Je Suis Charlie, Where Do Democrats Stand? Shocking Videos

0

Democrats clearly stand on the side of PC and Islamophobia propaganda. It makes them feel better about themselves. It makes them non-haters. It’s destroying Europe and still they cannot see.

Howard Dean says the Charlie Hebdo terrorists are not Muslims. ISIS is not Islamic, it’s a cult. They’re mass murderers, he says, but he chooses to ignore the religious aspects even though their entire reason for acting centers around their demented version of their religion to which 15% to 25% of Muslims agree.

Did he not hear them screaming “Allah Akbar?”

Listen for yourself:

We have to respect Islam, not poke our fingers in their eyes, we should show respect, worry about racism and Islamophobia, treat it like Christianity and Judaism – the people who don’t behead, rape children, shoot up cartoonists and cops.

Listen to this talking head:

USA Today ran a piece asking Why Did France allow the tabloid to provoke Muslims? by Anjem Choudary, pictured below, who, except for his occasional imprisonment, is a dangerous instigator of terrorism who lives and radicalizes in the UK.

Choudary

USA Today decided it was reasonable to give a terrorist a chance to put Sharia law out there as an opposing viewpoint.

Here is an excerpt:

Contrary to popular misconception, Islam does not mean peace but rather means submission to the commands of Allah alone. Therefore, Muslims do not believe in the concept of freedom of expression, as their speech and actions are determined by divine revelation and not based on people’s desires.

Although Muslims may not agree about the idea of freedom of expression, even non-Muslims who espouse it say it comes with responsibilities. In an increasingly unstable and insecure world, the potential consequences of insulting the Messenger Muhammad are known to Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Muslims consider the honor of the Prophet Muhammad to be dearer to them than that of their parents or even themselves. To defend it is considered to be an obligation upon them. The strict punishment if found guilty of this crime under sharia (Islamic law) is capital punishment implementable by an Islamic State. This is because the Messenger Muhammad said, “Whoever insults a Prophet kill him.”

However, because the honor of the Prophet is something which all Muslims want to defend, many will take the law into their own hands, as we often see.

Within liberal democracies, freedom of expression has curtailments, such as laws against incitement and hatred.

The truth is that Western governments are content to sacrifice liberties and freedoms when being complicit to torture and rendition — or when restricting the freedom of movement of Muslims, under the guise of protecting national security.

So why in this case did the French government allow the magazine Charlie Hebdo to continue to provoke Muslims, thereby placing the sanctity of its citizens at risk?

It is time that the sanctity of a Prophet revered by up to one-quarter of the world’s population was protected.

His twisted, manipulative use of language is meant to further radical Islam. He supports the murder of people who do not protect his Prophet.

John Kerry’s ridiculous response:


That great supporter of free speech speaks out against it:

Hillary recently said she wants us to use “smart power”, understand our enemies and empathize with their point of view:

There are 15% to 25% of Muslims who are radicalized, consider what that means.

Listen to this great comment made not so long ago by Brigitte Gabriel: