RUTHFULLY YOURS

The Rahami family came to America from Afghanistan as refugees. They made life miserable for their neighbors. When the police tried to bring some order, they cried Islamophobia.

Two of the Rahamis have posted in support of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda and other Islamic terror groups on social media. The third actually built and planted bombs to kill Americans. He terrorized two states, tried to kill and maim countless Americans and then shot it out with police.

Ahmad Khan Rahami, the central figure in the terror case, brought his wife here from Pakistan and she departed days before his attack. His mother left for Pakistan a few weeks before his bombing spree.

The media, eager for a story of redemption, has widely broadcast the claim that Mohammed Rahami, Ahmad’s father, told the FBI that he was a terrorist. But that was years ago. And Mohammed didn’t turn in his son because there was a terror plot, but because he attacked family members.

As Mohammed put it, “Because he doing bad. He stab my son and hit my wife. I put him in the jail.”

This wasn’t Mohammed Rahami being a good citizen. It was a dysfunctional oversized family of Muslim refugees causing problems for local law enforcement over their own internal disputes.

Ahmad stabbed his brother in the leg with a knife. His father told the FBI that Ahmad was a terrorist. Then he recanted the accusation and said that he had made it out of anger.

This wasn’t patriotism. It wasn’t helpful. It was selfish abuse of the system.

We get a lot of lectures from politicians about the contributions of Muslims, especially refugees, to America.

Here are the sum total contributions of the Rahami family to America. 29 wounded people in Manhattan. 1 wounded police officer in Linden, New Jersey. A chicken place that was the subject of disputes with law enforcement. A lawsuit against Elizabeth, New Jersey stemming from that chicken place, which threw around accusations of Islamophobia. Previous legal issues and a jail sentence for Ahmad over his family dispute. 1 assaulted police officer due to issues with the chicken place.

Then there’s Ahmad’s unwed girlfriend and his baby whose case will be wending through the courts.

Black Lives Matter has been guided to anti-Semitism by the concept of “intersectionality, which argues that all oppressions are interlinked and cannot be solved alone. Thus, women can never be treated fairly if blacks face racial prejudice, and the disabled are not given sufficient support to be equal to the abled, and unless the Palestinians are liberated from the Israelis, and the Israelis are liberated from their lives and their home.

“Intersectionality” urges us to view the world as divided into a conspiracy of oppressors and an agony of oppressed, and reduces people to a number of categories, such as gender, sexuality, race, nationality, religion, capability, etc. Differences, such as sexism, racism, nationalism and ability — as opposed to what we have in common — are reinforced.

Supporters of “intersectionality” cheer terrorists when they murder Jews. To them, that is just “social justice” at work.

The recently published platform of Black Lives Matter (BLM) states that Israel is responsible for “the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people,” and “Israel is an apartheid state … that sanction[s] discrimination against the Palestinian people.” These statements are anti-Semitic not only because they are false and modern versions of tradition anti-Semitic blood libel, but also because BLM selectively chooses the Jewish State out of all the states in the world to demonize. What has inspired BLM to engage in this counter-factual, anti-Semitic rant? BLM has been guided to anti-Semitism by the concept of “intersectionality.”

“Intersectionality” is the idea that all oppressed peoples and categories of people share a position, and by virtue of that fact are potential allies in the struggle against their oppressors.

“Intersectionality” is a concept used to describe the ways in which “oppressive institutions” (racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, xenophobia, classism, etc.) are interconnected and cannot be examined separately from one another. The concept is credited to the legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, writing in 1989, but it is only in recent years that it has escaped academia and swarmed into the streets.

“Intersectionality” has, however, been extended beyond individuals to types of oppression. The argument, as above, is that all oppressions “interconnected and cannot be examined separately.” Thus, women can never be treated equally or fairly, if blacks face racial prejudice, and the disabled are not given sufficient support to be equal to the abled, and unless the Palestinians are liberated from the Israelis, and the Israelis are liberated from their country, their lives and their home. To make the point, the Israelis are accused of having had a hand, direct or indirect, in the oppression of blacks, women, and the disabled everywhere. So much oppression, intersectionists apparently think, can be traced back to the fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and the International Jewish Conspiracy.

We knew this would happen.

To be sure, it’s easy to say so afterward, but then, you and I both know that we knew.

It started on that infamous day of April 15, 2013, when two bombs exploded at the Boston Marathon, leaving three dead and more than 250 people injured, some grievously, including at least one man who had both his legs blown off by the explosion.

You and I both recognized immediately that this was an act of Islamist terrorism, but the very first news report I saw blamed the TEA Party. Yes, the TEA Party, a loosely organized movement that has never committed any acts of violence. The Democrat Ministry of Propaganda, otherwise known as the mainstream media, was, and is, well aware of this fact. Nevertheless, many news reporters (read left wing propagandists) seemed to be salivating, hoping and wishing that some connection, however tenuous, might be found implicating any conservative organization.

Afterward, when the truth became obvious, the DMoP carefully excluded any reference to Islamic extremism. After all, we must not profile, must we?

Later, in San Bernardino, neighbors who suspected that Islamic extremists were up to no good, declined to notify police because they feared being stigmatized, perhaps even sued, as Islamaphobes. Fourteen were murdered and many seriously injured when the Islamists launched their attack. When you first heard that there had been a massacre, did you doubt for a moment that Islamist extremists had done this?

Shame on us for profiling.

Now, two recent attacks, in Minnesota and in the New York-New Jersey area, thankfully did not result in any innocent deaths, but even so, many people were painfully injured. The intent had been to kill on a large scale. Both attacks were conducted by, well, let me see (sarcasm here) Mormons? Boy Scouts? The TEA Party?

We both know, don’t we? We knew even before the news reports confirmed the facts, didn’t we?

Sadly, we will know next time, too.