Why do so many political leaders value the feelings of Muslims more than the lives of Westerners?
As I write, the Russians are hunting down the perpetrator of an attack on the St. Petersburg subway, in which 11 people were killed and some 45 injured. It took Russian authorities no time at all before an image of a possible culprit was circulated.
Vladimir Putin, it appeared, would not be taking a page out of the West’s Jihadi-protection program manual. The feelings of Muslims—who else?—were not being spared. Russians weren’t cautioned about Islamophobia. Officials didn’t beat on breast about their society’s failure to integrate Muhammadans. Mental illness wasn’t floated to exculpate what was likely Jihad.
It looks like the identity of the killer will be known by the time I complete this column.
The quick unmasking of Khalid Masood’s identity, last month, was likely because he was killed quickly. The British knifeman met his maker in a timely manner because Masood targeted the Palace of Westminster, threatening the British Parliament, where an Authorized Firearms Officer (AFO) was stationed.
In Britain, criminals are armed. Politicians enjoy armed protection. The public is forsaken—for the sake of “our values,” they are told. For the good of their “freedoms,” as defined by their political jailers, the English agree to live with certain realities.
The reality of an English soldier being butchered on a London street, for one.
Drummer Lee Rigby was carved up in Woolwich, just yards from the Royal Artillery Barracks, in May of 2013. Slick with the blood of his victim, Drummer Rigby’s emboldened killer then asked the dhimmi passing by to film his splenetic screed. Muhammad’s messenger wanted to say “it” on YouTube. ...
Posts
