the Centrist

A few weeks ago I wrote an article entitled “Jersey Jihad” in which the entire Coptic Christian family of Hossam Armanious (wife and two young daughters) were ritualistically murdered (Jan. 14, 2005) in Jersey City. The ritual was in accordance with instructions given on various Islamist websites. His crime? He exercised his First Amendment Right by speaking out against the jihad on the internet. My thesis then, and now is … where is the outcry? Where is the media coverage? If this is not a ‘hate crime’, then what is? If this is not a ‘sensational media worthy event’, then what is? If this is not abridgement of our First Amendment Rights … then what is? A ‘Goggle’ search on the inter-net shows not only little resolution for the crime, but also no national media coverage since the funerals. The local prosecutor is making attempts to link the killings to a robbery (some money was stolen, but none of the thousands of dollars worth of jewelry was taken) in a futile attempt to make this story disappear. We hear pundits from the left constantly bellyaching over the dilution of our First Amendment Rights … even to the extent that Constitutional Rights be extended to enemy combatants … yet no outcry for Hossam and his family. America stands by as the ACLU legally terrorizes Christmas as well as anything with the word God, Moses, Messiah, or Jesus in the public arena. Yet it ponders why Allah, Confucius, Buddha, or the Dalla Lama are treated with reverence and allowed to ‘further the education of our youth’ in that same domain.
The ACLU defends the likes of Prof. Ward Churchill of Colorado State as he denigrates the victims of 911. In his paper “Some People Push Back” (now expanded into a book “Some People Push Back – On the Justice of Roosting Chickens”) written shortly after 911 he makes false accusations based on false assumptions. He references America’s atrocities, and repeats his groundless accusation that American troops used germ warfare against Native Americans at Fort Clark in 1863 … he claims that troops spread smallpox via contaminated blankets. Neither this atrocity, nor his oft publicized Native American heritage can be corroborated and have been largely debunked by academists. He predicates his conclusions on America’s Christian roots by way of the crusades. Of course Churchill conveniently forgets two overriding factors: the Crusades began nearly a full millennium before America’s birth; and although the Crusades were a blemish on Christian history, the core rational for them was Islamic, not Christian, Imperialism. He also views the root cause of 911 through his own anti-capitalistic agenda, rather than the terrorists own testimony. He uses a very broad brush as he paints the Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II Administration with the very same stroke of world domination. He forgets that Clinton bombed Bosnia and Bush I invaded Somalia to intervene in defense of Islam … not Christianity. Of course he never mentions the Oil for Food debacle, where thousands of Shiite children were starved to death by their Islamic brothers, while the Clinton Administration attempted to save them. He neither reveals his links to terrorism (trained with Moammar Gadhafi in the 80′s), nor does he give any ink to the litany of recent Islamists atrocities against Western Civilization … starting with the assassination of Robert Kennedy (1968) and arriving at the subject at hand … 911 … the ‘era of the Islamist’ has been bloody indeed. Churchill summarizes his thoughts: “In sum one can discern a certain optimism – it might even be called humanitarianism – imbedded in the thinking of those who presided over the very limited actions conducted on September 11 … it is a kind of ‘reality therapy’ approach, designed to afford the American people a chance to finally do the ‘right thing’ on their own, without further coaxing.” One might ask, just what is the ‘right thing’ in the eyes of this tax supported radical? “A sufficiently large number of Americans rising up and doing whatever necessary to force an immediate lifting of the sanctions on Iraq, for instance maybe hanging a few of America’s abundant supply of major war criminals (Henry Kissinger comes quickly to mind, as do Madeline Albright, Colin Powell, Bill Clinton, and George the Elder)” . This is protected speech. This is newsworthy. This is the travesty visited upon our nation, at the behest of the ACLU, and disguised as ‘further education’.
I contend that those Coptic Christians murdered in New Jersey deserve at least the same amount of space and defense as Churchill. Ignoring the First Amendment rights of a man and his family who died for that very cause, is at least as important as defending the rights of a man who contends that lynching those he disagrees with is protected speech. I for one, am tired of the anti-American rhetoric emanating from tenured positions throughout America … it is time to educate with truth, rather than rhetoric … it is time for correctness without the prefix political … it is time the Armanious family receive the justice for which they died.