… has ruled that ISIS propagandist Hoda Muthana is not an American citizen and can’t come back here? The New York Times, which runs a Pietà image of her with her child, calls it a “surprise ruling,” but if you read this blog you’re not surprised. There’s reasonably compelling evidence, in this case, that as the daughter of a Yemeni diplomat she never held actual American citizenship.
[Judge Reggie] Walton expressed sympathy for [Muthana’s father], but he ruled that there was enough evidence that Hoda Muthana was born while her father still had diplomatic status…
Assuming she can obtain Yemeni citizenship, she will be much happier there, because, just like ISIS, they still have slaves in that country.
November 15th, 2019 at 8:37AM
The Caliphate still has enclaves in various suburbs of Paris and London, as well as other non-American places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and of course, the NYT newsroom. She will surely find refuge in one of those places.
November 15th, 2019 at 9:02AM
tp: I’m sure you’ll find Caliphate sympathizers everywhere you mention except of course the NYT. And there’s nothing non-
American about any of the non-American places you mention.
If you want to go after a newspaper, the Washington Post is a better choice. But even there, the scandal of the dumb headline writer at the Wash Post is just that – a scandal about a dumb headline writer.
November 15th, 2019 at 9:06PM
“In 2014, Ms. Muthana withdrew from college and used her tuition money to pay for travel to Syria. Once there, she promoted ISIS’s ideology on social media and called on Muslims in America to carry out terrorist attacks. But since her capture she has apologized and said she wanted to come home, including in an interview with The New York Times.”
I wonder what I would have to do to get such sympathetic coverage by the Times?
November 15th, 2019 at 11:25PM
Easy, JND. Become a woman. From the Pieta photograph of Muthana in the NYT to the words missing from that quote about her, it’s all about the way we simply can’t deal with murderous women. The passage should read:
“In 2014, Ms. Muthana lied to her parents, withdrew from college, and stole the tuition money they gave her to pay for travel to Syria. Once there, she promoted ISIS’s ideology on social media and called on everyone in the world sympathetic to the Caliphate to kill large numbers of Americans and others in the most savage ways imaginable. She sang the praises of the Charlie Hebdo killers. She probably took part in the enslavement of Yazidi women. Since her surrender (she was among the last holdouts among the most fanatic ISIS followers) she has apologized and said she wanted to come home, in interviews with anyone who will listen. Throughout these interviews she steadfastly refuses to take personal responsibility for what she has done, blaming it all on other people.”
Whether it’s this chick or Marsha Edwards (about whom, as I predicted, we’ve not and will not hear a subsequent word – except for a recent report that she was perfectly sober when she pumped five shots into her defenseless son and then turned to her defenseless daughter and shot her three times), people seem constitutionally unable to treat savage women in the same way they treat savage men. It took Amy Bishop murders/bombings/beatings over decades for anyone to take her seriously as a crime suspect. Not until she made the mistake of leaving a few people alive in a mass killing of her fellow professors did anyone think to consider that this little thing might be a killer. Edwards was celebrated alongside her victims at a group funeral. I wonder how her victims would have felt about that.
So if you’d like to do the deed and enjoy the sympathy of the world, go full girl.