Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.
After an Islamic terror attack, Americans are told that they’re foolish and fearful to worry about the type of Islamic terrorism that just filled a local morgue with bodies. Instead of focusing on the families of the dead, the media coverage sharply pivots to a million stories about Muslims who claim to be terrified of a “backlash” from Americans and must be protected from the threat of this imaginary backlash.
When Americans worry about being murdered by the Islamic terrorist next door, they are accused of “giving in to fear”, but when Muslims claim that they’re terrorized by the occasional dirty look, that’s not only a legitimate fear, but actually rises to the level of a national crisis.
Never mind the American corpses, let’s focus on the Muslim hurt feelings.
After Trump suggested that maybe we shouldn’t be bringing tens of thousands of Syrians to this country when 13% of them poll as ISIS supporters (that’s 1,300 for each batch of 10,000 Syrians), Muslims Brotherhood front groups and their media allies swiftly began their victimhood theater.
Donald J. Trump has killed zero Americans or even Muslims in terrorist attacks. Meanwhile Muslims have killed 9,983 Americans.
Determining whether Trump or Muslims are the bigger threat is a matter of simple math.
But the media dismisses the threat of Islamic terrorism and urges the country to panic over Trump. And it never questions the credibility of the Muslims who whine that they need protection from Trump.
On ABC News, CAIR boss Nihad Awad complained that Trump was fueling anti-Muslim sentiment. No one at ABC asked him about the time he said, “I am in support of the Hamas movement”.
Nihad Awad openly supported Islamic terrorism and made anti-Semitic remarks. And yet the media acted as if the pro-terrorist activist needed protection from Trump, when it’s Americans who need protection from Awad and his cronies.
“Donald Trump must be held partially responsible for the spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes and discrimination we have witnessed since the Paris terror attacks,” Awad insisted.
Does that mean that Awad and CAIR are responsible for Islamic attacks on Jews?
CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper claimed, “Trump’s statement has really given tacit permission to that minority of bigots out there to go after Muslims.”
Hooper had previously claimed that Al Qaeda attacks on America had been caused by “misunderstandings of both sides” and had said that he wants Islam to dominate America.
CAIR’s founder had said, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran is the highest authority in America, and Islam is the only accepted religion on earth.”
Instead of asking even the most basic questions of Trump’s Muslim accusers, the media whitewashes Islamist spokesmen with a history of supporting terrorism and runs puff pieces on Muslim crybullies.
In the latest bout of manufactured Muslim crybullying, the media eagerly reported that “U.S. service members are using the hashtag #IWillProtectYou to show support for a young Muslim girl who believed her family would be forced to flee following Donald Trump’s call to ban Muslims from the country.”
The #IWillProtectYou hashtag links back to victimhood theater from Melissa Chance Yassini whose Facebook likes lean toward Salafist clerics, some of whom admire Osama bin Laden and support the murder of American soldiers.
One of Yassini’s likes is Imam Zaid Shakir who said that attacking “an airplane filled with the 82nd Airborne” was fine under Islamic law. While the media solicits American soldiers to “protect” the Yassini clan from Trump, one of Melissa Yassini’s favorite clerics authorizes murdering those same soldiers.
Other likes by Yassini include Imam Zakir Naik, who said, “If [Bin Laden] is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist.”
Who is really more of a threat to this country, Trump or supporters of Islamic terrorism?
But the media promoting Muslim victimhood memes never examines the character of its pet victims. There’s a booming business in violently bigoted Muslims claiming to be victimized by Trump.
A former Muslim Student Association president, a group notorious for its bigoted speakers and the number of its presidents who have gone on to join Al Qaeda, whined to Bernie Sanders that the “biggest bigots”, a list that according to her included Ben Carson and Donald Trump, were making her feel bad.
Bernie Sanders responded by invoking the Holocaust on her behalf, something he only seems to do for Muslims, not Jews, gave her a hug and put the video up on his YouTube channel. The media wrote glowing pieces about the shameful scene. None of them bothered to do even the most basic research.
“What I have found is that muslim Americans like us, are so afraid of “judging” that we can’t talk about certain situations with fear that society will label us as bigots discriminatory and or racist. Islam and civil rights issues are mutually exclusive,” she wrote.
After the 2012 attacks on US embassies, Remaz posted a meme reading, “I protest against disrespect of our beloved Mohammad.” While Bernie Sanders invoked the Holocaust in her defense, Remaz Abdelgader spewed hatred at Jews and at the Jewish State.
Remaz Abdelgader claimed to be worried about her civil rights because of Trump and yet she insists that, “Islam and civil rights issues are mutually exclusive”. That’s an ISIS-like position with ominous implications for civil rights in the United States that ratifies the concerns about Muslim migration expressed by some Republican presidential candidates including Cruz, Carson, Santorum and Trump.
Is Trump the real bigot here? Or is it CAIR’s Nihad Awad who rants about “Jewish interests”? Or Melissa Chance Yassini, whose Facebook likes include a woman who claims Jews drink blood and an Imam who supports killing gays?
Is Trump a threat to civil rights or is it the aspiring “human rights attorney” who believes that “Islam and civil rights issues are mutually exclusive”?
Any honest liberal opponent of Trump would have to admit that the views of his Muslim opponents are more illiberal than his views and more of a threat to civil rights in the United States of America.
Do Muslims really need protecting from Trump or is it the other way around?
Anyone who really cares about civil rights will be just as willing to scrutinize Trump’s Islamic critics as the man himself. The fact that the media resolutely refuses to do this is an admission that its pundits, anchormen and scribblers don’t care about civil rights. Instead they blindly support Islam.
They are not in favor of civil rights, they are against America.