After stabbing a police officer in a failed attempt to commit a more serious terror attack, a Michigan man kicked off his trial by making a demand of the court. However, as soon as the judge heard his sick request, she offered a simple reply that immediately struck down his undeserved sense of entitlement.
As the Muslim minority grows in the West, so does their list of Sharia demands. What initially begins as humble requests for tolerance intensifies to shouts of accommodation of their endless religious compulsions. In fact, Muslims have become so comfortable in their privilege that it is commonplace to hear terror suspects issue ultimatums in the court and prison systems to fulfill outrageous religious beliefs. Fortunately, one judge wasn’t falling for these demands, showcasing an unlikely but welcome display of sanity in the otherwise liberal U.S. justice system.
In June 2016, Tunisian migrant and Canadian resident Amor M. Ftouhi was arrested and charged with attempt to murder Lt. Jeff Neville while shouting “Allahu Akbar!” in Flint airport. Smiting at the officer’s neck, as the Quran specifically commands, Ftouhi planned to utilize the critically injured policeman’s gun to commit a deadly terror attack but was thankfully thwarted by fellow officers.
While appearing in a Flint federal court for his heinous crimes, Ftouhi not only showcased no remorse for his actions but invoked his religious supremacy, outrageously demanding that the court hand over the home addresses of every witness testifying against him. Fortunately, Judge Linda Parker not only vehemently rejected his ultimatum but spelled out exactly why she wouldn’t fulfill such a ridiculous request, reminding his attorney that that would directly endanger public safety, according to Michigan Live.
Despite defense attorney Joan Morgan assuring the court that her client needed the locations of those testifying against him in order to “properly prepare for trial,” Judge Parker refused to reconsider her decision to dismiss Ftouhi’s demand to know where witnesses live, the Detroit Free Press reports. Instead, Judge Parker commenced the trial, saying her decision was made in the public’s interest.
“Those were very disturbing statements that were made after his arrest,” Parker said, referring to a filing from the U.S. Attorney’s Office stating Ftouhi told officials detaining him that he came to the country with the “sole purpose of killing armed U.S. government employees.”
“There was no ramping down,” Parker said. “He targets a group of people by profession. Those statements need to be taken with some degree of seriousness.”
Morgan failed to convince Judge Parker that by denying his request to view the addresses and contact information of witnesses in his upcoming January 2018 trial, she was infringing upon his right to a fair trial, an accusation the judge refused to acknowledge.
Although going against Muslim suspects is quickly becoming a rarity, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jules DePorre reiterated the “chilling effect” that would ensue if Ftouhi acquired the witnesses’ information.
“He had a mission and that mission was not accomplished,” DePorre said, explaining that it is plausible that Ftouhi could make a call from jail to reveal witness information to an “associate” in his home of Canada, and that the FBI could not investigate calls made to other countries in the same manner as in the U.S.
Ftouhi was clear about his motivation for his crimes, confessing to authorities that he is a “soldier of Allah” whose “mission” was to slaughter as many infidel police and military officers as possible.
“(Ftouhi) told the interviewing agents that he had planned to kill the victim police officer and then take the officer’s gun to kill more police officers,” the government’s response to the motion stated. “(Ftouhi) also told agents that he hoped the officer was going to die.”
After stabbing Neville, the complaint said Ftouhi further exclaimed something similar to “You have killed people in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and we are all going to die.”
Ftouhi’s excuse is a common narrative of even the self-proclaimed moderate Muslims of the West. He believes that alleged occupation of Muslim countries and causalities of war are justifiable reasons to butcher innocent non-Muslims. Of course, not one of these accusatory Muslims admits that before the U.S. was even a nation, Muslims had slaughtered over 270 million non-Muslims in conquests they have waged in order to establish worldwide Sharia law.
Muslims continually play the victim each time their kind murder innocent civilians in horrific terror attacks or commit genocide in Muslim-majority lands. However, Islam has never been peaceful and even began with its prophet entering Medina as a war-torn refugee only to repay their tolerance by waging war against their peaceful tribes. Unprovoked, Muhammad led his troops to pillage, rape, enslave, and slaughter hundreds of peaceful religious minorities, justifying his onslaught with the Quran’s commands to violence. These same commands pertain to Islam’s barbaric and oppressive rule to this day, which is why we see mass Muslim migration to the West and subsequent terror attacks.