Well, I made this mistake, thinking that someone was, 'high toned' as they were in 'anger' on the tone scale when in fact they were just, um, angry. Totally saps one's energy.
Are you sure about the lack of prosecution being because of religious exemption? Suppose in the US it would be the Patriot Act which governs the area. Although I haven't read the Act, would be really doubtful that there are religious exemptions.
You're right. But then again, you're not a blindly corrupt government government employee, apathetic and marching lockstep with American idealogue politicians like Obama and the ultra-left wing media.
Until the current American administration is replaced by something dramatically better, the US government will continue to turn a blind eye to the rampant religious terrorism virally spreading around the globe--and right here in the United States itself. For
Example: The radical Muslim terrorist Nidal Milik Hasan who went on a murderous shooting spree at the military base Fort Hood in 2009. Screaming "Allah Akbar!" Hasan murdered 13 soldiers, injuring more than 30 others. Despite the public and political outcry to label this a "Terrorist Attack", Obama directed law enforcement agencies (via the Department of Justice) to characterize it as "workplace violence". This, despite the voluminous evidence uncovered after the massacre of Hasan's ties and allegiance to al-Qaeda and its senior terrorist recruiter/planner Anwar al-Awaiki. Hasan confessed his intent to murder as many soldiers as possible because of his duty to his Muslim beliefs, the Koran and the slaying of infidels. There was direct evidence corroborating his having direct conversations with al_Awaiki. Additional volumes of proof was located on Hasan's computer of his radical jihadi beliefs. Again, Hasan proudly boasted about his terrorism for Allah and al-Qaeda after the murders. Yet, the ideology of "there are no Islamic terrorists" (aka "
those aren't the Islamic terrorists you're looking for") won the day because the person occupying the White House made the crime instead Islamophobia, rather than murder.
There are scores of other examples where the US suffered domestic terrorism by radical Islamic terrorist(s), where they were
labeled as something else--and not prosecuted under terrorism laws. Just recently, for example, there were two Muslim terrorists who launched an assault rifle attack against a "Draw Mohammed Cartoon" event in Garland, Texas. These were two ISIS recruits (radical Muslims) sent to terrorize and murder as many convention attendees as possible. They were directed to this event because the Koran declared death to anyone who dare draw or depict the prophet Muhammed--exactly the same as what occurred in the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo, where Islamic terrorists stormed the satirical magazine and 16 innocent people were murdered over two days. Likewise, the US media and Justice Department refused to call the Garland attack "terrorism".
To rational people, all of these outrageous acts of terrorism are obvious and need to be swiftly prosecuted according to the special anti-terrorism laws--but they are not. In fact, instead of vigorously prosecuting them, the US government is hosting White House events where known radical Muslims are invited to speak. And the Justice Department has begun shutting down local law enforcement efforts to gather intelligence on radical Mosques in the US because it is "Islamophobia". Much like airport security screeners are not allowed to pay special attention to younger men from known Islamic countries--because it is "profiling". Rather, security screeners are instructed to only RANDOMLY stop and question/search travelers. Thus, the screeners must ignore the suspicious acting ones if the "random" selection instead lands on a 95 year old American great-grandmother. The great-grandmother is the one that receives the scrutiny because there must never be "profiling" (i.e. common sense, pattern recognition, et al) according to the ultra-left idealogues.
