All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 31, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:18
December 31, 2015, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Buck Sexton here, very excited to be joining you for hour two today on the EIB.
Number here is 800 282882.
Also you can send me your thoughts at Facebook.com/slash Buck Sexton.
I've got it open.
You can comment, go back and forth.
Just try to keep it civil, if that's all right.
It's always a nice little request to keep it civil if we can.
Doesn't seem to work when I ask, but still fun to put it out there.
I got an Islamophobia alert for you all.
Now, before I can get into what the specific alert is, let's talk a bit about Islamophobia.
Islamophobia is a term coined specifically to silence discussion, criticism, debate about Islam, which is a faith tradition and ideology, a system of politics and a system of law all wrapped into one.
But the moment you begin to dig a little bit into it, try to get a sense of what the implications could be for Muslim countries of an increase in, say adherence to Sharia, or if you're talking about in this country, uh how we deal with the U.S. Muslim population and what we're doing with regard to our efforts to combat radical Islamic jihad.
You are very likely going to run afoul of the or the well, at least the people who deploy this term.
They will call you Islamophobic.
Specifically, of course, also meant to tie itself to homophobia.
So essentially indicates you're a hater.
You're a spiteful, hateful person, and it's meant to make it seem like you also have an irrational fear.
I mean, if you're talking about jihadists who want to cut off heads and blow up buildings and murder lots of innocent people, including many, many Muslims.
It would seem to me that sometimes we're not talking about an irrational fear at all.
We're just trying to have a discussion about a complicated system of belief, ideology, politics, law, custom, everything else.
But Islamophobia is meant to silence you.
It's meant to get you to not talk about it, meant to make sure that you stick to the talking points because it's they're trying to make it as close as possible to calling you a racist, which means that you are ostracized from society.
You are pushed out.
You are no longer worthy of your job, of having friends, of being respected, of being talked to.
That's the power of now being called a racist, or that's the power the other side wields when they call you a racist.
And there are efforts underway, not just from these front groups, care and others, but there are efforts underway from and have been for years now, from the left, from the Democrat media to push as much as possible to use Islamophobia as a in a in the same way that we use the term racism, right?
It just all of a sudden the music stops.
You know, no more discussion, no more debate, no more talking.
You don't want to be Islamophobic.
Okay.
But so we have a case of Islam a case rather here that they point to and they say indicates actually no no, I'm sorry.
I have two cases for you.
It's kind of a special day.
Two cases for you of what would be termed Islamophobia.
Let's break these down a little bit.
We had a year in which discussion of radical Islam has reached sort of a new intensity because of major jihadist terrorist attacks abroad and on U.S. soil.
And inevitably, whenever whenever this happens, whenever there's a major attack, the media runs right to the playbook, and the playbook is Islamophobia, screaming it from all the rooftops, making sure that we're always on guard against the backlash that never really comes, that never materializes because that's not who we are.
The American people don't go out and harm or denigrate or attack people because of what they believe, how they look.
That's not what we do.
It's not who we are.
But the media thinks they have to grandstand.
They have to remind us about this all the time anyway.
I, for one, am particularly sick of it.
But let's get into these cases, because they're that's what they always want to talk about, the specific cases.
The FBI, and this is from the Blaze.com, also where I work.
I'm on the Blaze Radio, the Buck Sexton Show.
This is from theBlaze.com.
Police say a man wrapped bacon on the doors of a Los Vegas mosque last weekend, and now the incident is being investigated by the FBI as a possible hate crime.
Now, this is more an issue of my uh my dis uh disapproval of the whole notion of hate crime in general.
I think there are crimes.
I think that you can have enhancements in the crime based upon the circumstances.
But hate crime is inherently very, very politicized.
Right?
Leaving bacon on somebody's door or porch is gross.
We're talking about raw bacon here.
Obviously, cooked bacon in the proper circumstance on a plate consumed for breakfast, or any meal for that matter.
It really shouldn't just be relegated to breakfast.
We should have that discussion another time.
But yeah, raw meat left in front of a church.
I mean, this is a a buffoonish thing to do, but it's littering.
It's not a hate crime, is it?
This is now a federal issue.
The FBI now investigates if you leave uncooked pork product in front of a religious site.
Uh I have to say that this standard is certainly not applied to Christian sites.
This standard is only applied in this context because we're constantly on Islamophobia alert.
They call it a one of the mosque's founding members says they're very concerned now and perceive it as a quote, deliberate attack on their religion.
What if he called that a prank?
What if he said it was a joke?
Now, should he have to pay a fine for littering?
Should he have to clean it up?
Sure.
A hate crime, though, huh?
The FBI is going to investigate this one.
We now have federal law enforcement officers.
We're looking into a guy for leaving an uncooked pork product on a building open to the public.
This was captured on video.
This is one of these one of these instances they'll point to as Islamophobia, and they've kept a running tally.
In fact, I'll get into what that number will be.
But when you look into these incidents, it's very interesting.
They like to refer to them in the sort of broad spectrum sense of, well, this is the tally.
There have been there have been X amount of Islamophobic incidents.
And then you find out, well, what qualifies as Islamophobic, or even better, an incident.
And in some cases, it's, well, a person somewhere in this country of 320 million people looked at a woman who is wearing hijab, the uh Islamic covering, usually a head scarf, although there's many variations on it, looked at her funny or said something sent something mean.
And this is now a national this becomes something that is a national news story.
We all have to talk about this.
We have to sit around and say, oh my gosh, how could this be?
Uh eventually somebody will pull out the FBI's statistics when it comes to hate crimes by religion will show that you are far far more likely, uh, far more likely to see attacks against somebody or or incidents against somebody of one kind or another because they are Jewish than because they are Muslim.
That's just the numbers.
That's just the truth.
And yet these incidents get this very special attention.
And we're told that we have to be constantly on guard for this backlash that's coming.
Well, here's one of these stories that caught a lot of attention initially, and then it just sort of faded away.
Didn't really capture the same level of interest from the media and the left after it was initially reported.
Here's what was first reported.
All right.
So there was an individual who on Christmas Day set fire.
Someone set fire to a mosque on Christmas Day.
Oh my symbolism here.
Very clear.
It's Christmas, and someone's out there, you know, waging their own one man religious war, or it could be a woman, but one man religious war against Islam by lighting a mosque on fire.
Letting a mosque on fire is arson, a very serious crime, right?
Leaving bacon on someone's front step is not nice and littering, and you shouldn't do that, but a mosque on fire is a serious crime.
This was reported, of course, with uh with gusto by the leftist media because as you see, now we have we've been telling you it's coming.
Remember, in the aftermath of Paris, many of us sit around and say, okay, are they going to use the refugee flow in Europe to sneak in, jihadists?
Are they going to use refugees coming to this country to sneak?
That's not the discussion the media wants to have.
The media wants you to sit around and berate yourself.
Feel bad about yourself as an American for the wave of Islamophobia that is descending across the country.
That's what we're supposed to focus on.
And you say, well, what are these incidents?
And you'll hear about a mean phone call, a nasty look.
In fact, they've been saying, and I'll read you some headlines in a bit that this is worse.
It's worse now than it was after 9-11.
Oh.
Is that so?
Back to this mosque fire on Christmas Day.
Arson against a Muslim site of worship in Houston.
And well, it was reported on, for example, by Salon, one of these very, very leftist very leftist sites out there, says, amid escalating anti-Muslim violence, suspect arrested for allegedly setting Houston Mosque on fire.
So they got to preface that.
This stuff is happening, man.
This stuff is happening.
The Islamophobia is real, man.
You gotta watch out for this.
It's everywhere.
Don't you see?
But then when we look into some of these cases, what do we find out?
Well, in this case, there was there was a team of thirty investigators working around the clock looking into the cause of this fire, which was found to have multiple points of origin, pretty clearly arson.
But what they found out was that the individual who set this fire was a frequent attendee at the mosque and was himself a Muslim.
Oh.
So what's the I'm I'm confused here.
I thought this was evidence of anti-Muslim bigotry and bias.
That's the way it was initially reported.
This was yet another data point, one of the biggest ones we've seen in weeks, arson against a mosque.
Set by allegedly, a frequent attendee at said mosque, who a quote, motive has not yet been determined for.
They can't determine the motive, huh?
Well, I can tell you this, that the media only has a few paths here.
They have denial and ignore, right?
Deny either deny that this kind of happened or ignore that it happened, just pretend because the story was, oh, this was this was going to be we were going to be hearing about this one for weeks, right?
Because this is the rising tide of intolerance, and also, of course, the conflation of any criticism or discussion or debate or intellectual pursuits surrounding Islam with being a bigot or racist.
This is an important part of what the left's agenda is here.
Because for some on the left, it's just a question of using Islam as a counterbalance to those patriotic Bible thumping American types, you know.
That's why they're so constantly on the on the uh defensive in favor of Islam and and taking their part in all of these public debates and discussions.
You got a guy who's a Muslim, he sets fire to a mosque, the story's gonna die away.
So that's one option.
There's the denial and ignore.
There's the uh I guess self-hating Islamophobia, right?
That that we have this is really our fault because as a society, as a culture, we have so denigrated this one faith tradition that it makes people who are in fact adherents of it question it all and they just can't take it anymore and they set a fire and they commit a felony crime and against fellow Muslims.
That's a tough narrative to sell, but I'm sure there are some in the media who'll find a way to try to push it.
That's another one that they could go for.
Or the one I know they won't go for is it possible?
Is it just maybe feasible that this hyperventilating about the coming scourge of Islamophobia coast to coast across the country in every town and city?
Maybe that this is overstated, and maybe this is misdirection.
And maybe if they have to point to incidents that are falsified, falsified Islamophobia moments.
There aren't really that many of them.
Maybe we don't need to get so hysterical about this.
Is that just possible?
Could we explore that together for a few moments?
I think we should.
This is Buck Sexton in Farush Limbaugh.
I'll be back right after this break.
Buck Sexton here in Farush Limbaugh, 800-28282.
You can send me your thoughts at Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton, please do.
I'm also a uh host at The Blaze.
Go to the Blaze dot com slash radio for more on that.
Learn about the Buck Sexton show.
Uh we're talking a bit about Islamophobia here.
Cases, incidents of Islamophobia.
You have the uh the raw bacon, the baconing of a of a door of a mosque door, uh investigated as a possible hate crime, you know, federal criminal statutes and penalties apply in that instance.
We have a a quote, devout Muslim who was charged with setting a mosque on fire on Christmas Day in Houston.
Media is not really going to touch that one much more.
But they're always looking for this stuff.
And especially right after a terrorist attack happens, terrorist attack like the one we just suffered in San Bernardino, California.
Whenever that happens, then all of a sudden they circle the wagons, not with the American people to try to figure out what we can do for more successful counterterrorism, for uh the prevention of these attacks.
No, no.
The media's foremost fixation is to make sure that there's not this again, the backlash, the backlash that they always say is going to happen, and yet it does not happen.
Sites like uh Vox, Huff Post, and the New York Times, some of those you may know, some of those, you know, hopefully you don't.
But uh they have headlines like this.
It's not just Trump.
Islamophobia in America is spiraling out of control.
Why is uh this is another one.
Why is Islamophobia worse now than just after 9-11?
A researcher explains.
Oh, well, Mr. Researcher, looking forward to that.
It's not just Ahmed Muhammad, anti-Muslim bigotry in America is out of control, another headline.
And then is Islamophobia the new hysteria?
There's an interesting one.
That question could go any number of ways.
And there was a site that has a running list of shameful Islam.
This was, I think, on Salon, it might have been on Huff Post, I don't know.
It all blends together in the sort of leftist soup.
A running list of sh uh shameful Islamophobic acts since the Paris attacks.
We are in a country of 320 million people, everybody.
And yet there are so few acts of true and uh and criminal and nasty anti-Islamic bigotry that you don't have to look hard or wait long for instances of these cases being inflated.
In some cases, they're conjured up out of thin air entirely.
But even if they didn't happen, there's still a teachable moment.
You see, they're there they're still that that that put that in quotes, by the way.
They're still raising awareness.
You see, if you're a Muslim and you burn down your own mosque, you can turn around and say, Yeah, but you're persecuted because people burn down mosques.
And there's not really a disconnect there for much of the media.
They go, yeah.
Maybe in this case it wasn't true, but once again, I think the definition of Hutzbah, right?
Burning down your own mosque and then saying that you're persecuted because people are burning down mosques.
It's sad to me that many Americans seem intent, many leftists and progressives seem intent on believing that their fellow Americans, uh, that their fellow Americans are in fact the real threat, the real terrorist threat, even as well.
You'll see think pieces out there, although I think calling them think pieces gives us gives them far too much credit.
Think pieces about who's the real terrorist threat.
And they'll do a comparison of gun violence versus terrorist violence, and this is what they'll put out there, all of it so that they can distract, deflect, convince you that the threat is either inflated from the global jihad,
uh, or the real threat is from Bob next door, not somebody who just arrived here from a foreign country who brings with him or her a foreign ideology of jihad and uh violence and as part of a uh a death cult.
That's that's not what they want to focus on.
They want to focus on their next door neighbor, because that's where the real worry is.
I mean, if you were to poll the New York Times editorial board, for example, what's the bigger menace?
Radical Islam, what's the bigger menace in America?
Ask the New York Times editorial board.
Bigger menace.
Radical Islam or pro-life Christian evangelicals.
What do you think their answer would be?
I think you'd know.
Now, the administration has been particularly adept at message control here.
Not adept in the sense that we don't see it, but adept in the sense that they manipulate public perception very, very well, specifically surrounding these events.
And we saw it right after San Bernardino with the delay and then the press conference and care was out there and media went into full blown Islamophobia prevention mode.
But I want to talk a bit about how this administration does this, how they have shaped perception about terrorism, not just this year, but while Obama's been commander in chief, all intended to try and convince us that it's not really a big threat.
We don't need to worry.
They've got this under control.
There are other places we should be looking for the threat.
More coming up in just a minute.
Yes, indeed, Buck Sexton here.
Thank you so much for tuning in.
Thank you for staying with me.
800-282-2882.
You're on the EIB.
We'll be taking some calls in a minute.
But first, the Obama terrorism slow roll.
Let's talk about how this works.
And also you could apply this to the Benghazi situation back in 2012 as well, but here's how it goes.
You wait and delay on these in the aftermath of one of these jihadist attacks.
You make sure that the media is going to all fall in line with you on this, and they promise that they're not going to jump to any conclusions, and you can't jump to any conclusions.
And it's all about well, we let's not let's not leap to motive here.
We don't know.
You know, whether talking about Fort Hood, the guy's running around yelling a lahu Akbar, he's shooting his fellow soldiers, but you know, we don't know.
You talked about how he is a supporter of suicide terrorism in front of people publicly, but we don't know.
Chattanooga.
I mean, if I asked you off the top of your head to think of some of the mass casualty attacks, jihadist mass casualty attacks, both attempted and perpetrated on U.S. soil during Barack Obama's tenure in office, you'd have to really sort of think about it for a second.
Because, yeah, of course, Paris and San Bernardino, those are recent, those are mass casualty attacks, and you'll think about those.
But then if you think a little more, you'll get to uh Chattanooga, for example, you'll get to Garland, you'll get to Ford Hood, and if you think even beyond that, you'll perhaps recall some of the uh averted disrupted terrorist plots on U.S. soil, various arrests.
This is happening, this has happened dozens of times, right?
People that are either plotting on behalf of ISIS as either a lone wolf or a lone uh lunatic to try and attack American interests in the name of jihad.
You think about it, you go, well, there's actually been a lot of these things.
And one frustration, by the way, for those of us who uh go on television uh uh or go on radio or work in the media in some capacity and try to speak the truth about these things, is that you never get when you go on, right, and you say, as a former terrorism analyst for the CIA, I'm pretty sure this is terrorism.
Now, a lot of you are saying, uh, yeah, buddy, you don't have to have worked the CI to know that this stuff is terrorism and it's jihadist terrorism, and this was done either on behalf of ISIS or Al-Qaeda's and you're totally right.
But let's keep in mind that there are many who go on there, oh I was uh, you know, this is all General So-and-So says that uh he's not sure yet.
You know, you get some of these guys who go on TV, and you go, really?
Not sure yet.
Former senior counterterrorism official, by the way, one of the sort of fancy terms of art that are deployed for uh the the TV punditry class, they'll go on TV as well, oh, it's not not clear.
I can't say it's clear at this point that this guy running around choosing specifically U.S. military targets with a background of radical Islamic extremism and uh yelling alakwakbars, you should I'm not sure.
We don't want to jump to any conclusions.
But they'll say this stuff with a straight face.
And it's frustrating that somebody who does this and goes on TV and says, No, this is definitely terrorism, it's terrorism right away.
You get called an Islamophobe and a bigot.
In some cases, depending on what station you're on or what what show you're on, you might even catch a little uh little bit of guff, a little bit of a little bit of nastiness from the person on the other side, if it's a point-counter point situation, right?
And then later on, after the Obama administration's dragged the whole thing out, we've all had to wait for quite a while before we can know whether in fact this is terrorism officially speaking or not, right?
Well, the FBI hasn't told us at all.
I guess in that case, we don't know.
No, no.
We know.
But when it finally comes out, and the DOJ and the Obama administration belatedly agree, or I should say, confirm what people like me and many others say.
You know, I never get the emails or the messages on Facebook or the uh opportunity TV.
No one ever brings you on to say, well, you know, you were right about that one, and maybe we shouldn't delay these things endlessly.
Maybe we shouldn't constantly try to hide the ball on this and pretend that we don't know what we know.
You never get the opportunity to revisit it.
You know, you never get the, yeah, I feel bad about calling you a bigot when you're 100% correct.
That uh calling you an Islamophobe, eh, that might have been a little harsh.
Nope, they will not.
They will not do that, they will not tell you that.
They will move on to the next story, and they'll pretend that this never happened.
It would be nice if they would change this up a little bit, but there is a playbook here.
There is a strategy, and it's one that is used for explicitly political purposes.
And as you know, the Democratic Party thrives on division on the basis of race, ethnicity, uh, ethnicity, religion, you name it.
Anything, any way they can uh slice up the American people into different groups, they will do that.
Any way they can, they will.
And while that's happening, they also have to protect the regime.
The reputation of the Obama administration, specifically when it comes to counterterrorism, and of course the terrorist attacks have happened on U.S. soil, because people think that this White House has a sort of strange reluctance to speak the truth on this.
And they can't really be blamed for having a moment of pause when the president goes in front of the United Nations, for example, and says that the future does not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.
A strange thing to say.
It's not whether it's true or untrue.
It's just why does the president feel the need to say this?
But more than that, the president has gotten very lucky on some of these issues and gotten a lot of help from the media on some of these issues.
I am not far right now from uh Times Square, and I'll be talking to you about the massive security precautions the NYPD and others are engaging here in Times Square later on in the show.
But there was, of course, the Times Square bomber, Faisal Shazad, who just didn't build the bomb properly, otherwise he might have killed dozens, hundreds maybe of people while President Obama was commander in chief.
That was just luck on our side.
That was nothing else.
There was Farouk Abdul Matalab, the underwear bomber, who would have blown up a jet on Christmas Day.
Obama's first year in office.
Also, again, it was luck in that instance.
But you look at all the lone wolf attacks, the disrupted attacks, those giving material support to ISIS, those looking to join ISIS, and yeah, we have a real problem here.
The American people recognize that.
And the polling shows that the polling shows that concerns about terrorism now are far outpacing many other things that in the last twelve months had been the number one issue.
And they don't trust the administration, not only they don't trust the administration to speak honestly about this to the American people, but to also handle the issue of jihadist terrorism, whether it is spawned specifically by ISIS and its affiliates, or it's just somebody who's decided to franchise out the jihad for themselves.
The President Obama has for quite some time now gotten a bit of a pass on much of this.
Media has been very quick to, as I said, point the finger about Islamophobia, to point the finger about any number of things, and to draw this out and delay it, because for example, a headline within the first twelve hours of San Bernardino that says two Muslim jihadists murder 14, uh murder 14, and wound dozens more at a Christmas party in California, biggest mass casualty terrorist attack on U.S. soil.
Well, if you include the unborn child uh killed at Fort Hood, it's 14 as well.
But since Fort Hood and before that, since 911.
Right?
That's a headline that sticks.
That's a headline that people will remember.
It's a story that will have greater potency.
It will linger longer in your mind.
When you go back and you think what terrorist attacks have happened, well, President Obama's been in office.
You have to really think about it.
I mean, they just told us a couple of weeks ago, I think it was, that Chattanooga, well, yeah, yeah, that was that was radicalized jihad, yeah.
Yeah.
We knew right away.
But San Bernardino took a number of days, and the president, of course, initially focused on gun control.
Oh, he's still focusing on gun control, by the way.
Politico, I see here reporting on executive actions expected next week.
The president's going to push to quote make progress on the issue of gun control.
We'll have to talk about that.
Among other things, by the way.
This is Buck Sexton for Rush Limbaugh.
Much more coming.
Stay right with me.
I'll be back.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh.
More on me at the Blaze.com/slash Buck Sexton.
You can download my podcast there daily.
Please do.
Would be much obliged.
I mentioned, and I just wanted to give you the details on it right before the break, and then we'll get into some calls here.
That President Obama, of course, I mean, you know, it's happy new year, everybody.
Obama wants to take away your guns.
One goes with the other, right?
I mean, this is like champagne and funny hats with glitter, and Obama wants to take away your guns.
These things all go together.
Uh Politico here reporting that Obama's going to unveil curbs on gun sellers, and the executive action expected next week will be part of the president's new year push to make progress on long stalled programs before the presidential election heats up.
This is once again, this is a what is this about the gun show loophole, yeah.
Uh this is according to gun industry insiders and others familiar with the proposals.
The changes include requiring an expanded number of small-scale gun sellers to be licensed and therefore conduct background checks whenever selling a weapon.
This wouldn't close the so-called gun show loophole, though it has the potential to narrow it.
End quote.
Oh, yeah, sorry.
Also, the administration is expected to impose tighter rules for reporting guns that get lost or stolen on their way to a buyer.
Yep.
This will do absolutely nothing to stop gun violence.
This will do nothing to certainly stop terrorism, right?
Because there was that whole remember that discussion that was happening about the no fly list and guns?
Because that's going to stop the terrorists from getting their hands on guns, as you know, what happened in San Bernardino, straw purchaser.
And they weren't on the no fly list anyway.
And even if they had been on the no-fly list, a straw purchase would have gotten around it.
But this is never really about controlling guns to stop violence.
For the Obama administration, for the elites in this country, for the left, I have to tell you gun control is really about social signaling.
It's to show that they're the right kind of people, and you're the wrong kind of people.
There is an antipathy for people who own guns.
People who own guns are more likely to vote Republican, be Christians who go to church.
There's any number of things.
And so they're really just doing this to show their disdain for gun owners.
Because that's the kind of stuff that gets the base, the left base excited.
This won't do anything to solve anything.
But it's not meant to.
It's just meant to show, yeah, see, we don't like those gun owners either.
Brought to you by the Obama administration.
All right, let's take some calls.
Mark in San Jose, California.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh show.
You are speaking to Buck Sexton.
What's up?
Hi, but great point you just made.
Hey, I want regarding that.
I I want to draw upon your expertise and experience with terrorism.
I've noticed there's an astonishing correlation between all these lone wolf terrorists.
Do we see after leave that Chattanooga, the Sarnes, the uh just every one of them has a past experience of drug abuse, and I was wondering what research is being done with drug abuse and mental illness and terrorism.
It doesn't seem like we're addressing the core of what could be behind all this.
Well, I'm sure there's look, it's uh it's a very big government and it has no shortage of people looking into and analyzing terrorism, that I can tell you.
Um I'm sure there's some research being done on uh on some of the aspects, some of the things you raise, literally just because of the size uh and scope of the counterterrorism bureaucracy in this country, which is enormous.
I mean, if you get inside the belly of that visa I've been, you will see very quickly that it's a very large there's a very large machinery devoted to all of this.
Um let me expand on that if you don't mind.
Uh uh I mean we have the the SARNS, they were uh abusing Marijuana like nobody's business, and they commit this terrorist act.
We have Timothy McVay, who was not Islamic and committing a terrorist act.
We have after Lee and Shadow committing a terrorist attack.
Looks like they're all using drugs.
Same with us one, the same Bernardino, same with both terrorist attacks this year, the earlier and later.
Same with the Giahajan.
Every single one of them has a past abuse from marijuana, which sounds settled in.
No, Mark, I gotta tell you, there's there I could sit here and talk to you about plenty of I mean, for example, the the people who are blowing themselves up.
I mean, suicide bombers day in and day out in in Syria and Iraq.
I mean, I I don't think we can point to drug abuse as what's leading to that.
I mean, when you have people that are in a desperate, and Mark, thank you for calling in.
I know you've been a hold for a while.
When you have people who are in a desperate circumstance, maybe they're more likely to radicalize, but the precondition for Islamic terrorism is a belief in radical jihad as an obligation on all individual Muslims, right?
Without that, you don't blow yourself up in a crowded marketplace in Ramadi or in Paris or anywhere.
Uh so to look into the background of of individuals and see that there's a history of some sort of distress.
Yeah, you it's usually the case that uh well adjusted individuals don't join radical death cults.
Um, but I I'm not familiar with any research into any correlation whatsoever with marijuana and any of that.
And there are a whole lot of people who smoke marijuana that have nothing to do with jihad.
Eat some nachos, but not into jihad per se.
Uh let's take Barbara in Naples.
Barbara, you're on the Rush Limbaugh show, you're speaking to Buck.
Hi, Buck, greetings from a pro-life conservative concealed caring evangelical Christian.
All right.
Checking all the boxes.
What's up, Barbara?
Well, my my family and I, my parents sent us to Disney World as a gift for Christmas.
And my parents are elderly and they decided they didn't want to go because they were concerned about any terrorist things going on in large areas, such as uh uh music park, which I we understood and we thought, okay, we we wanted to respect them for that.
They're afraid that we would be worried about getting them out should something happen.
And now we live in Florida, so we got it we don't go to Disney World as much as we used to, but while we were there, it was the first day of their new security measures.
And we were excited to see that they finally had taken some security measures in place.
There were dogs there.
Um there were the police were there, the sheriff's department, there were also metal detectors, and we had gotten a phone call that had stated that we were not allowed to have any child over the age of 14 wear a costume or any type of mask that covered their face.
Completely understand that and had no problem with it.
But while we were in the park, I was appalled by the amount of women that were in full double burkas wearing full facial masks covering everything but their eyes.
And I understand that we are we are have religious rights, but if a 14-year-old can't wear a mask covering their face, why is it okay for a woman to come in wearing a full facial mask as well?
Well, of course, the answer is you already know, Barbara, is that it it's not.
If it's a safety issue, it's a safety issue, and that has to be applicable, universally applicable, whether there's uh some sort of a religious uh r religious conflict with that or not, because that's people's safety is more important than someone's right to uh to dress a certain way.
Um and and I have to say that this is something that you you see repeatedly uh when the media covers these things, right?
Uh there was a I think it was an Al Jazeera producer had put out on on social media, and this got some traction that there was offense taken when they showed the face of the female San Bernardino shooter, uh, because of course she was going around in a full burqa.
And at that point, uh nobody really cared what her religious sensibilities were or were not.
We wanted to know who the perpetrator was, but there are some who seem to think that there is a special exemption for safety issues, for law enforcement issues, based upon uh this desire to uh wear the full wear the full-on burqa.
But thank you for calling in and thank you for holding in.
Yeah, Disney World, they're just worried about they know they'll get sued if they uh make an issue of it with anyone.
Because remember, Islamophobia always got to be worried about it.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh today.
Thank you all very much for joining me.
We'll be talking a bit about uh the New Year's Eve security precautions here in New York and across the country, and also I'll get into the war in Afghanistan.
Some very interesting things going on that you're probably not being told about enough, if at all.
Got that and much more coming up on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Stay with me, Buck Sexton.
▲
Export Selection