We are now living in a world where calling out anti-Semitism is a provocative act – it’s racist, bigoted and, in a word, Islamophobic.
That is what we are now being told by our Islamist handlers (who have the ear of the mainstream media) and their Leftist enablers.
Tread lightly on this surreal new politically-correct reality or you will get lambasted as did Chelsea Clinton when she arrived at a vigil at New York University for the victims of the New Zealand mosque massacre.
At the vigil, a visibly-pregnant Clinton was aggressively confronted, backed against a wall and summarily accused of being the cause behind the massacre.
Watch protesters confront Chelsea Clinton:
“Forty-nine people died because of the rhetoric you put out there,” she was told by the self-appointed vigilantes of social justice.
Which rhetoric was that? Clinton had committed the new “crime” of speaking out against the anti-Semitism recently being spewed by newly-elected Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a Muslim woman.
Clinton’s accusers were subsequently provided a mainstream media platform to justify and explain their attack on her by the trendy and popular internet site BuzzFeed.
There, they wrote that Clinton was part of “a bigoted, anti-Muslim mob coming after Rep. Ilhan Omar for speaking the truth about the massive influence of the Israel lobby in this country.”
It is important to note that the reason Omar was accused of anti-Semitism had little to do with calling out the “influence of the Israel lobby” but rather her use of classic anti-Semitic tropes to do so –specifically Omar’s nasty references to Jews being rich (“It’s all about the Benjamins, baby”) and accusations that Jews have dual loyalty, code words for implying that American Jews (and Jewish members of Congress who support Israel) are loyal first to Israel and second to the U.S.
Omar is also a supporter of the anti-Semitic BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanction) movement against Israel, Hamas (an organization that calls for Jewish genocide) and the Muslim Brotherhood front group CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which believes in a world run by sharia law in which Jews would be second-class citizens.
“Chelsea hurt our fight against white supremacy when she stood by the petty weaponizers of antisemitism,” wrote Clinton’s accusers on BuzzFeed, “showing no regard for Rep. Omar and the hatred being directed at her.”
Let’s unpack this accusation. How exactly did Clinton hurt the fight against white supremacy by speaking out against anti-Semitism?
In the words of Clinton’s accusers, it was by not showing “unwavering solidarity with the Palestinians in their struggle for freedom and human rights.”
If you were wondering what the Palestinians have to do with the New Zealand mosque attack, read on:
“When someone attacks one of us, they attack all of us,” wrote Clinton’s accusers on BuzzFeed. “We know that our struggles are intertwined…This is about people who do and do not have power [my emphasis], and how those with power use it.”
The writers continued, “A global environment of hatred and vilification against Muslims created this killer…This is because, spurred on by professional bigots, anti-Muslim hate now permeates our culture and politics, and everyone, as a matter of urgency, should consider the role they play in enabling it. That includes Chelsea Clinton.”
What the authors are saying is that anti-Semitism is no longer offensive because Jews and Israelis (the authors are using these groups interchangeably) are people who have power and Palestinians and Muslims are people that don’t.
This means that if you dare to call out anti-Semitism being spewed by a Muslim, you are “fanning the flames” of white supremacy and are therefore culpable for any anti-Muslim attack in the world.
The authors emphasize: “This is not about left and right. This is about people who do and do not have power, and how those with power use it.”
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, another newly-elected Muslim congresswoman, reiterated this new dogma when she accused members of Congress – both Democrats and Republicans – who called out Omar’s anti-Semitic remarks of Islamophobia.
Citing the same power structure, Tlaib asked, “Is it because she’s a black American and she’s Muslim?”
Islamist activist and sharia-apologist Linda Sarsour also joined in, raging against those speaking out against Omar’s anti-Semitism and accusing them of contributing to the New Zealand attack.
Claiming to be a traumatized victim, Sarsour tweeted,
I am triggered by those who piled on Representative Ilhan Omar and incited a hate mob against her until she got assassination threats now giving condolences to our community. What we need you to do is reflect on how you contribute to islamophobia and stop doing that.
— Linda Sarsour (@lsarsour) March 16, 2019
The playbook of these Islamists and their enablers is familiar: play victim, turn around the blame and deflect responsibility. Ultimately, their goal is to shut down any conversation that is critical of a Islamism.
In this case, it means vilifying those speaking out against a Muslim who is spewing anti-Semitism.
But it is important to note that it is all conversation against Islamist ideology that they aim to shut down. Witness this tweet by Muslim journalist Mo Ansar in the wake of the recent attack in the Netherlands by a Muslim Turk who killed three people at a tram station:
Many UK MSM journalists won’t know – since Geert Wilders spread Islamophobia across the Netherlands like a wildfire, Utrecht has been the centre of a number of PEGIDA riots and demonstrations against mosques and Muslim migration. #MuslimLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/HvYL8FDyd8
— Mo Ansar (@MoAnsar) March 18, 2019
So whether a white supremacist attacks Muslims or a Muslim attacks non-Muslims, the cause is still Islamophobia.
Unless the conversation is firmly and rationally redirected to assign moral accountability to individuals and groups who are actually responsible for bigotry, racism and terrorism, the window of what we can and cannot speak about will continue getting smaller and smaller.
The question is, is there still enough of an opening left at present to get in a foothold?