Last Friday, the Justice Department issued an affidavit charging Dawud Sharif Abdul Khaliq (David Wright), 25, of Everett, Massachusetts, and Nuh Amriki aka Nuh al Andalusi (Nicholas Rovinski), of Warwick, Rhode Island, with plotting to behead me, and then changing their plans to target Boston police.
In all the coverage, the media refers to these Islamic jihadis as Wright and Rovinski. They never use their Islamic names. More scrubbing, more obfuscating.
According to the affidavit, "Wright, Rovinski and Rahim [that is, Usaama Rahim, the third jihadi who was killed as he attempted to murder police officers in Boston] conspired to attack and behead a person referred to in the affidavit as 'Intended Victim-1,' a resident of New York, who had organized a conference in Garland, Texas, on May 3, 2015, featuring cartoons depicting the Islamic Prophet Muhammad."
Reuters, if you recall, said I made it up: "Activist says Boston beheading plot targeted her; police express doubt."
I am still awaiting Reuters' correction and apology. But I don't think it will come. The media want to make it all about me – "controversial," "provocative," "inciteful" – as if getting rid of me, rids us of the problem.
The left, the RINOS and the Islamic apologists say I am "provocative" for standing against Shariah.
Were the Jewish children murdered in cold blood by a devout Muslim at a Jewish Day School in France "provocative"?
Was Daniel Pearl "provocative"?
Were the shoppers at the kosher deli, Hyper Cacher, who were massacred by the jihadi Amedy Coulibaly, "provocative"?
Are the Yazidi and non-Muslim girls who have been gang-raped and sold into slavery "provocative"?
Is the existence of Israel "provocative"?
Are the millions of non-Muslims being ethnically cleansed across the Middle East "provocative"?
Were the World Trade Center towers "provocative"?
Were the soldiers in Fort Hood, Texas, "provocative'?
Was beheading victim Colleen Hufford in Oklahoma "provocative"?
The media have been avoiding reality since 9/11, and now we are suffering the consequences of their avoiding reality. There is a problem in Islam, with or without Pamela Geller. By virtue of this jihad murder plot against me, I have become the proxy for every freedom-loving American who refuses to submit to violent intimidation.
I am the Islamic State's No. 1 target because I am, unlike most of the mainstream media, refusing to bow down to them and submit to their dictates. They want to make an example out of me to frighten the rest of the U.S. into silence and submission – that is, to frighten those who have not already submitted.
This is not about me. This is about whether the U.S. will stand for freedom or submit and cower before violent intimidation. They targeted me for violating Shariah blasphemy laws. They mean to kill everyone who doesn't do their bidding and abide by them voluntarily.
This is a showdown for American freedom. Will we stand against this savagery, or bow down to them and silence ourselves?
The one thing that's being ignored that came out of Garland is that ISIS is not just coming. It's here. Islamic terrorism is here. Americans were targeted for slaughter on our home soil. Islamic terrorism is here, and we are thwarting attacks on a now weekly sometime daily basis.
Will the media realize what's at stake, and that their heads are next, or continue to target me because they hate my message of freedom? And why isn't the Obama administration protecting Americans? Why is he providing cover for savages who are hell-bent on destroying American freedoms and those who stand for it? Why are they importing hundreds of thousands of Muslims from jihad nations?
The personal costs in this fight are staggering. Please donate to our security fund because I have no intention of backing down: We have two major initiatives coming up. Donate here.Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.