- The Washington Times - Thursday, July 13, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Linda Sarsour, defender of all things Islam and hater of all things President Donald Trump, set the conservative world on notice that she’s taking names and taking numbers.

And those in her crosshairs better watch out: Lawsuits, they will be a ‘flyin’ soon.

“Just know that I am taking names of those who have lied about me to defame my character,” she tweeted. “I may be quiet now, but not for long. I am working.”

Quiet, in Sarsour’s mind, must actually mean loud-mouthed — because here’s a woman who’s been anything but quiet lately.

Sarsour, for the uninitiated, has risen to the top of the left’s love chain of late, mostly because of her co-chairmanship of the Women’s March earlier this year — you know, the one where women wore mock-ups of their genitals on their heads and clamored in the streets for rights they already have?

Yeah, that one. The charge of the pink hat brigade.

Well, Sarsour was a key speaker of anti-Trumpism at this event, and she’s used that fame to fuel forward her radicalized Muslim views. Most recently, she suggested jihad against Trump — though she insists her use of that word was for peaceable purposes only. That when she says jihad — the word the world knows to mean violent overthrow — she simply means discussion and debate, diplomatic resistance and peaceful opposition.

But decide for yourself.

In a videotaped speech to the Annual Islamic Society of North America, ISNA, Sarsoursaid: “Why, sisters and brothers, why are we so unprepared. Why are we so afraid of this administration and the potential chaos that they will ensue on our community. We already saw their potential when they come out every few weeks, Muslim ban one, Muslim ban two. … They are relentless, they are persistent and consistent and persistent. They want to see how much we as a community can endure. I want to see who our friends are and how hard we are going to fight back against this administration.”

Call to arms? Fiery, to say the least. 

Then she said this: “I hope that we, when we stand up to those that oppress our community, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad, that we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad … but here in these United States of America where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.”

OK. So she didn’t call for the suicide bombers. But she used the word associated with Islamic suicide bombers just the same. She also made it clear that a key duty of a Muslim in America is to resist assimilation. That’s not just un-American. That’s a call that evokes images of violence.

Another?

To remain in a perpetual state of outrage and anger. Read on.

Sarsour’s words: “We have to stay outraged. … We as a Muslim community in these United States of America have to be perpetually outraged … when I wake up in the morning and I remember whose sitting in the White House, I am outraged.”

More of Sarsour’s words: “Do not ever be those citizens that normalize this administration.”

And again, even more: “Our number one and top priority is to protect and defend our community. It is not to assimilate and to please any other people in authority. Our obligation is to our young people, to our women, make sure our women are protected in our community, and our top priority, even higher than all those priorities, is to please Allah and only Allah,” Sarsour said.

So stay separated, stay angry. The picture’s starting to fill in.

Put it all together and suddenly, use of the word jihad — already a disingenuous substitute for simple struggle and peaceful First Amendment protest — becomes the fiery, angry, kill-the-infidel definition we all know and love.

Sarsour is deceptive, to the point of dangerous. And now she’s donning the victim hat.

Her Twitter feed, post ISNA speech, was filled with not-so-veiled threats, a pity-poor-me tone and a victimhood mentality that’s sure to be a winner with her leftist fan base.

One tweet: “These past few months have shown there is a clear campaign to defame my character that has come with emotional & financial damage.”

Another: “I can’t put a price tag on the trauma that these propaganda campaigns have put on my family. People will pay w/ their pockets.”

Her angst, in part, is due to a story that appeared in Gothamist about a Brooklyn assemblyman, Dov Hikind, saying he had heard Sarsour misappropriated money she helped raised for vandalized Jewish cemeteries. Sarsour denies, and has provided a breakdown of where the money was spent, and will be spent.

But her Twitter cries go beyond the one story.

“I have the unfortunate receipts of what it costs to be the target of right wing media, elected officials, prominent individuals,” Sarsour tweeted.

Then this: “I have a running document of the lies & who is putting them out there. This is not about setting records straight, it’s who will pay 4 lies?”

And this: “I have NO PROBLEM with folks vehemently disagreeing with me on anything BUT I do have a problem with threats & lies. That’s unacceptable.”

Don’t be fooled, or frightened, by Sarsour’s rants. This is all a classic case of thee, not me.

Using a word like jihad is not a slip of the tongue. It’s a word with a widely recognized meaning, and its meaning is violence, mayhem and murder. It’s not a synonym for peaceful resistance. It’s not a truthful call for quiet struggle, and it’s not an honest plea for the simple act of striving.

Calling for Muslims to resist assimilation into American culture is not a path for peace. It’s a prod for opposition, at all costs, whatever the price.

Setting the pleasing of Allah as a top priority, above all others, is an outright demand to separate — to the point of placing religion first, all else second. After all, does Sarsour not know this nation was built on Judeo-Christian principles?

Does Sarsour not recognize the teachings of Allah and the principles of Islam are completely incompatible with the U.S. Constitution — not to mention the Christian Bible?

But of course she does. If she didn’t, she wouldn’t have to buck the existing cultural and political systems with such vehemence. 

So how about this as a response: All Americans — all Christian-Americans, that is, minus the Muslim community — ought to live in a perpetual state of outrage against the advancing Islamic influence seeping into U.S. society, and ought to resist such assimilation on a daily basis. It’s to protect the women and children, you see. But wait, hold that thought. An even higher priority than that is for all Americans, minus the Muslims, that is, to live a life that’s pleasing to Jesus.

Yes, the highest priority for this separated community of Christian-Americans is to please Jesus.

And, to borrow from Sarsour: The hope is that when we stand up to those who oppress our community — our community of Christian faithfuls — that Jesus accepts from us that as a form of crusade.

That OK with you, Linda? Doubtful. Suddenly, that scenario would seem not just anti-American and unconstitutional, but also a not-so-thinly-veiled call for violence against Muslims. And no amount of explaining away the word crusade as a synonym for peaceful protest would suffice.

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide