Many left-wing progressive and Islamic political groups have quietly walked away from Islamic activist Linda Sarsour since her incendiary July 1 appeal for Muslims in America to declare jihad on elected President Donald Trump.
She is getting sharp-eyed criticism from experts on Islam for her call to jihad against Trump — and for her calls for Islamic self-segregation and loyalty to Allah only. But she is getting only tepid and perfunctory public support from her usual alliance of Islamic and progressive allies. …
The Washington Post has not posted any reported article defending her call for jihad but did print her evasive op-ed. Yet the most-liked comment response to her op-ed in the progressive paper declared:
As an atheist, I feel confident that i am able to voice my opinion to my peers without fear of reprisal. The same can not be said if i were in a Islam majority country. The current brand of Islam is the opposite of liberalism. I don’t want anyone calling for “Jihad” or holy war on anyone. Regardless of how a person meant it. Hundreds of millions have died and science has been stomped out in the name of Jihad.
The second-most approved comment said:
WAPO would not and should not accept editorials from David Duke. So why provide a legitimizing platform for Sarsour, who is equally hateful? …
The content of Sarsour’s speech is difficult for Americans or progressives to accept. It is neither a left-wing speech not a right-wing speech, but is instead a revivalist, fundamentalist Islamic speech, and it exposed her segregationist, theocratic and anti-modern agenda. …
The post-speech silence of her progressive allies is a strong contrast to a tsunami of soft-focus praise which Sarsour received in January for being our of four leaders in the “Women’s March” against the newly elected President Donald Trump.
Twenty years too early Linda.
hat-tip Stephen Neil