The votes? To paraphrase the late, great George Carlin: The fascism of political correctness? No, it’s pure, unadulterated fear, with heavy doses of anti-white and Christophobia mixed in.
Perhaps the moniker “radical Islam” should be supplanted with “Islamic supremacism,” to keep in line with the Democrats’ favorite terrorist group: white supremacists. In the wake of the Sri Lankan Easter Sunday Islamic supremacist terrorist attacks that killed over 300 “Easter worshipers,” Democrats were quick to condemn but refused to acknowledge the ideology of the terrorists or the religious beliefs of the victims.
When a shooting occurs, in the U.S., New Zealand, or wherever, Democrats never show restraint in politicizing the event. Islamic supremacist terrorism, though? Well, thoughts and prayers, of course.
The intent in Sri Lanka was to kill and injure Christians. Islamic supremacists are particularly frightening because they murder indiscriminately; Muslims are the most victimized group, worldwide, of Islamic supremacy. If Democrats cared about Muslims, wouldn’t it make sense that they’d condemn Islamic supremacy? Yes, but only if the Democrats didn’t fear Islam.
We need Democrats to clarify when the religion or race invoked to justify terrorism is warranted. Had the Sri Lankan Islamic supremacists used AR-15s, Democrats would have called it a “mass shooting,” rather than “hatred and violence.”
Had the 9/11 Islamic supremacists used “assault weapons,” Democrats wouldn’t have labeled it “some people did something” and would have rewritten Islamic supremacy out of their life stories — same as they did with the Pulse nightclub terrorist, Omar Mateen.
Right, U.S. rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)? Right, Hillary, who, in 2016, said the U.S. was at war against “radical jihadists” as opposed to, um, regular jihadists? What does “radical jihadists” even mean? Clinton didn’t believe the bull dung she was peddling; she knew that Islamic supremacists have racked up a higher body count than all other groups combined over the span of centuries — and it’s not even close. Most Muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Islamic supremacists.
“Islamophobia” is a 25-year-old bogeyman term concocted by some organization called the International Institute of Islamic Thought. The noun means nothing, and that’s precisely the point: in Democrat World, where political gravity is suspended, useful idiot dupe dopes need a steady diet of useful idiocy to keep them fat, happy, and hateful.
Turns out it’s the Democrats in need of an Islamophobia elixir. It’s been astounding to observe how the same Democrats who prattle on about Islamophobia are scared to death of criticizing Muslims.
Surprisingly, the New York Times had a pretty thorough report about National Thowheeth Jama’ath, an India-based Islamic supremacist group believed to be responsible for the Sri Lankan church and hotel bombings. It’s likely the group is internationally funded and may have a connection to the Islamic State.
This detail in the report stood out: “The group … had a reputation for vandalizing Buddhist statues but little history of carrying out terrorist
I hope President Trump will continue to stay on offense against all terrorism, but that he be cautious in declaring “victory” against Islamic supremacism. When one terrorist group is defeated, others are always waiting in the wings. Democrats know this but say nothing because they’re afraid.
Islamic Supremacy Apologists
During Omar’s 9/11 speech, she slandered and libeled Trump, accusing him of intentionally inciting violence against Muslims.
Was there any admonishment from House Speaker Nurse Ratched Nancy? Nope; in fact, she admitted that she defended Omar’s statement despite not knowing what Omar had said. This is peculiar, given Pelosi’s lukewarm acceptance of the MoveOn.org Three Stoogesses: Omar, U.S. rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Minn.), and U.S. rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). Tlaib, also Muslim, recently accused not the GOP, but her Democratic Party of Islamophobia.
Pray, tell: what is the explanation for Nancy Pelosi’s rush to defend Omar and remain silent on Tlaib? Is Nancy concerned that the Democratic Party will lose Muslim votes? According to Pew, though the American Muslim population is about 1 percent of the total U.S. population, it has been steadily increasing since 2007. Few of the 2 million adult Muslims are Republicans.
They’re located in crucial Democrat states and locales, such as New Jersey; Michigan; and Washington, D.C.
Politics is sales; why alienate a growing voting base? Still, I’m unconvinced that such a small voting demographic has instilled so much fear in the hearts of Democrat politicians — although U.S. senator Bread Line Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) wants convicted, imprisoned Islamic supremacists to have the right to vote. If this doesn’t tell you how irreparably hopeless the Democrats’ voting base is, nothing does.
Useful Idiots All Around
Don’t forget, being a Democrat Muslim has extra credit benefits of espousing anti-Semitism with impunity. Predictably, the DMIC (Democrat Media Industrial Complex), as well as Tessio Republican Joe Scarborough, came to the defense of Omar — not just for minimizing the deaths of nearly 3,000 on 9/11, but for her anti-Semitic social media posts implying the money-hungriness of Jews. The Democrats and DMIC are probably praying five times daily toward the Kaaba, in Mecca, that Omar doesn’t get drunk and tweets that Jews run the world.
Democrat Islamic supremacy apologists refused to say that Christians were the target in Sri Lanka. Why is it so difficult for Democrats to say an attack on one Christian is an attack on all Christians? Democrats demand we say that about attacks against Muslims, but in Democrat World, all religions are created equal — but some are created more equal than others.
And just to be clear: Any attack on innocent civilians, irrespective of religions or non-religious beliefs, is abhorrent.
Unfortunately, there are useful idiots on our side, who ascribe to the very left-wing (not right-wing) false ideology gods of Aryan and white supremacy. Trump voters do not willingly and knowingly associate with these clowns. On the surface, it may appear bizarre that Democrats seek out the favors of anti-Semitic Muslims, such as Omar and Louis Farrakhan, until one remembers that hatred of those who differ with your political opinions is necessary to the Democrats’ sales pitch.
It’s been over a month since Democrat Ku Klux Klansman David Duke proclaimed Omar the “most important member” of Congress. Where’s the presser by congressional Democrats demanding that Omar disavow Duke? Why hasn’t Omar herself disavowed Duke?
Recall when CNN’s Jake Tapper, in early 2016, demanded to know if Donald Trump disavowed Duke’s support. Why did Tapper give relevance to an irrelevant racist when it applied to Trump but gives no relevance to Duke when it applies to Omar? Tapper must be petrified to hold Omar to account.
If criticizing Israel and Jews isn’t anti-Semitic, according to Democrat logic, then criticizing Islam and lawmakers who practice Islam isn’t Islamophobia. In the Democrat death cult, all criticism is created equal, but some is created more equal than others — a tyranny familiar to all those oppressed in Islamic supremacist nations across the Middle East.