In the wake of what’s now (finally) being officially investigated as an act of terrorism on U.S. soil, Obama’s attorney general revealed her “greatest fear.” Naturally, you might instinctively assume it would be something like protecting Americans against the rise of terrorism within its own borders. But then you’d remember, we’re living in Obama’s America.
No, Attorney General Loretta Lynch revealed last night that her “greatest fear” is the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric” in America. She furthermore vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech.
Via The Daily Wire:
The day after a horrific shooting spree by a “radicalized” Muslim man and his partner in San Bernardino, California, Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged to a group of Muslim activists that she would take aggressive action against anyone who used “anti-Muslim rhetoric” that “edges toward violence.”
Speaking to the audience at the Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner Thursday, Lynch said her “greatest fear” is the “incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric” in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech. She said:
Assuring the pro-Muslim group that “we stand with you,” Lynch said she would use her Justice Department to protect Muslims from “violence” and discrimination.
The fear that you have just mentioned is in fact my greatest fear as a prosecutor, as someone who is sworn to the protection of all of the American people, which is that the rhetoric will be accompanied by acts of violence. My message to not just the Muslim community but to the entire American community is: we cannot give in to the fear that these backlashes are really based on.
Claiming that violence against Muslims is on the rise and citing France’s clamp down on potentially radicalized mosques, Lynch suggested the Constitution does not protect “actions predicated on violent talk” and pledged to prosecute those responsible for such actions.Someone may want to remind the attorney general of her own words, “protection of all of the American people.” In the wake of 14 innocent souls being gunned down and 21 being wounded by two Muslim extremists, our attorney general’s worries are about protecting Muslims from “violence.” How about ALL Americans, Ms. Lynch? While I’m not suggesting or condoning indiscriminate targeting of Muslims, I AM suggesting that we acknowledge an enemy who’s declared itself — an enemy that happens to be Muslim, the Islamic State. And it appears our bend-over-backwards political correctness just may have gotten in the way of possibly averting the deaths of 14 Americans the other day. And yet, the attorney general appears to nonetheless be admonishing us against recognizing that there are indeed Muslims amongst us who intend us destruction.
And as for the Constitution not protecting “actions predicated on violent talk,” do you think she means incitations to violence? Like those we’ve seen in recent months from the radical black activists to “Find a mother f**ker that is alone. Snap his ass, and then f***in hang him from a damn tree.” Or how about the U.S. Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan’s, calls to “stalk and kill” white people? I must’ve missed the attorney general’s swift action against these overt calls to kill whites and police officers.
I hope I’m wrong, but somehow I fear that Ms. Lynch’s definition of “violence-inspiring” speech is somewhat broader than direct incitations to violence — which indeed are not protected. (Unless, as we’ve discovered, you’re a black calling for violence against whites or cops.)
We’re living in extremely perilous times, where we must walk a very fine line balancing our freedoms and our own protection — not just for select groups of Americans, but for ALL Americans.
[Note: This article was written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor]