islamophobia | the "silent" majority no more!
At this time her website is still down after this vicious DDoS attack . It was a crippling attack. Want to help get her site back up? You can contribute here. Meanwhile, there is a temporary site! The Atlas Shrugs temporary site can be found here.
Continuing with the rally on January 17th in Garland, Texas. They rallied for Free Speech. A fight that Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer helped to organize .
“The Stand for Freedom of Speech” rally was a huge success. A fabulous turnout of grass roots America that turned out in large numbers to counter the ill-timed “Stand with the Prophet” conference taking place there.
“Stand With the Prophet Against Terror and Hate” – was hosted by a public school (the Curtis Culwell Center (Garland Independent School District property) – an event that was dedicated to eradicating “Islamophobia”.
Those who follow “The Prophet” do NOT understand our Freedoms. Nor embrace them. And those Americans who are foolish enough to embrace this insurrection, must not be allowed to shut us down. America. Mad as hell and NOT going to take it any more.
Thank G-D for the fighting spirit that rises in defense of our Freedoms. The AMERICAN WAY. We must NEVER FORGET. When our backs are against the wall – AMERICANS do not turn tail and run. EVER.
“The Muslims Are Coming: Islamophobia, Extremism and the Domestic War on Terror” by Dr. Arun Kundnani .
Kundnani has a theory that must rise above historical misunderstandings of Islam. He insists: The War on Terror is NOT about Islam. It is all about POLITICS, the FBI and government entrapment.
Whether the question was in agreement with him or not (though most seemed to support him) Kundnani predictably brought his answer back to his meme: The War on Terror is NOT about Islam. It’s about POLITICS; the FBI; entrapment.
Answer – Kundnani: The way the entrapment defense is supposed to work, you begin saying the actions that you are accused of would not have occurred were it not for the government’s intervention. you, also, have to prove you did not have a predisposition to commit those acts BEFORE the government intervened. So far, No ONE has successfully won an entrapment defense in any of these Federal Terrorist related cases, BECAUSE it is very hard for the defendants to say they did NOT have a ‘predisposition’. That’s because the Prosecution brings a (so-called) Terrorism EXPERT in to the court who says that because this guy visited these web sites, expressed these opinions, that constitutes a predisposition to be a terrorist. What are those websites and the opinions expressed? Often, radical criticism to U.S. foreign policy OR expressions of belief that should be protected by the First Amendment (of the Constitution). The courts, the system, does not supply sufficient protection from that kind of abuse (of the First Amendment) from taking place.
Kundnani uses this moment to refer to Abdullah -Alim and his arrest for Gun possession. [46:29] Pointing out that THIS is NOT considered a TERRORISM related case. He doesn’t get to make his entrapment argument at all. The jury hears nothing about the FBI. Straight court-case. Guy stopped on street. Possession of a gun.
Kundnani CLAIMS this to be a sufficient protection from that kind of abuse (of the First Amendment) from taking place.
Kundnani replies: He thinks this is beyond most peoples means. That it seems a bit dramatic. Mosques are aware that they are targets for the FBI. So sadly, they are no longer welcoming to strangers who wish to join the mosque. They are suspicious of potential new members. VERY suspicious of anyone who talks Radical Talk while trying to bring about an entrapment. Mosques are now reporting that they have someone in he congregation who’s talking in an angry, radical way.
He mentions the immigration status of many of these potential informants, who are here ILLEGALLY. Vulnerable to being removed if they find themselves on the wrong end of the Federal Government. People are aware that the FBI can use its powers to TARGET you, it takes a little bit of courage to publish that the FBI is approaching you (for entrapment). He says Abdullah-Alim HAD that courage and he’s now spending 16 years in prison.
Kundnani says the more we can talk about these issues, the more we can overcome the fear and the isolation. To think about strategies.
Question # 3 [man with accented English] Clearly he agrees with Kundnani’s presentation by how he phrases his statement/question. He states ‘What’s new here?” He refers to government tactics targeting potentially radical groups. He mentions England where two years ago, he says, the government proposed to criminalize ‘free speech’, not just for radicalized groups but, for university.
Answer from Kundnani [53:22] (Not sure HOW this answer came out of that question above ) He says that is what he covers in his book.
The history of the FBI- 1940’s- Claiming that what’s different now from the FBI’s abuses under Hoover. Hoover had a program in the late 1950’s to criminalize the LEFT and to criminalize the Civil Rights Movement.
Kundnani says it was UNDERSTOOD at the time, by Hoover and the people that exposed it, as unauthorized criminal activity by the FBI. That’s why it had to be secret.
Exposed in the early 1970’s, recognizing that this secret program was against the Constitution; against the law. With 1990’s legislation in the U.S. the government can now do the same stuff lawfully. Some one can now be convicted not for something they are doing, but for expressing opinions.
Kundnani also says that to write this book, he had access to material that’s not public, but THIS is Open Secrets. ” If you publish an article that says something positive about a terrorist organization, you are effectively providing resources. material support to that organization.” Twenty years ago we’d have understood that activity as First Amendment protected.
Re Change: He feels this is about how we THINK about theses issues in society. We’re not going to bring about change by changing government policies here or by changing how we do counter-terrorism policy coming out of Washington.
What we NEED is a more FUNDAMENTAL change in how we question violence in society. How we THINK about Muslims.
Are we able to recognize Muslims as fellow citizens when they express opinions that we disagree with and not seen as extremism, but seen as just someone else expressing an opinion from us.
Next Kundnani refers to the questioner’s mentioning of pieces of legislation in Europe that target, not radicals, but what we consider to be radicalization is somewhat nebulous and vague.
QUESTION #4 – a woman-“Going back to the recent beheadings, now you did say that you were compare the United Kingdom and the U.S. in regard to these kind of practices so I was just ‘looking’ at that. And, also, other than interviewing people who were in the FBI, have you in anyway been involved with the FBI-type work in your career?
Kundnani asks her to clarify what she is asking. (he euphemistically responds) That there seems to be more people coming from Britain involved in that “kind of activity”? Syria- UK – [she mentions the radicalization being worse in UK.] He continues, that for about a decade now the story, the impression, is that there is a bigger problem in the UK compared to the US. (He does not agree) He claims it’s very hard to reach that conclusion based on the actual statistics.
He thinks it’s about the same. Many from UK have gone to Syria (he says) for Humanitarian reasons, medical/nursing, in opposition to the Assad regime. Some join groups supported by US, some have joined ISIS.
NOW he starts talking about the son of a man who is between held in a downtown New York prison [1:02] The Metropolitan Correctional Center on Park Street. A Federal Building where we hold people accused of terrorism (Pre-trial) He’s Egyptian.
QUESTION # 5 (a woman) [1:03] The questions started to get bit more demanding. (Accented English. Hard to understand) re “God of Islam” and madrassas.
Kundnani tries to respond (she keeps talking in the background) First, you said I’m blaming the victims of 9-11. Kundnani insists he is NOT blaming the victims. He says our governments approach to counter-terrorism is misguided. We need to be consistent in our morality here.
If we’re going to condemn 9-11, we also need to condemn the actions of our OWN government when IT kills civilians. If we want to talk about morality, THAT’S moral consistency.
Question #7 (a woman) [1:12;09] She feels he would have a much better argument if he said that the vast majority of Muslims are not radicalized, they don’t follow these teachings. But, when you say Islamic teachings never have anything to do with this, quite frankly it’s not believable.
NY Times had an interview, head of Pakistani madrassa system said that the “most important thing for his madrassa students to realize was that the destruction of the West is really the most important thing in Islam.” You can say that he is misinterpreting Islam, but I’m sure he believes that the madrassa system is (…?) Islam for him.
He has a PHD in Islamic Theology. He is exterminating Yizidis and Christians; selling them in to slavery. He is NOT doing that because he is reacting to the actions of the United States. So, I would ask, it’s just not credible to say that Islam never had anything to do with this.
“This still leaves you,” he says, “with this flawed assumption that ideology causes Political Violence and Terrorism.
Ideology does NOT cause political violence and terrorism.
One does not become a terrorist because he read an Islamist extremist texts. That’s never happened.
Someone watches videos, becomes propagandized, becomes a terrorist. Never happened.
Kundnani gives one example of a woman in London, Choudhury, who is the closet example (he says) that it happened. That’s IT.
Looking for a Sense of Adventure.
THAT’S what the data tells you.
So-called Terrorism Studies Departments, which have been founded by Federal Government after 9-11 with HUGE sums of money for a PARTICULAR agenda (!) There’s a revolving door between these particular departments. The FBI. The CIA. Various aspects of the National Security system. It’s NOT genuinely independent place.
SO, we have to start to create opportunities for a much more NUANCED, more ACCURATE account of what causes terrorism.
Instead of talking about radicalism, we need to be talking about the political cause (as well as) the way religious language is used, ways of expressing propaganda.
Kundnani’s response: Says he likes the question, because you would think that Obama would be pretty good on the issues.
The conclusion: ‘They’ (the Obama administration) decide that this ‘issue’ of terrorism has the potential to destroy any (?….) debate; to undermine (??) [1:18;57]THEY decide this can’t happen again, to have an issue spiral out-of-control and make it seem to the American people that WE’RE not tough on Terrorism.
Obama does two things(domestically). He gives the FBI Free-Hand. All kinds of Civil Rights and Muslim Community organizations are constantly turning up, saying we have the issues about civil rights not getting any play.
Internationally his strategy is, “We will try to close down Guantanamo”[1:19;38] Kundnani continues, “Which, of course, is the right thing to do.” We’re going to END torture.
In fact, we STILL out-source people who need to be tortured. We don’t do it ourselves any more. We’re going to try to bring those kinds of processes within the judicial system so we can (do it) with some sort of legal veneer.[1:20;04].
Then, still referring to Obama’s policies, he mentions drone-strikes as the (preferred?) kind of killer-act for counter-terrorism. We don’t need to do something like the Iraq War again. We don’t need to do interrogations (we’ve done so many now), we can just do extra–judicial killing. SO, he says, the ASSUMPTION was that the drone-strikes were THE solution.
He then mentions that Obama’s War on Terror Strategy is centered around his weekly Tuesday morning meetings. (Does he attend these/DID he? ) The War on Terror strategy meetings, where the list of potential drone targets keeps growing and growing and with the advise coming from his National Security advisers.
(A woman mentions Bin Laden) Kundnani he responds: It seems like we are making progress on the War on Terror. Yet, we have another round of (…..) which resembles what we were getting in 2003.
The evening Bin-Laden was killed- Peter Berg CNN’s Terrorism (guy) [1:22;10] said THIS is the END of the War on Terror (2011) It’s a decade. We’re DONE. (If only, says Kundnani) But, next morning, Hillary Clinton steps up and says the War on Terror continues. Lunch Time, the next day, Berg (back tracks). He is back on and says, the War on Terror is NOT over.
Kundnani says, the government did not use this opportunity to draw a line and think about these issues in a NEW way. They made a strategic error by saying “more of the same’ and the message from CNN becomes just a sort of ‘mouth-piece’ for the government.
Kundnani’s response: Yes. (the man interrupts- every administration is afraid ) Yes, but, if you don’t have a serious attack, no one’s going to give you any credit for it. Now, any president, is just thinking about SELF-interest (wow – what a broad statement of ‘fact’: any and ALL presidents?) and that, he says, would a a TOUGH approach.
[1:25;30] He feels public opinion in the Fight Against Terrorism should we trade Civil Liberties for (greater ?) Powers for the Government. Ten years later (after people said ‘yes’) now people are saying, we should Keep our Civil Liberties.
It’s not just about the incident of a Terrorist attack, it’s about how we communicate about that terrorist attack in the aftermath. For example, the Boston Marathon bombing. It didn’t produce any really significant changes in counter terrorism ( …?) The reason: We’d been told for decades to expect something like that, if not worse. And when it hap pened, people were outraged, but they weren’t surprised or shocked. It didn’t generate the same kind of dynamic as the Post 9-11. (man interjects) But very few people were really killed. And you had thousands (Kundnani interrupts him) But, terrorism is about terror, not just about the number of people killed so … look at the beheadings videos, where again, the number of people being killed is not the same as 9-11, but it’s generated a whole lot of fear… in the United States… The man says, “But, people were killed—“ Kundnani takes the next question.
Question #10 – a woman (accented English-Chinese) [1:27;08] This is just my observation. I agree with you. You do something wrong… you the minority must justify… The strategy…to wipe out the rich people. The so-called rich people. Or the intellectuals. I don’t follow you very well, I feel like there is similarity. When I grew up in China. I didn’t feel brain-washed. I was not active in politics. But, since I came to America, I find, I feel like brainwashing is universal. Not just in China. Right now we have so much brainwash. In America. I feel there is so much misunderstanding.
Kundnani’s response [1:29;20] Thank you. All I can say is, an ideology is most affective when you don’t realize it’s an ideology. So in a society like the Soviet Union, or China, it’s obvious that it’s the State propaganda. We’re not a Totalitarian Society which makes the ideologies we (Americans? The West?) have less obvious. In a way, it makes them all the more pernicious. An interesting comparison. Thank you.
He ends with an obscure conclusion—When talking about different POLITICAL differences, you’re absolutely right the political experience is hugely different. Different scenarios.
So, how to you, kind of, make the distinctions that you are making that would stop the discussion from devolving into “He Said this/She Said this” or this came first…I think some of the comments that were happening earlier in this discussion: The FBI does this thing because Muslims or Arabs (whatever) have done this thing, but the counter-argument might go: The Arabs are acting this way because the U.S. government does this thing. And it could just go on and on forever.
Kundnani responds [1:34;49] (had difficulty transcribing some of this response) Right. And that’s the cycle we’re in. That’s my whole point. We’re doing this to you because you did this to us earlier. That’s precisely the cycle we need to break. I would hope that (the society?) in the United States will be much better at breaking that cycle than our enemies. We should be the reasonable ones with a strategy to break that cycle, much more effectively.
Right now, for me, thinking about the situation with ISIS, we need to radically rethink our whole alliance with Saudi Arabia. Probably Turkey as well. Thinking along those lines is the key to breaking these cycles.
We’ve turned a blind-eye to Saudi Arabia and the official and semi-official funding that it provides for armed groups in the Middle East; for decades. We have assumed that we NEED Saudi Arabia to be our ‘friends’ , to supply cheap oil into our economy and to keep buying our weapons. The REALITY is we DON’T need to do that.
[1:36;53] Right now the people who are most affected by the United States are the Kurds. (… ) We’re never going to allow them to do very much because we have to hold on to Turkey as our ally.
We don’t want the Kurds to become more influential in the region. (…) If we’re serious, the United States, we should be doing something very different in terms of our relationship with Turkey. (…) …our political thinking around the whole foreign policy towards the region… in a situation where we have genuine grass-roots movements in the Middle East OR real democratic societies where the people in the region get to shape the direction their societies take…That’s the best way to prevent Terrorism in the end.
[1:38;08] How do we get there? We stop (…?) regimes in the region. Which no one talks about. Why don’t we do that … We don’t want a genuine democracy in Egypt. If that happened, then the Egyptian people might choose not to be an ally of the United States anymore. These kind of questions (…?) how do we break that cycle and create a more peaceful Middle East.
From TSM: As I finish transcribing the Q and A, there has been ANOTHER ISIS BEHEADING. Sunday, November 16, 2014. “Abdul-Rahman” Kassig aka Peter Kassig. He converted (‘reverted’) to Islam. It didn’t save him. He had fought in Iraq in the U.S. military, and so for the Islamic State he was a “Crusader” and had to die. His grusome murder is part of a 16 minute video sent to the Social Networks. Kassig was murdered as part of a MASS beheading that included about a dozen Syrian soldiers.
The Q and A was still going on after an hour. I quickly took a couple of cell-phone pics as I left the room. This is the best angle I could get of the clean-cut, ‘NYPL Dr.Kundnani’ vs the academic radical I found on-line.
Later, I found pictures of a completely different ‘look’ from Dr. Kundnani Seems this is his ‘rebel’ Kundnani, speaking to the Muslim student orgs.
We are engaged in a war of ideas, with our principal enemy: an ideology.
An ideology that will not collapse out of economic incompetence.
The ideology of the terrorists is religiously based and derived from Islam and its founding texts, the Koran, hadith, and the sunna, and the history of the early caliphate.
One, but not the only way we know this, is because they tell us so.
“The Muslims are Coming:”Islamophobia, Extremism and the Domestic ‘War on Terror”.
Dr. Kundnani is an Adjunct Professor of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University and terrorism studies teacher at John Jay College.
“Based on several years of research and reportage from Texas and New York to Yorkshire, the New York based scholar tackles the growing Islamophobia in Britain and the United States.
The librarian, NOT surprisingly, began with a reference to RACHEL MADDOW. Validating how important and timely this topic of Islamophobia has been made by a current program of Maddow’s.
In support of this statement she refers to a Rachel Maddow podcast (MSNBC political talk show host) Regarding Maddow, ” Two weeks previous to this event, Maddow referenced a story where the FBI distributed a photo to the public of a mass terrorist, American- native born”. She feels this shows how the FBI tells us we should now FEAR ordinary Americans.
He said that he actually did some of the research for this book “here in this very building“. He briefly explains the motivation for the book.
“The debate on ? … ?? from the time Obama was elected, beginning of his first term, the debate about terrorism in the United States was starting to look very different from how it did in the “Bush Years”. The “Bush Years’- very dramatic. highly critical debate. people talking about the Iraq war. torture. Abu Ghraib.
He suspected that the way we were doing Domestic Counter Terrorism in the United States was FLAWED; even discriminatory. Many of the assumptions being made in how we understand terrorism and what causes it, were misguided.
2010. Dr. Kundnani traveled the U.S. New York. Minnesota. Michigan. Texas. Virginia. Wash, DC.
Interviewed FBI agents working on counter terrorism with local police departments. Security Officials. Homeland Security. National Security Council in the White House. His goal: to get a sense of HOW they understood this counter-terrorism work that they were doing. The thinking behind it.
He also had interviews with COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS in Muslim Communities around the U.S. AND he interviewed a small number of people who actually were being accused and labeled as Islamic extremists. (to try to get an understanding of their stories as well) He spent a year doing this.
First story (6:29) Jesse Curtis Morton – Interviewed 2011, shortly before he was arrested. Younus Abdullah Muhammad, aka Jesse Curtis Morton– (NY Daily News-June 22, 2012) A Muslim convert from Brooklyn was sentenced Friday to nearly 12 years in prison for posting online threats against the creators of the “South Park” television show and others he deemed enemies of Islam.
Morton’s site inspired a variety of would-be jihadis, including “Jihad Jane” Colleen LaRose; Antonio Benjamin Martinez, who plotted to bomb a military recruiting station; and Jose Pimental, who plotted to assassinate members of the U.S. military returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. He also corresponded with American al-Qaida member Samir Khan on writing an article for use as al-Qaida propaganda.
Morton’s prosecution was relatively novel under a law enacted in recent years that makes it a federal crime to use the Internet to place another person in fear of death or serious injury. Morton was arrested last year in Morocco, where he moved after Chesser’s arrest.
Typically, Morton was well educated. He had a Masters Degree from Columbia. Reverts to Islam. Credits Islam for saving him from drug addiction. Becomes a drug abuse Councilor.
Spends time in Saudi Arabia where he encounters the same materialism that alienated him from US society. American commercialism was being imposed around the world. He wants to save the world from Western Capitalism. Revolutionary, anti-Globalist politics version of Islam; a religious conservatism.
His point made: This is very different from how most American Muslims think about religion.
QUESTION from author, Dr. Kundnani – What led him (Morton) to this radical form of Islam? Was it his abusive upbringing that produced his rage that was projected on to American Society as a whole? Was it to escape his drug addiction? A religious longing for a utopia where his life’s struggles could be redeemed?
Why did his ideological journey take the particular form that it did? The author’s attempt at an answer leads to the War on Terror and BUSH. Kundnani posits that Abdullah Morton’s own belief’s mirrored the War on Terror’s (fascist ??) civilization.
Did Morton accept on ‘face value’ the BUSH administration’s official narrative [12 :37] that Radical Islam is an existential threat to an American Society that he has come to despise. He gets his labels of Good and Evil from the Official War on Terror.
Abdul-Alim claims that when he was arrested on Dec. 9, 2011, the police placed a gun on him. This was then followed by a visit from the FBI. Pressured again to be an informant so he can avoid a possible 10 years in prison on trumped up charges. He chose to go to trial.
A black man with previous conviction (a 2003 conviction for cocaine trafficking) he was convicted again.This time he was found guilty of “possession of ammunition without a license and possession of a firearm without a license.” 6 years. Police also say they found another bag of guns that are his and could add 10 years to his sentence.
Sympathized with al-Qaeda, viewed the US government as an oppressive government, and the Imam called on his followers to organize a protest against it. Members of Abdullah-Luqman’s mosque also carried guns. Question asked by Kundnani, were they just small-time hustlers who were set-up by the FBI, who infiltrated the mosque and entrapped the Imam in a warehouse sting. As he concludes his presentation, Kundnani’s claim that these cases are textbook examples of the taunting of people, not for their actions, but for their ideology, with agents and informants acting as provocateurs.
The FBI provides the plans for the alleged terrorist plot, but also the means and opportunity. Supplying money and weapons, the accused would not have had the capability to carry out the plot. The FBI was able to manipulate vulnerable people.
Supposedly, WE (the FBI, etc) were actually fantasizing in to existence the very threat of Domestic Terrorism that we claimed to be fighting.
He mentions Spielberg’s futurist film”The Minority Report“, using the film as an allegory to debunk counter-terrorism within the United States right now.
Claiming that some form of religious ideology is the root-cause of terrorism.
2008 the FBI had 15,000 paid informants. But, even though he admits he does not know how many were from the Muslim Community, he makes the claim that he finds it reasonable to assume there must have been at least 10,000 PAID informants of those 15,000 from the Muslim Community.
“Lost in the debate about having an informant in the (Muslim) community, is that this is way more pernicious in under-mining relationships of trust.
As government officials and the ‘so-called’ terrorist experts have repeatedly invoked this concept of radicalization, has become part of our everyday language. This had led to the situation where there is a wide-spread assumption now that the root-cause of terrorism lies in some kind of Islamic ideology.
“Having a belief in (let’s call it) extremist Islam, or however you want to define that, does not correlate with involvement with terrorism” . “A simple STATISTICAL fact”.
Kundnani continues, “The ‘reality’ is that it’s POLITICS not religious ideology that drives terrorist violence.
“Bill Maher has this problem about Islam causing terrorism. Ben Affleck said that’s racist.” Kundnani says, “This is a debate that has been playing out since at least 9-11.“.
The argument Kundnani makes in the book, “The Muslims are Coming”, is that “Islamic ideology is largely irrelevant in trying to understand the causes of terrorism.
It’s also analogous to anti-Semitism . He mentions late 19th c Jewish conspiracy theories. Jews were turned in to sub-humans and yet at the same time, super-powerful people.
He claims this is the same structure we have now with Islamophobia; conspiracy theories and secret Muslims controlling the world and Sharia Law in the White House.
“This is NOT to imply to criticize Islamic Belief, it is somehow ‘racist’.
All institutionalized in government profiling. Civil rights abuses.
[37:14] Looking at the official way that terrorism is understood, leads us to the role of government in foreign policy, fostering political context. This idea that we can blame terrorism on Islamic belief is convenient, it allows us to talk about religion and NOT politics, including the politics of our own government.
Claims THIS is consistent with the WHOLE history of terrorism of the last 150-200 years. Terrorism is DRIVEN by political content.
Example – assassins of the late 19th c- ‘working class movement‘ – takes over Paris – 10’s of thousands killed by the army – some of survivors say it is legitimate for us to use dynamite. Context creates that decision.
SOUTH AFRICA- students protesting that their classes have to be taught in Afrikaans. Not their language. Students shot by the apartheid state. African National Congress resorts to bombs in retaliation. He claims this is a pattern that repeats itself.
Kundnani jumps to 2003 to 2006 (2009) a dramatic surge in terrorism. It is the process that we need to understand.
Their ideology hasn’t change from moderate to extremist Islam. What’s changed is being exposed to the NEWS of 100’s of thousands of people dying. We are in a cycle of violence. BUT, we ONLY see the violence of OTHERS.
In actual fact, both forms of violence FEED each other in this cycle of war and murder. Words. Terrorism. Extremism. Radicalization. encourage us to seek only half an evaluation.
[42:39] He now claims to quote Dr Martin Luther King (1967) King said as he spoke to the angry young men across the country about a non-violent approach to protesting American racism, he felt like a hypocrite.
Kundnani’s conclusion: Violence is NOT just about the Angry Young Men, it’s about the Governments. They both feed each other.
The next post : Part Two is The Q and A. The audience now had a chance to ask questions of Dr. Kundnani. Some even dared to ask him for comments regarding the recent beheadings .
TSM asks: Is it ‘Islamophobic’ to oppose ‘beheadings”??