Thursday, July 16, 2015


Today a gunman opened fire at two military recruitment centers in Chattanooga, Tennessee, killing four U.S. Marines. At least one other military person (a 24-year-old female sailor) was wounded and in surgery as of the last report.

To the surprise of literally nobody on this planet who has a brain, the shooter's name was Muhammad. Specifically, he was an individual named Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, who was born in Kuwait and later became a naturalized U.S. citizen. Three years ago he graduated from UT-Chattanooga with a science degree and three days ago he started an Islamic blog. On one of his blog's two posts, he wrote of Mohammed's early followers and implored "Allah to make us follow their know what role we need to play to establish Islam in the world."

Laughably, the FBI's Knoxville Field Office has declared "it would be premature to speculate about the motives of the shooter at this time." Grotesquely, other federal officials have tried to direct our eyes away from Abdulazeez's religion, with U.S. District Attorney Bill Killian referring to the shooting as "an act of domestic terrorism" and The Exalted One President Obama referring to Abdulazeez as "a lone gunman." (emphases mine)

First of all, it is often too early to claim knowledge about other people's motives, and sometimes it is too early to speculate responsibly about them. But it is never too early to simply speculate, especially when said people leave glaring clues three days before they act.

Secondly, passing verbal gas about Abdulazeez being a "citizen" who was alone when he murdered is nothing more than a disgraceful, naked attempt to pretend like he is somehow different than all the other terrorists who have been attacking Americans for the last 36 years, when everyone with a brain knows those terrorists have all been Muslims.

Yes, I am aware that Timothy McVeigh, who carried out the Oklahoma City bombing 20 years ago, was not a Muslim. But unlike 98% of journalists and 99% of leftists, I am also aware that McVeigh was an avowed atheist who declared "science is my religion" -- so all of you excuse-mongering libs should do the world a favor by putting at least a temporary stop to your anti-Christianity and anti-Semitic anti-Judasim caterwauling.

The most annoying feature of contemporary liberalism is not that it prefers tribalism over individuality, or that it enjoys bullying people into shutting off their brains and marching in ideological lockstep. As annoying (and in fact terrifying) as those features are, the most annoying and terrifying aspects of liberalism are its utter cowardice in the face of evil and its tendency to attack the good while letting the bad walk free.

In the here and now, Muslims decapitate non-Muslims and post videos of the beheadings on YouTube. They oppress females, forcing them to wear burkas and undergo genital mutilation. They put homosexuals to death. They commit each of these atrocities in the name of their religion and cite specific scriptures as their bases for doing so.

Yet the response of American liberals is not to express outrage about these atrocities. To the contrary, their first reaction is to use the word "Islamaphobe" to condemn anyone who does express outrage. Their second reaction is to tell Christians to "get off" their "high horse" (in the words of President Obama) because, you know, the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages commenced a Spanish Inquisition to stop unjust executions.

I am no fan of the so-called Confederate flag and I agree with liberals that it was correct to remove it from South Carolina's statehouse grounds. But at the same time, I do not believe that the majority of people who fly it privately, most of whom do so as a matter of geographical pride, are bigots champing at the bit to reintroduce Jim Crow. I find it disturbing that liberals insist we embrace nuance and understanding when it comes to Muslims who right now engage in slavery and genocide, yet see no need for nuance or understanding when it comes to Southerners flying the Confederate flag or wearing it on their Lynyrd Skynyrd shirts.

Getting back to that utter cowardice I mentioned, think about how liberals treat different people: Though they routinely vilify those who are sure to respond peacefully (Christians, Jews, Mississippians), they are flawlessly fast to jump to the defense of the one religion whose adherents are known to be violent. Can anyone think of a more textbook example of cowardice?

Amidst all of this, liberalism's standard-bearer, President Obama, expects us to take his word that the "deal" he worked out with Iran is in our interest? The same deal that gave the Iranians pretty much everything they wanted even though they came to the table in a position of weakness while we came in a position of strength? The same deal that did not require unannounced inspections and did not require the release of Americans being held hostage in Iran? The same deal that allows Iran to deny us entrance to sites we want to inspect? The same deal whose process for appealing such denials takes a farcical 24 days, which is more than ample time for the Iranians to remove everything they don't want us to find? The same deal that lacks any enforcement teeth, and therefore all but green lights Iran's acquisition of nuclear arms?

FU POTUS. I can't believe I am saying this about an American president who was elected by the American people, but when I look at this "deal' with Iran in the context of everything else you have done since 2009, especially where foreign policy is concerned, the only rational explanation for your actions is that you: 1) don't care if innocents die; 2) have no problem with harm happening to the country that elected you; and 3) would like for individual liberty to be expunged so people won't be free to live their lives in ways you don't like.

I wish I could take comfort in the knowledge that history will judge you harshly, but I find no comfort there because I know you are imperiling the future of my children.

And worst of all, I believe you don't care one bit how many lives get lost, destroyed, or otherwise subordinated on the altar of your elephantine ego.

No comments: