Arizona: ‘Practicing Muslim’ Migrant Murders Two Outside Tucson Gay Bar

Another jihad attack that won’t be recognized as such?

A Muslim migrant murdered two people outside a gay bar in Tucson, Arizona early on Monday morning, and the establishment media is busy covering for the Islamic motivations of the killer. Of course. It’s what they do every time.

The Arizona Daily Star’s Tucson.com reported Thursday that “a cousin of Ousman Ceesay, the man police say killed two people outside a Tucson gay bar before shooting himself, said he never heard anti-gay sentiments from Ceesay, despite his growing up in a country that criminalizes homosexuality.” Oh, well, then! As long as he wasn’t anti-gay!

Ceesay’s cousin, Muhammad Sylva, explained: “We don’t talk about those things here, because you hardly see it.” That is hardly a ringing defense of tolerance and pluralism, and Sylva didn’t make Ceesay look any more accepting of Western values as he explained the shooter’s background.

Sylva “said he and his cousin Ceesay grew up in the same household in the West African nation of The Gambia, and they remained close after Ceesay moved to the U.S. around 2010. The topic of homosexuality, or opposition to it, never came up with Ceesay when they were young, nor in the years after Ceesay moved to the U.S. to attend college, said Sylva, in a Wednesday phone call from The Gambia, where Ceesay’s family still lives.”

Demonstrating an awareness of what Western leftists want to hear the most, Sylva said: “Ousman doesn’t have the time to talk about hating people. Throughout our conversations, through the 17 years he spent in the U.S., he doesn’t talk about that.”

Nevertheless, “Tucson police say Ceesay was carrying a list of LGBTQIA+ associated businesses at the time he fatally shot Vincent Anthony Siqueiros, 42, and Cameron Davis Capara, 33, in the parking lot of Venture-N, a long-standing gay bar on North Sixth Avenue.” Not only that, but “police are investigating the Aug. 31 shooting as a hate crime.”

This was because “a search warrant served on Ceesay’s home Monday afternoon turned up a note indicating ‘hate toward the LGBTQIA+ community,’ Tucson police said. Police said Tuesday that Ceesay had no prior connection to the victims, who died at the scene early Monday morning. Ceesay died later at the hospital, after also shooting himself, police say.”

The Daily Star brought in Sylva for more cleanup work on this, lest anyone come away from this story with a negative view of Islam: “Due to the shame associated with homosexuality in The Gambia, gay people hide their sexuality, so it’s unusual to hear much about the topic, Sylva said.” Sylva tried his hand at some moral equivalence: “Here, we have two religions. We have Christians and we have Muslims living here. Both faiths here don’t accept homosexuality.” Yes, but only one of them will kill you for it. “So if you’re doing it here, you hide it. … It’s not something we talk about.”

This moral equivalence mop-up work of Islam’s image was necessary because “Ceesay was a practicing Muslim who often prayed five times a day and participated in fasts, Sylva said. But Ceesay’s faith was not ‘extreme,’ he said.”

Indeed it wasn’t. A hadith depicts Muhammad specifying the punishment for homosexual activity: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, ‘Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot [Lot], execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.’” (Sunan Abu Dawud 4462) Nothing extreme about that. It’s just basic Islam.

This is being investigated as a “hate crime,” but not as a jihad attack. Law enforcement officials have no category for jihad attacks. They do not exist. Yet they keep on happening, in the U.S. and elsewhere, and the longer authorities ignore their ideological roots, the more serious the problem will get.

The only piece that doesn’t fit is the fact that Ousman Ceesay killed himself. He may have expected that police would kill him, and was hoping that Allah would still accept him as a martyr for murdering the two Infidels. Or there could be some other explanation. But we will never know, because will not pursue this question, being unaware of its significance.