Remember when authorities wanted us to believe this was a random incident of “workplace violence”?
The story of what led to the tragedy at the Inland Regional Center last week is getting stranger by the day. The latest twist sees the FBI planning to take Syed Farook’s friend Enrique Marquez into custody on undefined charges. According to authorities, Marquez – who purchased the rifles used in the attack – planned a previous attack with Farook in 2012. The details of that attack are not yet known, but the mere existence of a plot three years ago refutes most of what we heard in the first few days.
These were not, as authorities first told us, lone wolves. Or, to put it another way: How many people have to collaborate on a terror plot before the word “lone” loses all relevant meaning?
They were not, however, agents of the Islamic State either. If it is true that both Farook and Tashfeen Malik were radicalized as of 2012, they found their way to this horrific ideology long before ISIS was even on the map. And the road that led investigators to Marquez is not the only strand of this thread they are following. From Fox News:
Investigators were also examining the digital footprint left by the shooters, who tried to destroy their computer hard drives and cell phones prior to carrying out the attack. Investigators tell Fox News the data that has been recovered shows that Syed Farook posted multiple messages online expressing support for Islamist groups like Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, while also expressing hatred for Israel. Investigators have also expressed concern that Farook may have been in contact with other terror groups.
How far does the web extend? How many people are currently stonewalling the FBI?
Are we really supposed to still believe that the family knew nothing?
Moreover, how can Democrats continue to push for Syrian refugees to come into the United States in light of all that we’ve learned? We don’t even know what’s going on right here in the homeland. In fact, we can barely even discuss it because these liberals are more concerned about offending Muslims than they are about making sure Americans are safe. We’re talking about protecting their feelings; they’re talking about how to attack us.
Religious freedom, we were told in no uncertain terms this summer, only goes so far. For instance, you can’t cite religious freedom when you want to avoid baking a cake for a gay wedding.
But when it comes to Muslims, there appear to be no such restrictions. Plot away, fellas.
For sure, to say that “not every Muslim is a terrorist” is an understatement of grand proportions. But why is it that every time a Muslim gets in front of a microphone after one of these attacks, they seem much more interested in condemning offensive statements than condemning terrorism? Muslims have had 14 long years to prove to the American people that they won’t tolerate this crap, and they have failed spectacularly. Is it because, when you get right down to it, they simply cannot say anything that would allay the worst of our suspicions?
A little bit of heartlessness is not the worst thing in the world. Somewhere along the line, we decided that “hate speech” is worse than murder, even when it is murder on an epic scale. Once we get past that colossal myth, maybe we can start uncovering these terrorists before they strike.