Virginia Church Hosts Lecture on “Islamophobia,” Professor Claims It’s Driven By “Imperialism”, and comments from

“I have lots of relationships with Muslims. They have taught me compassion and peace,” stated Luther College Professor Todd Green during a January 22 presentation at McLean, Virginia’s Lewinsville Presbyterian Church (LPC). Here this self-proclaimed “scholar of Islamophobia” and “anti-Islamophobia activist” reiterated his fantasy that interpersonal relationships with Muslims can refute supposed “Islamophobic” prejudices arising from Western sins like imperialism.

Green, author of the 2015 book The Fear of Islam:  An Introduction to Islamophobia in the West, is currently a Franklin Fellow at the United States Department of State, where Green “assesses and analyzes Islamophobia in Europe.” He has had ample opportunity to expound the book’s themes in various appearances in radio (see here, here, and here) and online, as well as public presentations such as at the 2016 Peacestock conference of the leftwing Veterans for Peace. He also writes for left-leaning publications such as the Huffington Post and Sojourners.

Without specific definitions, Green has concluded that “Islamophobia is an irrational fear, hostility, or hatred of Muslims and Islam” and is “one of the most acceptable prejudices in the United States today.” This presents a “cultural racism” in which “Muslims are essentialized; they are treated as a race,” he elaborated at LPC. Nonetheless, he has previously vaguely qualified that critical study of any such posited bigotry “is not an attempt to cut off critical conversations about Islam.”

Green has assessed that “imperialism is one of the main factors driving Islamophobia in the past and in the present,” resulting from historical “imperial tension and imperial competition” between Christians and Muslims. “In the seventh century when Islam came on the scene, it spread very quickly and Islamic empires developed quite quickly,” he has stated, while leaving unmentioned the Islamic supremacist jihad doctrine that propelled such conquests. With shifting power balances between Western and Islamic civilization across the centuries, Islamic empires gave way to the European colonialism that subjugated many Islamic lands.

Westerners colonizing Muslims, Green has argued, realized that “with imperial projects there must be some ‘other’, and this ‘other’ must be demonized and dehumanized in order for the imperial nation to galvanize popular support.” The “neo-imperialism” of rival Cold War superpowers followed European colonialism. Even post-Cold War, “much of U.S. foreign policy is incomprehensible apart from understanding that we are still engaged in the imperial project.”

Casting Muslims as passive victims of Western aggression, Green believes that such stereotypes influence Americans today who “have seen and continue to see Muslims in many parts of the world as obstacles to our imperial ambitions.” In the Huffington Post, he emphasizes the “history of Western interventionism in Muslim-majority contexts, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the U.S. exploitation of energy resources in the Middle East, the legacy of European colonialism.” The oft-debated question “Is ISIS [the Islamic State in Iraq and (Greater) Syria] Islamic?” is merely a “thinly veiled form of Islamophobia intended to heighten our fears of Islam while absolving the U.S. of its own responsibility in contributing to the rise to ISIS.”

“Religion is rarely the driving force behind terrorism,” Green’s article claims, befitting his oft-disproved analysis that socioeconomic disadvantage, not Islamic doctrine, lies behind jihadist violence. At LPC, he described Muslims joining ISIS because of factors like discrimination in Europe or oppression from Middle Eastern dictatorships, just as socioeconomic factors might influence Westerners to join rightwing movements. “White Christians have an empire to hide behind.  Many of these young men joining ISIS don’t.  When you are politically disenfranchised you will sometimes find other ways to find power.”

In identifying “Islamophobia’s” past and present purveyors, Green resorts to well-worn, hackneyed tropes. He embraces the fraudulent Edward Said’s Orientalism thesis that “knowledge about Islam coming from Orientalism was being distorted by the imperial project.” Past Western Islamic studies served not intellectual inquiry, but rather “knowledge for the sake of control” over Muslims.

Green today castigates “professional Islamophobes” supposedly motivated by pure malice, such as Pamela Geller, Daniel Pipes, Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer, and Geert Wilders. “From the time they wake up in the morning to the time they go to bed at night, their job is to figure out ‘how can I better demonize Muslims today.’” While “Islamophobia” often appears among conservatives, it is “more dangerous in the way it manifests itself among those who claim to be liberal,” such as talk show host Bill Maher, Green noted at LPC. He meanwhile makes the common yet baseless claim that “Islamophobia” forms a well-funded “powerful industry,” while the “anti-Islamophobia side does not pay quite as well” for individuals like him.

Contrastingly, in Green’s estimation Islamic belief seemingly can cause no harm, as he rejects “misconceptions” that “sharia law is somehow incompatible with democracy or with the West.” “The overwhelming majority of Muslims” globally “really are trying to practice their religion that helps them and their fellow human beings flourish,” he has argued. At LPC he added that “I hate the language of ‘radical Islamic terrorism’” and its “simplistic understanding that Islam programs people to be violent.”

Islamic rule past and present thus raises few concerns for Green while he condemns the United States for having supported dictators like Iran’s shah. Like many academics, he whitewashes Islam’s often brutal, subjugated “status of dhimmis or protected minorities” for non-Muslims, stating that “for much of the history of Islam Christians and Jews were protected and lived in peace with Muslims.” Today Americans in the Middle East should “be very consistent when it comes to supporting democratic movements, even if that means risking losing an alliance with an autocratic government,” irrespective of such “democratic” results in 1979 Iran and 2011 Egypt.

More often than not, non-Muslims draw Green’s criticism. Writing in Sojourners, he approved of President Barack Obama’s regurgitation of the common canard that the Crusades were unjustified aggression, not a just war defensive response to jihadist conquests. “Obama did his best at the National Prayer Breakfast in February [2015] to address the legacy of violence carried out in the name of Christianity.” Green also has falsely relativized that the “Bible has its fair share of violent texts” along with the Quran, thereby ignoring fundamental differences between violent verses in these two scriptures.

Green’s Huffington Post writings betray a less than stirring defense of free speech against jihadist censorship. Geller and Spencer’s 2015 Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, where security guards killed two Muslim assailants, merely exemplified “hate rallies that engage in Muslim-bashing under the pretense of defending freedom of speech.” Reviewing Iran’s 1989 blasphemy death sentence for British writer Salman Rushdie, Green mused that “minorities rarely have possessed the same opportunities to shape public opinion as those with political power or cultural capital.” Therefore, “Rushdie and some of his more outspoken supporters adopted a fairly uncritical approach to freedom of expression, assuming at times that this freedom benefits all members of Western societies equally.”

For Green, individual relationships between Muslims and non-Muslims are the antidote to what he has called a “perfect storm of Islamophobia” in a French television interview. He laments supposedly skewed media representations emphasizing Islam’s violence while “there simply are not enough strong relationships in the West between Muslims who are in the minority and the non-Muslim majority.” As one venue for interfaith outreach, he advocates the Muslim Brotherhood (MB)-derived Muslim Students Association (MSA), which he addressed in 2010 at Minnesota’s St. Cloud State University.

One of Green’s book interviewees, Muslim congressman Keith Ellison, currently under fire for his anti-Israel statements and extremists Islamist affiliations, presents for Green the kind of Muslim people should befriend. “If you have a really jaded, negative view of politicians and think that they are intellectually disengaged, you should have a conversation with Keith Ellison, and you will change your mind,” Green has stated about the Minnesota representative. Accordingly, Green’s wife and fellow leftist, Tabita, has written about how he took Luther College students from their Iowa campus on a field trip to Ellison’s Minneapolis mosque, where the radical imam Siraj Wahaj has been a featured speaker. Tabita also noted that the field trip included a visit to the Minnesota chapter of the Hamas-derived Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) “to learn about their civil rights work.”

Green’s tweets round out his Islamist sympathies. In one, he calls the radical, anti-Semitic Woman’s March on Washington organizer Linda Sarsour a “shining star in the battle against racism and bigotry” and therefore “#ImarchwithLinda.” In another, his CAIR and MSA affiliations apparently make him worry that “[d]esignating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist org. will open the door to witch hunts aimed @ Muslim civil liberties groups.”

Yet even Green recognizes that interfaith relations with Muslims are not without their pitfalls. “You want to see a nonstarter happen,” he has indicated in his various appearances, including at LPC, then introduce the subject of “Palestine” between Jews and Muslims. Before tackling such hot topics, he recommends that interfaith groups undertake noncontroversial community projects like Habitat for Humanity homebuilding; “I tend to prefer more organic relationships to evolve,” he has stated. Apparently then, Jewish legal legend Alan Dershowitz should build a house with Ellison before deciding to leave the Democratic Party if he becomes the Democratic National Committee chairman.

Reality belies Green’s “getting to know you” thesis in which individual relationships with Muslims dispel reservations towards Islam that actually come from the faith’s hard facts, not imagined prejudice. Numerous Christians from Muslim-majority countries have impressed upon this author Islam’s oppressive nature towards non-Muslims, even though these individuals lack no opportunity to meet Muslims as Green bemoans in the United States. Likewise Europe’s significantly larger Muslim populations, recently increased by an influx of “refugees,” have done little to improve Islam’s popularity.

The arguments of Green, who by self-admission is by training a student of American and European religious history, not Islamic studies, might impress his fellow leftists as indicated by his largely positive reception at LPC. Paralleling the Obama Administration’s State Department, LPC has made an appeal to “Actively Support the Boycott of Products Made in Israeli Settlements” and is pro-LGBT. Yet individuals like James Lafferty, head of Christians Against Radical Islam (CARI), indicated during audience questions why skepticism is warranted. He recalled a local presentation 25 years ago by Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam once feted as a Muslim “moderate” and later killed in Yemen as an Al Qaeda supporter by a 2011 American drone strike. “He said many times exactly the same words I have heard tonight,” Lafferty noted.

New York Times claims that “far-right media” is stoking “anxiety about Muslim refugees”
Canada moving toward criminalizing “Islamophobia”


  1. Margaret says

    January 28, 2017 at 10:24 am

    Todd Green has made Islamophobia his cash cow.

    The word Islamophobia itself is a reflection of a deep-seated Islamic intolerance and an absolute rejection of freedom of speech.– Dr. Mark Christian

  2. Buford says

    January 28, 2017 at 10:36 am

    This looney can think what ever he wants but the old BS I know Muslims & they are nice people who come here with good intentions is bunk if this Moron would take the time to read a Quran he would see Deception is encouraged along with Violence & according to him it is a form of Islamophobia to not go along with these cretins.

    • maghan says

      January 28, 2017 at 3:27 pm

      Yes, this so-called professor is incredibly stupid to claim that the moral content of Islam has to do with how “individual Muslims have been nice to him”. The fool is a disgrace to academics if he does not know that to full comprehend a doctrine one must READ and CRITICALLY study its doctrinal texts. It’s not about having Muslim friends at all.

      To understand Islam one must read the Qur’an, the Hadith and the Sira. Todd Green does not give the impression that he has done any of that. Charlatan, I say.

  3. IQ al Rassooli says

    January 28, 2017 at 11:06 am

    It is beneath CONTEMPT how so called professor Todd Green and the so called Christian church aid, abet and collude with the very Muslims who are literally ERADICATING Christians and Christianity in both the Arab and Muslim countries by deliberately Misleading, Misinforming and DECEIVING Quran ignorant Americans.

    Let me therefore tell you the TRUTH~


    Islamophobia is a neologism used to refer to an IRRATIONAL fear or prejudice towards Muslims and the religion of Islam.

    The term has achieved a degree of linguistic and political acceptance which is utterly at odds with Facts and Reality.

    Let me firstly deal with the FACTS:

    1 Muslims are the only group on the face of planet Earth who show their anger, their destructiveness, their Hatemongering and their Warmongering on TV, in Print, in their Educational System and in their Speech against ALL other belief systems (that are not Muslim) be they Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Hindu, Animist and others

    2 Muslims are the only CULTISTS who manifest their Hate and Anger while holding their holy book the Quran in one hand and guns, grenade launchers, swords and daggers with the other.

    3 Muslims are the only group who while demonstrating their hatred and anger shout and call upon the name of their god Allah with their TERROR VERSE

    ” Allahu Akbar”

    4 They are the only group who in the “name of Allah” slaughter UNARMED and innocent INFIDELS/ Kuffar/ Non Muslim civilians by the sword, suicide bombings, beheading, blowing up planes, buses, trains etc etc

    5 Of all the acts of terror and AGGRESSION in the world today, Muhammadan Muslims have the pride of being the number one in at least 105 countries in the world on FOUR continents.

    6 Muhammadan Muslim law, called the Sharia’, discriminates unreservedly against the following:

    a) All females (even be they the followers of Muhammad
    b) All UNBELIEVERS such as Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews etc
    c) All Homosexuals
    d) All sects of Muhammadan Muslims who do not follow their methods

    7 Muslims BURN and destroy the holy places of other religious groups such as Churches, Buddhist temples, Hindu shrines and synagogues without remorse.

    8 Muslims show nothing but UTTER CONTEMPT for the beliefs, property and lives of all those who do not believe as they do

    9 Muslims massacre, mutilate, rape and destroy the lives and holy places of other Muhammadan Muslims who do not follow the same path.

    10 Muslims in the Western Democracies, while hiding behind their Freedoms of Speech and Belief, declare in public and the media that they intend to turn the Christian Democracies into replicas of their DEPRAVED belief systems under SHARIA

    11 Most Muslims in the world – the so called ‘Silent Majority’ – RARELY demonstrate against these inhumane, depraved and sickening acts and behaviour conducted daily in their name and in the name of ‘Islam’.

    12 One can understand and sympathize with those Muhammadan Muslims who live under Islamic governments and live in fear of being in the opposition, but those who live in Democracies HAVE NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER in showing their disapproval, disgust and anger at those who are allegedly bringing Muhammadan Islam in DISREPUTE.

    Not ONCE in the last THIRTY years have any of them DEMONSTRATED anywhere in the democracies against the alleged Radicals/ Extremists shouting:

    NOT in Our NAME!

    13 It is one of the great ironies of history that it was Muhammad himself who said :
    “SILENCE MEANS CONSENT”, hence the silence of the followers of Muhammad in the West does mean that they CONSENT to what other Muslims are committing in their name and in the name of Muhammadan Islam and Allah.

    In fact and in reality, they have no choice since those that the media ERRONEOUSLY call ‘Islamic Radicals’ are actually the truest believers in the faith of Muhammadan Islam since they are ONLY following what the QURAN itself commands them to do in hundreds upon hundreds of verses:

    To force into Conversion, to Hate, to War, to Subjugate, to Slaughter, to Plunder, to Rape and to Enslave ALL those human beings who do not believe as they do. That is the remaining 80% of Humanity.

    If all the above items which any and all sane human beings are watching on TV, reading in the newspapers or listening to on the Radio DO NOT JUSTIFY being AFRAID of ISLAM, what DOES?

    Therefore it would be IRRATIONAL not to Fear Islam and or Muslims thus rendering Islamophobia a contradiction of terms; an OXYMORON

    Muhammadan Islam IS RADICAL, it has no SHADES.

    IQ al Ibn Q Rassooli
    Kafir & Proud!
    MAGA & DTS!

    • maghan says

      January 28, 2017 at 3:43 pm

      Just very disappointing the superficial knowledge these academics in religious knowledge acquire. One expects that any student of Christianity must have read St Aquinas’s works including his thoughts on Islam. Aquinas dismissed Muhammad and his followers as crazy men driven by sexual lust.

      Also there are works of Syrian religious figure, St. John of Damascus. He too denounced Islam as a hodgepodge of Judaism and Christianity debased by primitive and violent Arab customs.

    • Mary miller says

      January 28, 2017 at 4:52 pm

      Excellent! Now I just have to figure how to cut and paste as I would love to keep this in a permenant file. Thank you for the time you spent to post .

      • IQ al Rassooli says

        January 28, 2017 at 4:56 pm

        Mary Miller

        Glad you liked my article

        Most important of all is to SPREAD it to all you know and ask them to do the same

        The Chain Reaction would go NUCLEAR! The more Americans LEARN the worst for her enemies within and without

        IQ al Rassooli
        Kafir & Proud!
        MAGA & DTS!

  4. Pong says

    January 28, 2017 at 11:37 am

    One of those “studies” professor, who is trying to compensate his deficient knowledge with leftist propaganda. Many universities are Augean Stables and need Hercules to clean them. Studies should be banned from all universities and moved to the separate instututions, leaving the only subjects, which can be qualified as the science. Taxpayers money should be cut off from those institutions and Ph.D should not be given to the people, who are not real scientists. It makes me very angry that my Ph.D is equal to one given for some “gender studies”.

  5. Angemon says

    January 28, 2017 at 11:38 am

    Green and Considine sitting in a tree
    First comes “islamophobia”
    Then comes “imperialism”
    Then comes “Islam is not a monolith and I know some nice muslims so all muslims are nice”

  6. stan lee says

    January 28, 2017 at 1:24 pm

    Well, good for Green, the professor. Look around at colleges and universities today, and beehives of agreement with terrorism can be found. Not only found, but the young, impressionable secondary education students are ripe for worship of professor’s, teacher’s, and trainer’s opinions, for which their classes hang on every word uttered by these “educators,” the kids come to recognize that their grades depend upon agreement with the propaganda distributors who run the classes. That is where the marching snowflakes come from, and they are alienated, in many cases, from the adults on which they depend for sustenance. That, these snowflakes will take, but not parental advice given with the love of parents.
    These kids would rather pay homage to the non-familial powers who’ve taken over their lives, the “educators.”

  7. Giuseppe Valente says

    January 28, 2017 at 1:41 pm

    From Canada
    Fuck this asshole, Trudeau and Isalm
    I will not allow our soldiers who fought and died for freedom to go down in vain
    Fuck you again

  8. somehistory says

    January 28, 2017 at 2:24 pm

    He is essentially saying that he learned absolutely nothing from Christ…otherwise he wouldn’t credit islam for his *learning compassion and peace.*

    Of course, a person may learn from contrasting and comparing, but he has learned nothing… and it shows.

    He is tool of satan and his beast. Leading sheep astray.

  9. DFD says

    January 28, 2017 at 2:38 pm

    I wonder how much and in what form such – persons are being paid for. Regardless if they are secret converts, like Masud, or not.

    Once you have a foothold, in various committees or whatever, it’s not too difficult to promote your own.

  10. davej says

    January 28, 2017 at 4:18 pm

    Once you start from the principle of “Islamophobia” you will get everything else wrong too, as he does. This guy must be getting Saudi money, directly or indirectly.

  11. mortimer says

    January 28, 2017 at 4:27 pm

    Counterargument: ISLAM IS A POLITICAL IDEOLOGY…therefore it is NOT bigotry to criticize a political idea. For instance, it is NOT considered bigotry to criticize the Republican Party’s ideology or the Tea Party’s ideology or the Democrat Party ideology or the Conservative Party’s agenda or the NDP agenda. It is NOT a form of bigotry to criticize Hitler’s National Socialism or Maoist Communism. Islam is a political ideology, even though a theocratic ideology. It is therefore NOT bigotry to criticize the political ideology of political Islam…which by the way is set forth in the manuals of Sharia law.
    The Counterargument Points:
    1) Honest Conversation + Constructive Criticism about a political ideology. It cannot be denied that Muslims claim Islam is a supremacist political ideology.
    2) The counter-argument is against the term “Islamophobia”: analysis of political Islam is not a ‘mental illness’, but Islamo-political science.
    3) What’s wrong with the term is conflation of ‘Islam’ and ‘Muslims’: most Muslims are unacquainted with the political ideology of Islam and only partially observant of Sharia. They are half or even one-quarter Muslim and one-half or three-quarters secular, rather than predominantly ‘Islamic’.
    4) The definition is the conflation of ‘fear’ and ‘hatred’: to fear is not to hate. Fear may be justified. You cannot order people to not fear a hazard.
    5) The definition is a clumsy double conflation meant to sow confusion: Muslim persons are conflated with Islamic ideology and fear is conflated with hatred.
    6) What’s wrong with the term is that the first half doesn’t go with the second half. A logical term would be Muslim-phobia or Islamo-ideological analysis.
    7) A phobia cannot be reasoned away and should not be condemned since it is involuntary. It is a mental illness. We give pills to people with phobias. We don’t yell at them.
    8) Fear of Sharia punishments and jihad is reasonable. A fear of all spiders is not reasonable.
    9) Islamophobia is confused term and illogical.
    10) A term for bigotry exists: bigotry.
    11) Islamophobia is a Frankenstein portmanteau term.
    12) Liberals are afraid of being called ‘bigots’
    13) Islamophobia is a slanderous term that condemns 7 distinct groups: 1) haters of Islam 2) fearers of Islam 3) haters of Muslims 4) fearers of Muslims 5) constructive critics of Islam 6) condemners of terrorist 7) encouragers of Islamic reform
    14) The term conflates criticism of the doctrine as criticism of people
    15) The term conflates white guilt with criticism of Islam
    16) Conflation of criticism of doctrine with bigotry is intellectually ridiculous
    17) Straw man argument of bigotry is the excuse for virtue-signalling
    18) Ben Affleck refused balanced debate, refused to learn, refuse consider what he learned to make a solution. He is a bigot.
    19) Ben Affleck is a narrow-minded, orthodox globalist
    20) Islamophobia slur is a kabuki term to bypass and even close off debate, learning and solutions to difficult political questions such as the treatment of women, gays, cruel punishments, and religious totalitarianism.
    21) ‘Islamophobia’ slur is used to kill critical thought label it bigotry shield political Islam from analysis.

    Conclusion: the political science of political Islam is not a ‘phobia’, but rationalistic analysis. The term is an attempt to silence alternate opinions and freedom of expression. The term is meant to take away the voice of all who disagree with political Islam, whether ex-Muslims, Muslim reformists or those of another or no religion or civil libertarians who object to political Islam’s supremacism and draconian laws.

    • Mary miller says

      January 28, 2017 at 5:03 pm

      I love your posts. As soon as I see it is you, I know I am in for a good read. Only wish there were someway to save them for future reference without saving the entire article and every comment. Keep up the good work. You are really helping me on my talking points.

  12. warmac9999 says

    January 28, 2017 at 5:16 pm

    The most troubling aspect of the Christian appeasement of Islam is that such appeasement can only lead to the elimination of Christianity or world war.

  13. billybob says

    January 28, 2017 at 5:17 pm

    These people don’t even understand what the people they call “islamophobes” are. They think it is a prejudice like any other, against race or colour, for example. They think “islamophobes” go around hating Muslims and tearing off hijabs and scrawling anti-Muslim epitaphs on Mosques and burning Qurans.

    While a few indeed may be just plain old fashioned bigots and xenophobes, from my observation, this behaviour doesn’t come close to describing an “islamophobe”. It seems me that “islamophobes” in general are actually critical of Islam, and hatred of Muslims, if it exists, is only secondary to hatred of Islam. Furthermore, the expression of “islamophobia” is mostly verbal. It is expressed as a critique of the religious and political philosophy of Islam, and an expression of concern about where this ideology can lead.

    How different most “islamophobes” are from your run of the mill racists. If you ask a racist why he hates a particular race, he can’t give you a convincing argument, because there isn’t any. Race or skin colour does not have much if anything to do with what kind of person wears that skin. Skin colour is not a useful predictor to make decisions in advance with.

    For Green, I would recommend individual relationships with “islamophobes” as the antidote to what I call “Islamophobia-phobia”. He will come to lament the skewed media representations emphasizing “The islamophobe’s racism”, while there simply are not enough strong relationships in the West between “islamophobes” who are in the minority and the left progressive majority.

  14. Deidre says

    January 28, 2017 at 6:28 pm

    This is unique to Islam, in all of world history, and only shows the power of the antisemitc obsession. If it were not for this being a diversion from the antisemitic obsession, everyone would be treating Islam the same as the Old Testament has been treated for centuries, (that obsession too was a product of the same anti-Jewish obsession).

    they’re hanging on to one morsel the relatively brief period when Europe colonized the mideast, I guess at most between 1820 when the Brits empowered the Wahhabists, to the WW1 period, besides that it had only been Muslim empires doing the colonizing.

  15. Chris P Bacon says

    January 28, 2017 at 7:23 pm

    I don’t fear Muslims, I loathe them…and these dupes and dopes that are apologists for them are extremely dangerous and incoherent…no one is going to “guilt” me into changing my views. Muslims can enter the US but don’t expect special privileges and accommodations. You are no better than anyone else…in other words “your shit stinks too”

  16. More Ham Ed says

    January 28, 2017 at 7:35 pm

    The term “islamophobia” (lowercase be upon it) “was invented, deliberately, by a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, the International Institute for Islamic Thought, which is based in Northern Virginia.”

    Leftists push the thought control narrative that if you disagree, it must be a phobia of some kind (no disagreement is allowed).

    I wonder what drives islamo_REALISM:

    30205 deadly ISLAMIC terror attacks since 9/11.

    Could it have somethin’ to do w/ the unholy ko ‘ran?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s