have his teleprompter programmed for a measured response shows that the man doesn't have American in his bones.
The presidency is functionally empty, in my view.
Somehow, our leaders never tire of being wrong.
"Napolitano and Casey should know better."
Of course they should, but so should Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee and other politicians. There is a paucity of leaders in either political party who truly understand the danger that Islam poses to our freedoms and culture. Fortunately, there are more and more ordinary folks who have put in the work and have studied the texts, tenets, and teachings of Islam and recognize the danger. They are beginning to put pressure on those leaders and beginning to make their voice heard in the media. The tide is turning - slowly - but it is turning. The last to get a clue will be those political leaders, but they will respond to pressure from below, or they will be fired by the voters.
Duh_swami,
I agree that the people that voted for the election of the anti-American cabal in 2008 are responsable, but I don't think they made a mistake. I believe that at least 40% of the Democrat Party is America hating, criminal leftist bent on bringing down this great nation of ours. The stupidity of the independents, and naivette of so call moderates gave Osama the election. We are paying for it now, and most probably will never recover from our self destructive, multiculturalist illusion. I feel your same sense of dread.
Duh_swami, I agree that the people that voted for the anti-American cabal in 2008 are responsable, but I don't think they made a mistake. I believe that at least 40% of the Democrat Party is America hating, criminal leftist bent on bringing down this great nation of ours. The stupidity of the independents, and naivette of so call moderates gave Osama the election. We are paying for it now, and most probably will never recover from our self destructive, multiculturalist illusion. I feel your same sense of dread.
Ahhh...America's love affair with Jihad! I tell you, ladies and gents, it leaves me breathless.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared: ".... This was an individual who does not represent the Muslim faith."
HER version of the faith, which as she and her ilk know is THE RoP.
Funny that non-Muslims without having a clue about Islam, consider themselves to be the experts on the subject and go on to propagate misleading information among the unsuspecting, innocent citizens, so that they lower their guard. How many deaths of innocent non-Muslims will it take before the ugly truth is allowed to sink in?
I've always said that people fear from others what they know they are likely to do themselves - and I think that explains why so many Muslims fear backlash - because they know that if the situation was reversed, that Muslims would be the ones driving the backlash. Just look at the controversy over the Danish cartoons as an example of that.
You also have to remember that to many liberals, there is no such thing as "evil", only mental illness - and to many on the left, there are few greater mental illnesses than adherence to any religion other than "climate change".
So, they reason, if a moderate Muslim (only slightly afflicted by a religious mental illness) can snap and shoot a bunch of people, then how much more likely is it that a "fundamentalist Christian" (obviously suffering from an extreme case of religious mental illness) will snap and perform an act of "backlash".
The comparative content of the different belief systems doesn't enter into it, because for most liberals the key point of comparison is the lack of intellectual sophistication indicated by religious adherence. After that, the rest of the details are of no importance, and the expected behaviours are tied to how strongly one espouses one's faith AND whether one's faith is in the majority (bad) or is a minority (which must be protected by definition).
The end result of this view is that "fundamentalist Christians" (totally crazy and in the majority in the US) become the group to be protected against, while "moderate Muslims" (a little bit ill but all victims due to their minority status) are the group that needs the protection.
This is why you have to be intellectually sophisticated to be a liberal. Not just everyone can follow this logic...
Speaking of traitor/imbecile Napolitano, check out this spot-on Editorial cartoon from the "Augusta Chronicle":
http://spotted.augusta.com/chronicle/display.html?collection=14378&gallery=28124&page=1&photo=817458
If Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano intends to back up her statement with action and Change, she should request from the Islamic clergy that anyone committing such acts in the name of Islam will be declared apostates, with all that implies.
I wonder what her advisor Kareem Shora would say to that...
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared: "We object to, and do not believe, that anti-Muslim sentiment should emanate from this. This was an individual who does not represent the Muslim faith."
Gee, he sure fooled me, what with his regular attendance at the mosque, his e-mail exchanges with terrorist imams, his distribution of Moslem tracts, etc. I bet the imam and officials at the mosque he frequented feel foolish too. All this time they thought he was a good Moslem and now they learn from Secretary Napolitano that he was some kind of infidel faker.
Fine analysis. My compliments.
A Typical response by people who have never read the Qur'an or buy what CAIR says lock stock in barrel.
"The Koran actually forbids much of what the current radicals are doing. It forbids targeting children or destroying property."
I am sometimes at a loss for words when I see such ignorance.
[The quran] forbids targeting children or destroying property.
Yeah, right...
It forbids targeting 'innocents', but leaves the definition of 'innocence' up in the air, leaving Hamas free to declare all citizens of Israel non-innocent.
The Sirat routinely reports how women and children were sold into slavery.
And the very first mosque was, according to the Sirat, built on property taken from two orphans (their only reward would come from, ehm, Allah), where graves of 'infidels' were dug up and date palm trees cut down.
Islam is founded on the bones of dead infidels and destruction of fertile land.
The Koran actually forbids much of what the current radicals are doing.
If this is true - and let's take it at face value - we have a simple cure at hand:
The radicals should be declared to be apostates from Islam. With all that implies :)
Ah yes, just a bit too quick to judge others by their standards.