First, might I recommend that the “Imam” get some elocution lessons- it would help ever so much.
Secondly, without the hated infidels, these morons would not have cell phones, cameras, microphones, printed banners, and so on. The only thing the Islamic world produces is misery and death.
By Deborah Weiss
The thought police over at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are urging journalists to delete the word “Islamist” from their lexicon. Though CAIR claims that the word stems out of bigotry, CAIR’s real agenda is to protect Islam — and Islamists — from so-called “defamation.”
The Associated Press Style Book is a guide for journalists which lays out rules for spelling, punctuation, and other guidelines. In its most recent edition, it added the word “Islamist,” which it defines as: “Islamist: supporter of government in accord with the laws of Islam. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.” Generally, the word “Islamist” is used to distinguish those who want to practice Islam as a spiritual faith, as opposed to those who interpret it and apply it as a political ideology. Those in the latter category desire the merging of mosque and state.
On January 3, 2012, Ibrahim Hooper, national spokesperson for CAIR, published a column suggesting that in the New Year journalists should refrain from using the word “Islamist.”
He complains that news reports unfairly focus on Islamists and notes that there are no news reports of “Christianist,” “Hinduist,” or “Judaist” political leaders. He further insists that the word “Islamist” is used almost always “pejoratively” by “Islamophobic groups and individuals” who link the word to terrorism, persecution of religious minorities, and human rights violations committed in the name of Islam. Hooper whines that such “bigoted attacks” unfairly target Islam because they are not equally hurled at other faiths.
Hooper goes on to claim that often the word “Islamist” is used by “Islam-bashers” who “disingenuously” claim to hate political Islam, though deep in their hearts they hate all Islam. As proof of his assertion, he accuses the alleged Islamophobes of failing to explain how a practicing Muslim can be politically active without attracting the label “Islamist.” After all, he writes, Muslims who wish to serve the “public good” and are merely “influenced” by their faith are slapped with the label “Islamist.” He professes that they just want to work for the “welfare of humanity and to be honest and just,” and if that same inspiration had eminated from the Bible instead of the Quran, they’d be deemed “good Samaritans.”…
This is not the burning of American flags by a bunch of bearded fanatics in dirty nightgowns who we are admittedly somewhat powerless to prevent, other than to insist (or in the case our feckless and spineless State Department and even weaker President Obama – beg) that the Pakistani government exert ’control’ over it’s citizens
This is different
This was a bounty placed on the head of an American by a member of the Pakistani Government
So instead of apologizing for America or whining about being helpless to take action against citizens of a foreign country expressing their displeasure at us, here we have a situation where a member of a foreign government has called for the murder of an American.
We can act.
Why has the President of the United States not taken the following steps in retaliation to the Pakistani Government?
a) Immediately suspend all aid to Pakistan
b) Increase by 5% the interest Pakistan must pay us on any loans we have made to them (Lord knows, we need the money)
c) Expel all Pakistani embassy and consulate staff and their families everywhere in the USA except for the Ambassador and one assistant/secretary
d) Revocation of the visas for all members of the Pakistan Delegation to the United Nations except the Ambassador and one assistant/secretary
e) Recall all non-essential US staff and their families from our embassy in Pakistan and consular offices.
f) Assistance with repatriation of any American private citizen wishing to leave Pakistan
g) Immediate deployment of a minimum of 50 US Marines to guard our embassy and every consular office in Pakistan, and to provide as many Marines as necessary to provide for the safety and security of US Diplomats and their families
Furthermore if the death of any American (here or elsewhere in the world) whose murder can be traced to this vigilantism, the United States will take some, maybe all of the following action, without any further warning
1. The withdrawal of the US ambassador to Pakistan, and any remaining staff and their families
2. The permanent and immediate suspension of all aid to Pakistan
3. The arrest of the Pakistani Ambassador, his release being secured only by the the extradition of the Pakistani Cabinet Minister to face murder charges in the US
4. The revocation of the visa of the Pakistani Ambassador to the U.N. and remaining Pakistani delegation followed by their immediate expulsion
5. Immediate suspension of all new visas issued to Pakistani citizens
6. Revocation of all existing visas held by Pakistani citizens
7. Disclosure to India of any details we hold of Pakistan’s nuclear weapon program
8. Bombing a city in Pakistan
We have to make it clear that a foreign government that permits its cabinet members to call for the murder of Americans is not only no longer an ally of the United States, but an enemy who will face catastrophic consequences.
Si vis pacem, para bellum