RUTHFULLY YOURS

Immediately after the massacre in Orlando, the gay press was full of articles that adamantly refused to admit the reality of Islamic homophobia.

The same organisations that obsess over which bakeries in the U.S. and Europe will or will not bake wedding cakes for gay couples, and rightly have no trouble berating homophobic Christian pastors, seemed wholly uninterested in the motivations of the Pulse nightclub killer. Instead, these papers and websites were filled with articles, petitions and joint letters, enjoining people not to notice the Islamic element.

These gay activists have a vision of the world where only “patriarchal” white males of Jewish or Christian heritage can cause the world’s problems.

A small minority of very vocal “far-left” activists are now using their LGBT status as a smokescreen not to advance gay rights but to advance “far-left” politics.

The recent shootings at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando Florida have already begun to be submerged by the news cycle. Shock at the worst mass-shooting in American history — which saw the death of forty-nine people and the wounding of even more, fifty-three — has been further dulled by various distractions in the debate. This time, these have included a debate on America’s gun laws and speculation around the sexuality of the gunman.

All of these matters have been fought backwards and forwards and should certainly be components of any argument. But the part of the debate that has been the most important and — as usual — the most covered over, has been the religious motivation of the gunman. This, and the response it has entailed, is worth dwelling on: it reveals a concerted effort not to learn from events.

Just as it is inevitable that those obsessed with gun legislation should wish to make the debate about gun legislation, so it is inevitable that those with any other over-riding political agenda should wish to pin responsibility for the shooting on whatever is their particular obsession. It seems inevitable, for instance, that “Black Lives Matter” would blame the shooting on “the four threats of white supremacy, patriarchy, capitalism, and militarism.”

The recent sexual assault of a five-year-old girl in Twin Falls, Idaho, and the reaction by public officials and the media amounting to a cover-up dramatically illustrate, yet again, how the West battles against the harsh reality of unlimited Islamic immigration. The incident occurred June 2 at the Fawnbrook Apartments in Twin Falls where prosecutors allege a 5-year-old girl was sexually assaulted. Two juvenile suspects, boys, ages 14 and 10, were detained, charged and released. A third, a 7-year-old boy involved in the incident, was not charged. The boys are from Iraqi and Sudanese families, but it’s unclear if they are refugees or how long they’ve been in the community.

Public officials released few details about the incident, stating that the suspects are juveniles about whom information is routinely withheld. This only caused outcry from locals who were incensed by the incident itself, failure of officials to provide information, lack of media attention and release of the boys from a juvenile detention center within six days of their arrest. Outraged residents reignited calls to close the Twin Falls refugee center, a drive that failed a year earlier.

Further outrage occurred when the Justice Department stepped in, allegedly to address the concerns of distressed residents. Obama-appointed U.S. Attorney Wendy J. Olson threatened the community and media with federal prosecution if they “spread false information or inflammatory statements about the perpetrators.” Although Olson later explained that her comments were made because Twin Falls City Council members had received threats of violence against them, her statements convinced many critics that she was attempting to silence the community and not merely quell outrage or assuage the concerns of locals that the incident will be thoroughly investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice.

The crisis in Twin Falls is understandable given its history of refugee immigration. The small city has only about 47,000 residents, yet is has became a beachhead for Muslim immigration as a result of the work of a refugee center there managed by the College of Southern Idaho. The CSI refugee center dates back to the 1980s and is one of four agencies in Idaho working with refugees over the years.

Together they have brought in refugees from countries spanning the globe, including Czechoslovakia, Vietnam, the Congo, Bhutan and more recently, Iraq and Afghanistan. Some put the total number of refugees in the state at 20,000 since 1970. Since September 2001 alone, the U.S. State Department has sent more than 11,000 refugees to Idaho, more than 96% Muslim, from Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan and Syria.

The FBI is trying to control what the public learns about the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, the Orlando Sentinel reports:

A June 20 letter from the FBI, attached to the City [of] Orlando’s lawsuit over withholding 911 calls and other records from 25 media outlets including the Orlando Sentinel, was also sent to the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office with instructions pertaining to how they should respond to records requests.

The letter requests that agencies deny inquiries and directs departments to “immediately notify the FBI of any requests your agency received” so “the FBI can seek to prevent disclosure through appropriate channels, as necessary.”

The Seminole County Sheriff’s Office sent the Sentinel the letter Tuesday night in response to a request for documents, video and audio recordings from the early morning hours of June 12.

A spokeswoman for the Sheriff’s Office said the FBI sent them the letter Monday night and “instructed us to forward it to anyone requesting records.”

Seminole County is to the north and east of Orange County, which includes Orlando. On Twitter, Sentinel reporter Gal Tziperman Lotan posted the full letter, signed by Tampa-based Special Agent Paul Wysopal. “He refused comment Wednesday,” according to the Sentinel report.

The FBI’s position here is not without logic. The investigation of a terrorist attack is primarily a federal responsibility, so one might expect decisions related to the case, including about public disclosure of information, would be made centrally. The Sentinel notes that the lawsuit—which seeks a declaratory judgment as to what documents should be released—was moved from Orange County Circuit Court to federal court after the city named the U.S. Justice Department as a defendant.

But one is inclined to view the FBI’s actions with suspicion, in light of last week’s hamhanded nondisclosure. As we noted, the bureau released a transcript of one of the attacker’s calls to 911 with his declarations of fealty to the Islamic State and its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, censored. (He made other calls, whose content has yet to be made public.)

After enduring several hours of ridicule, the FBI released the transcript. It was surely no coincidence that the nondisclosure was consistent with the Obama administration’s agenda, both political (playing down terrorism during an election year) and ideological (denying that Islamic terrorism is Islamic).