Michelle Malkin

Syndicate content
This WordPress.com site is the cat’s pajamas
Updated: 37 min 42 sec ago

Show biz meltdown: Bombs away!

Wed, 09/20/2017 - 00:18

Show biz meltdown: Bombs away!
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2017

The numbers don’t lie. Across the entertainment industry, viewers and fans are tuning out. It’s no coincidence ratings are cratering as unhinged celebrities crank up their anti-Trump and anti-American antics.

Pro tip, Tinseltownies: Swapping your jazz hands for middle fingers and waving resistance fists at your customer base is bad for business. Let us count the waning ways.

Emmy emetics. Who wanted to see smirking Stephen Colbert lead a cast of Botoxed starlets and men in hot pants, handing out TV industry awards to diamond-draped elites hoisting up their gilt statues as emblems of victory on behalf of the hegemonically oppressed? Not as many as the boob-tube titans had hoped! The show’s overall viewership of 11.4 million tied an all-time low; the key ratings demographic of 18-49 adults sunk 10 percent lower than last year’s historic low. Most of America had better things to do than watch a privileged cabal of left-wing, coastal one-percenters preening indulgently about their progressivism. Conservative actor James Wood had the response of the night to the Emmy ego-thon, noting that “the stunning lack of political diversity in Hollywood is interesting, when you consider their consumer base is so evenly divided.”

Oscars’ abyss. Earlier this year, the Academy Awards show earned the second-lowest viewership ratings in its history. Program host Jimmy Kimmel and other celebs turned their stage and red carpet into Trump-bashing soapboxes for anti-cop rants, open borders pleas and Quran promotion.

Box office beatdown. Hollywood’s summer movie season launched more duds than North Korea’s Rocket Man. By Labor Day weekend, revenue plunged “nearly 16 percent over last year, the steepest decline in modern times,” according to the Hollywood Reporter, adding that “(a)ttendance also plummeted, and is almost assured of hitting a 25-year low in terms of the number of tickets sold, according to Box Office Mojo.” Variety dubbed it “the worst the movie industry has seen in more than a decade.”

I don’t want my MTV. The network that used to broadcast music videos now has a hard time attracting eyeballs to its marquee Video Music Awards. Go figure. Its 10th annual awards show was “the least-watched one in its history,” marking the “fourth year in a row that the network has seen a decline in the crown jewel of its annual calendar,” according to the Associated Press.

Al Gore’s man-made disaster. Among the summer’s hottest messes? Environmental scare-monger Al Gore’s climate change sequel to “An Inconvenient Truth.” The original green Chicken Little flick raked in nearly $50 million in 2006. The follow-up this summer, in release for a measly six weeks, scraped up less than $3.5 million in domestic receipts. Paramount tried to prop up the film with trailer endorsements from Bono, Randy Jackson, Pharrell Williams, Adam Levine and Shailene Woodley. But their Hollywood helium couldn’t lift Gore’s cinematic lead balloon.

Rolling Stone’s tombstone. The iconic pop culture and music magazine rolled itself into oblivion after publishing its infamous “Rape on Campus” hoax article in 2014. Legal costs are approaching $5 million; this week, a third defamation suit by University of Virginia fraternity members moved forward. Over the weekend, owner Jann Wenner announced that his majority stake in the rag is now for sale. Maybe magazine cover boys and lefty multimillionaires Justin Trudeau, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama can pitch in?

NFL = No fans left. The football field is now a minefield of social justice causes, where National Football League officials countenance Black Power salutes, but ban pro-police decals on helmets after cop ambushes. A recent J.D. Power survey found that national anthem protests by players were the top reason fans stopped watching games. Viewership at the start of the 2017 regular season was down 13 percent for the NFL and NBC from last year’s opener. Gridiron fans are switching the channel and they’re staying out of the stadiums, too. The Rams and Chargers barely filled half their stadiums. The USC-Texas game boasted higher attendance numbers than those two teams’ games combined.

NFL brass blame hurricanes. But from the boob tube to the big screen to the glossies to the Big Leagues, the fault lies not with Mother Nature or the entertainment industry’s consumers — but with the fatally self-absorbed, politically toxified stars themselves.

UN bureaucrats, MSM scurry to safe space after Trump’s General Assembly speech

Tue, 09/19/2017 - 11:47

**Written by Doug Powers

Did you see President Trump’s speech to the U.N. General Assembly? The address was not well-received by many of the gathered bureaucrats, but then again, Trump’s no Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Raul Castro.

Here are three parts that brought out the crickets:

This caused a few nosebleeds in the General Assembly:

He said, “It is a massive source of embarrassment for the United Nations that some governments with egregious human rights records sit on the U.N. Human Rights Council.” The panel’s 47 members include, for example, China and Saudi Arabia.

That was a fairly triggering and intimidating experience for many in the room (25 percent applauded, 50 percent shook their heads in disapproval, 15 percent cited it as evidence of climate change, and 10 percent surrendered to Jared Kushner’s security team).

But it got better. There hasn’t been a General Assembly silence this awkward since Dag Hammarskjöld broke wind during a role call vote:

“The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented.”

Ouch. Feel the Bern! Fortunately Trump put a “Make America Great Again” paper bag under each seat for everybody to hyperventilate into.

Trump also had a warning for Lil’ Kim:

Pyongyang’s “reckless” pursuit of nuclear weapons “threatens the entire world with unthinkable loss of human life,” Trump told the 193-member U.N. General Assembly.

If North Korea continues down this path, Trump said, “we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.”

With that one, Trump basically dumped ice cold water on the room without warning:

The President’s verbal attack on Pyongyang drew mumbles from the UN General Assembly Hall, Reuters reported.

One man in the audience covered his face with his hands shortly after Trump made his “totally destroy” comment.

The audible gasps also reverberated outside the walls of the U.N. and even ABC News’ chief foreign correspondent was beside himself:

VIDEO – @TerryMoran: Threat to ‘Totally Destroy’ N. Korea 'Borders on the Threat of Committing a War Crime’ https://t.co/zN2DJ4zd5Q

— Grabien (@GrabienMedia) September 19, 2017

Kim Jong-un threatens to put a mushroom cloud over Guam, Hawaii and California and Trump’s reaction in a speech is the real danger here? Impeach!

Lastly, people from the previous administration who thought it was a great idea to send nearly $2 billion in cash to the world’s #1 state sponsor of terror are currently hammering Trump for saying this:

President Trump on Tuesday signaled he is close to ditching the Iran nuclear agreement struck by former President Barack Obama, by saying the deal is an “embarrassment to the United States” in his first address to the United Nations General Assembly.

“We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles and we cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program,” Trump said.

“The Iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into,” he added. “Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it, believe me.”

CNN’s Chief Resistance Correspondent and Trump nemesis Jim Acosta was alarmed by the speech in its entirety:

UN speech was a lot of Trump tweets strung together. Saber-rattling. But no clear doctrine. Threats of confrontation around the world.

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) September 19, 2017

The liberal media — whose idea of “tough talk reality check” leadership is blaming terrorism on refrigerants — really miss Obama’s platitudes.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

UC Berkeley profs & grad students petition to make campus home of ‘flee speech’ movement

Tue, 09/19/2017 - 07:32

**Written by Doug Powers

This headline about UC Berkeley from the S.F. Chronicle speaks volumes:

null

“Free speech”? Everybody RUN!

At UC Berkeley, 177 professors and graduate students have signed an open letter urging thousands of colleagues and classmates to boycott campus for four days this month to ensure their “physical and mental safety.”

The strongly worded letter, titled “Boycott the Alt-Right @UCBerkeley,” asks that students, instructors and employees cancel classes, close buildings and “not penalize students who are afraid to come to campus” from Sept. 24 to 27.

That’s when Milo Yiannopoulos has said he, Steve Bannon, Ann Coulter and other couriers of the far-right agenda are supposed to descend onto campus for four days of rallies and speeches they’re calling “Free Speech Week.”

When it comes to fragility, these people make peanut brittle look like magnesium alloy.

The new chancellor for UC Berkeley should tell profs afraid of free speech on campus to feel free to boycott the university forever and find jobs elsewhere, but I have a feeling it’ll be the chancellor who ends up being sent packing at some point.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Confirmed: Challenging election results *no longer ‘threat to democracy’ (*If a Clinton lost)

Mon, 09/18/2017 - 17:39

**Written by Doug Powers

In October, just a couple weeks before the election, Hillary Clinton was totally convinced she was going to win, and as a result she had implicit trust in the system:

null

The disclaimer to that is so small you can’t see it, but it reads “*Unless I’m the one who lost”:

In an interview with NPR, the former secretary of state — who will speak in Washington on Monday evening as part of her nationwide book tour — would not rule out formally contesting the results of the election.

“I wouldn’t rule it out,” she said, though she quickly admitted there’s virtually no legal path forward, and that challenging election results at this point would be unprecedented.

Gee, “What Happened”?

Additionally, brief footage released from Clinton HQ late on election night is even more pathetic and embarrassing than originally thought.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Kim Jong-un’s propagandists might advise Hillary devotional website to dial it down a notch

Sun, 09/17/2017 - 14:55

**Written by Doug Powers

If you’ve not yet heard about the pro-Clinton uber-propaganda website Verrit, here’s a brief description:

Verrit is a political site created by Peter Daou[1] and Leela Daou[2] that shows talking points for use in social media discussions.

The website’s slogan says it is “media for the 65.8 million,” referring to the number of votes Hillary Clinton won in the 2016 presidential election. Daou, an adviser to Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, and prior chief executive of Shareblue[3] told Business Insider that he intended the website to “reflect the worldview” of those who voted for Clinton and described the site as an “online hub for Clinton backers so that they can find easy-to-share facts, stats and other information you can take out to social media when you’re having debates on key issues people are discussing”. Daou also said the website had no financial ties to Clinton.[4]

On September 3, 2017, Clinton endorsed the service.

Well of course Hillary Clinton “endorsed the service”! This is among Verrit’s attempt to prove why “every major media narrative about 2016 is demonstrably false” (via @dwdavison9318):

FAKE: Hillary Clinton was a “flawed” candidate.

FACT: Hillary Clinton is the first woman in history to become the presidential nominee of a major party. Would anyone characterize that as a “flaw?” Singling out Hillary Clinton as “flawed” when all humans are flawed has a decidedly sexist tinge. There is nothing particularly flawed about working a lifetime to become one of the most accomplished women in political history.

Good lord, even Kim Jong-un’s in-house propagandists would tell Verrit to reel it back in.

Here’s another funny one:

FAKE: The DNC “rigged” the primary.

FACT: Hillary Clinton won the Democratic primary by getting millions more votes than Bernie Sanders. The oft-repeated accusation that the DNC “rigged” the primary is an unfounded excuse repeated by Sanders diehards to rationalize his loss. It is insulting to everyone who voted in the primaries to falsely attribute Clinton’s victory to cheating.

Hmm, why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz resign again? (Hint: It wasn’t because of a bad hair day).

Authentication code for this post: 0475467

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Dem Rep downgrades ‘Russia hacked the election’ claim… again

Sun, 09/17/2017 - 11:14

**Written by Doug Powers

After Hillary Clinton lost, Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff of California was among Dems embracing the “Russia hacked the election” narrative and helping spread it like fertilizer on Hillary’s crop of excuses. And we all know what Schiff wanted everybody to believe when he said “hacked the election” back in March:

null

Fast forward to this morning and Schiff’s appearance on This Week with George Stephonopo… Stephinoppil… the guy who used to be Bill Clinton’s communications adviser. Out: “Russia hacked the election.” In: “Russia bought a bunch of political ads on Facebook”:

Every patriotic American should be furious the Kremlin so cynically sought to divide & manipulate us on Facebook. Tech firms should testify: pic.twitter.com/FXrYkMKhlg

— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) September 17, 2017

To paraphrase Bill Clinton, “it depends on what your definition of ‘hacked the election’ is.”

You can learn more about Schiff & the Dems ever-evolving Russia talking points on the next episode of…

null

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Promoting ‘What Happened,’ Hillary makes it clear she wasn’t very curious what happened

Sat, 09/16/2017 - 16:16

**Written by Doug Powers

I know Hillary thinks she’s artfully dismissing the issue of her husband meeting with Loretta Lynch on an airport tarmac, but this speaks volumes:

“I didn’t hear about it for days because it was so inconsequential to both of them. And when I did, I didn’t think much of it. It was a rationalization that was used to be able to do what he [Comey] did.

It’s really funny to watch a former candidate pitching a book called “What Happened” claim to have not been curious about what happened. But from what I’ve seen, a good portion of “What Happened” is devoted to avoiding, denying and dodging what happened.

“I didn’t think much of it” explains everything we need to know about the Clintons. The husband of a presidential candidate under investigation gets caught meeting with the nation’s top law enforcement officer, and that didn’t even ring any potential warning bells at Clinton HQ? It’s true they “didn’t think much of it,” but that was until they became aware the meeting was noticed by a reporter. At that point, it became Comey’s fault for thinking it might have been a big deal. Comey’s one of the reasons Hillary stayed out of trouble, to to see her have to resort to bashing him indicates the amount of deep s**t she was actually in.

When Hillary says “I didn’t think much of it,” the discerning longtime Clinton observer translates that to “that’s nothing compared to other stuff we’ve done!”

Even more pathetic is that Clinton blew off the tarmac meeting question and flowed right into “but Russia”:

He forever changed history, but that’s in the past. What’s important is the fact that the Russians are still going at us. He himself admitted that before Congress. People I really respect like Jim clapper and others who knew that the Russians were doing have been sounding the alarm. I will tell you this, Anderson. If I had been elected president under the same circumstances so that I the lost popular vote, I squeaked through the electoral college and evidence came up that the Russians were trying to help me, I would have said on the first day in office we’re going to launch the most thorough investigation.

If Hillary had won, none of this would have been brought up at all. Wonder why that is!

*****

Also for those keeping score at home, the candidate who campaigned on women being tough and independent-minded is now saying that “white women” didn’t vote for her because they’re controlled by men:

She referenced a discussion with Sheryl Sandberg, who told her that women become less likable when they’re more successful, whereas it works the opposite way for men. “Sheryl ended this really sobering conversation by saying that women will have no empathy for you, because they will be under tremendous pressure—and I’m talking principally about white women—they will be under tremendous pressure from fathers and husbands and boyfriends and male employers not to vote for ‘the girl,'” she said. “And we saw a lot of that during the primaries from Sanders supporters, really quite vile attacks online against women who spoke out for me; as I say, one of my biggest support groups, Pantsuit Nation, literally had to become a private site because there was so much sexism directed their way.”

Hillary’s trust level in women changes on any given day for any given topic:

"I will defend women's rights to make their own health care decisions." —Hillary https://t.co/BAbTwyL97U

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 23, 2016

But not their own voting decisions!

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Shot: The Wall was finally constructed — Chaser: At UC Berkeley

Fri, 09/15/2017 - 15:21

**Written by Doug Powers

Yesterday, construction began on “The Wall” — well, sort of — and it wasn’t along the US/Mexico border. Plot twist:

#UCBerkeley installing concrete k-rail barrier around Zellerbach. Expecting protests against @benshapiro speech tonight. @nbcbayarea pic.twitter.com/55zuAEikFs

— Bob Redell (@BobNBC) September 14, 2017

And that was just for Ben Shapiro’s appearance at UC Berkeley. Security was very tight so as to ensure that nobody exercising First Amendment rights got their heads bashed in by pro-peace free speech advocates:

Conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro delivered his speech at the UC Berkeley campus under extraordinary security that required attendees to pass through metal detectors and police barricades that held back hundreds of protesters.

The event at Zellerbach Hall appeared to do what UC Berkeley Chancellor Carol Christ has said she hoped for when she declared a free speech year on campus: provide an open exchange of ideas. Shapiro’s speech included a question-and-answer session in which audience members respectfully challenged his opinions.

Thanks to “Free Speech Week” coming up, that concrete barrier put up Thursday might get some more use later this month:

As part of its new commitment to embracing all views, the campus is playing host to the four-day long event, sponsored by the Berkeley Patriot, the on-campus conservative student newspaper. From September 24th through the 27th, Berkeley students will be treated to speeches from a number of controversial right-leaning speakers, including firebrand Ann Coulter and former White House senior adviser, Steve Bannon.

Each day will feature a different theme: “Feminism Awareness Day” on the 24th, “Islamic Peace and Tolerance Day” on Sept. 25, “ZUCK 2020” on Sept. 26, and “Mario Savio is Dead” on Sept. 27 (the late Mario Savio being a pioneer in Berkeley’s “free speech movement” in the 1960s, establishing the school as a hotbed of ideas and an incubator for often counter-cultural thought).

When you have to construct a Maginot Line for fear of violent backlash against free speech from people who call themselves “anti fascist” irony is so dead it can’t even be identified with dental records.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Bernie vs. Bernie: Single-payer utopia then & now

Thu, 09/14/2017 - 18:09

**Written by Doug Powers

Time for another episode of “Socialism Vision” vs. “Socialism Reality,” this time courtesy of the same socialist (with an assist from some like-minded Dems).

The wind-up:

I'm very proud to be introducing the Medicare for All Act today, which has 15 co-sponsors in the Senate, a record level of support. pic.twitter.com/26GimpDJoC

— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) September 13, 2017

And the pitch:

A video from 1987 shows Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) has not always considered single-payer health care a slam dunk for progressive reformers.
[…]
“You want to guarantee that all people have access to health care as you do in Canada,” Sanders said.

“But I think what we understand is that unless we change the funding system and the control mechanism in this country to do that—for example, if we expanded Medicaid [to] everybody,” Sanders added. “Give everybody a Medicaid card—we would be spending such an astronomical sum of money that, you know, we would bankrupt the nation.”

And it’s not as if the nation’s in a better position to be able to afford that extra trillions and trillions of dollars for more “free” stuff:

U.S. national debt reaches $20 trillion for the first time ever: https://t.co/yoVbxadHoP pic.twitter.com/JaJACQUAhf

— CBS News (@CBSNews) September 12, 2017

In 1987, when Sanders said single-payer would “bankrupt the nation,” the national debt was just over $2 trillion.

But anyway, for some reason Sanders seems to think that today’s super-expensive “free” is less super-expensive than it was 30 years ago. Inflation doesn’t apply to socialist pipe dreams.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Hillary Clinton: OK, scrap the Electoral College & maybe I’ll take another crack at it

Thu, 09/14/2017 - 08:56

**Written by Doug Powers

Hillary Clinton’s book tour has just started and it already could serve as the catalyst for a sequel to What Ever Happened to Baby Jane, with Hillary playing the roles of both Blanche and Jane. Add “Electoral College” to a list of blame that’s now longer than Jamyang Dorjee Chakrishar’s calligraphy scroll:

Hillary Clinton told CNN on Wednesday that it is time to abolish the Electoral College, part of a sweeping interview where the former Democratic nominee sought to explain why she lost the 2016 election.

Clinton, in the interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, displayed her animus for fired FBI Director James Comey, reflected on her love for the people — namely former President Bill Clinton — who helped her get through the crushing loss and blasted the arcane election body that she believes helped Donald Trump win the presidency.

“I think it needs to be eliminated,” Clinton said of the Electoral College. “I’d like to see us move beyond it, yes.”

Isn’t it strange that before the election all we heard from Democrats — with the assistance of the media and overconfident, unrealistic pollsters — was how Trump had “no path to 270 electoral votes”:

Early-voting by likely Clinton backers may leave Trump with "virtually no path" to 270, per @AP analysis. https://t.co/xhTYc2TjKH

— Lisa Lerer (@llerer) October 27, 2016

There is no possible way Donald Trump’s team actually believes this is their path to 270 https://t.co/PcAKcJwuMb

— Post Politics (@postpolitics) October 25, 2016

R's coming home, Trump was never going to underperform Romney by 10-12 points among Republicans; Still has no plausible path to 270 https://t.co/Q0jnwUsD6F

— Dan Pfeiffer (@danpfeiffer) October 26, 2016

But now, Electoral College = BAD!

I don’t recall many (if any) calls to dismantle the EC when everybody thought a Clinton victory was as sure a thing as the sun rising in the east and Bill trying to find his pants & a ride home at 5 a.m. on a Sunday morning.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

How romantic: Planned Parenthood gets into the online dating site biz

Wed, 09/13/2017 - 17:25

**Written by Doug Powers

I don’t know about you, but I’m sensing that the foundation’s just been poured for one of Hollywood’s most progressive Rom-Coms ever:

One of the most popular dating sites has introduced a new way to filter out anti-abortion rights users.

Starting on Wednesday, OkCupid users who have answered “No” to the question “Should the government defund Planned Parenthood?” will be awarded a badge that reads ”#IStandWithPP.” The badge will be prominently displayed on the user’s profile.
[…]
In a statement, OkCupid said that the badge is a way to not only support the health care organization but also promote others who have the same badge, thus making the browsing process that much easier for those who want a partner with similar political views.

“OkCupid’s partnership with Planned Parenthood is really exciting because it enables us to help people connect on the issues that matter to them. In this current climate, this matters more than ever when it comes to finding ‘your person,’” Melissa Hobley, OkCupid’s CMO, said in a statement.

“We know that Planned Parenthood is driving conversations, support and education that millions care about,” Hobley said. “When we looked at the data, we saw that our community on OkCupid was talking about Planned Parenthood … so we decided to make it easy to find the folks who cared about the same thing.”

This could lead to some super romantic “how I met your mother” stories:

null

null

Another successful hook-up thanks to Abort-Harmony.com!

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Never forget: Muslim hate crimes hoaxes

Wed, 09/13/2017 - 08:03

Never forget: Muslim hate crimes hoaxes
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2017

Another year. Another Sept. 11 anniversary. Another opportunity for grievance-mongering Muslim agitators to decry the imagined “epidemic” of “Islamophobia.”

South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) convened with Mad Maxine Waters and other House Democrats in Washington, D.C., to mark a somber occasion this week. No, not the coordinated jihadi mass murder of nearly 3,000 innocent people of all races, nationalities and religions on 9/11. Instead, they lamented Sept. 12 — “the 16-year anniversary of the day that South Asian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Arab, and Middle Eastern Americans woke up to a new political reality in which the safety of our lives and the security of our homes were irrevocably compromised.”

For left-wing zealots, the bloody lash of worldwide Islamic terrorism pales in comparison to the so-called “backlash” against Muslims. SAALT disseminated prefab tweets and declarations naming President Trump, outspoken anti-sharia activist Brigitte Gabriel and her grass-roots group, ACT for America, as well as “law enforcement, immigration enforcement, vigilantes,” and “white supremacists” as their enemies.

They’re all the same to the tolerance mob.

And “backlash” is a catchall trash can for everything from sideward glances to off-color jokes to offensive cartoons to unresolved crimes to actual acts of intimidation or physical violence. Mixed in with two shootings and a stabbing over the past year classified as hate crimes, SAALT noted that in August, “a Minnesota mosque was firebombed in what the governor rightly declared an ‘act of terrorism.'”

One of those things is not like the other. I contacted the FBI this week to ask about the Minnesota mosque incident. It is unsolved after more than a month, and a $30,000 reward for information remains unclaimed. An agent based in Minneapolis acknowledged to me that “it’s always a possibility” that the crime may be a hoax.

That’s what the Sept. 12 gripers want you to forget: People lie. And too many Muslim opportunists deceive in order to distract and divide.

Just two weeks ago, an alleged hate crime fell apart after a 22-year-old Muslim man admitted he had “exaggerated” an assault in a Durham, Ontario park restroom. Canadian police dropped charges against a 57-year-old man whom the Muslim man claimed had shouted anti-Muslim epithets and punched him in the face.

“We could have charged him with obstructing police or mischief and he was cautioned for those two offences,” a police official told the Toronto Sun. But the faker escaped without punishment.

In late August, Indiana State University professor Azhar Hussain received one year’s probation for fabricating anti-Muslim threats and an assault. He pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of obstruction for justice and harassment after lying to cops this spring about being attacked and sending anti-Muslim hate mails to the school.

“Based upon the investigation, it is our belief that Hussain was trying to gain sympathy by becoming a victim of anti-Muslim threats, which he had created himself,” the campus police chief concluded.

In June, a small fire at a Des Moines, Iowa, mosque generated national headlines — until a young Muslim woman was arrested for starting it.

“Security cameras in the mosque showed a woman, later identified as Aisha Ismail, 22, pouring lighter fluid on the carpet and then starting the fire,” police reported. “It doesn’t appear that she was trying to burn the place down,” the local chief said. “It seems like she was trying to make a statement.”

In Houston, a “suspicious” fire at a Houston mosque in 2015 turned out to have been set by one of the center’s own worshipers who prayed there five times a day for five years. The unindicted terror-funding co-conspirators at CAIR-Houston had clamored for law enforcement authorities to “investigate a possible bias motive for this fire” due to “the recent spike in hate incidents targeting mosques nationwide.”

That same year, New Yorker Kashif Parvaiz was convicted of murdering his wife in front of his child after police debunked his cover story of being attacked by a group of bigots who called the family “terrorists.”

For every rare and bona fide act of “Islamophobia” in North America, there are multiple acts of Islamo-faux-bia ginned up to stir attention, milk public compassion and generate unfounded fear.

It’s bad enough when the Islamo-faux-bists operate any other time of year. It’s downright disgusting when they exploit the true horrors of 9/11 to hype their delusions of systemic post-9/12 oppression and collective victimhood.

Syndicate

Syndicate content