Tuesday, December 29, 2009


Paris 27 December 2009
Nidra Poller

Now we understand the difference between jumping to conclusions and slithering to them. A skillful hop skip and a jump led us to conclude that Major Hassan, author of the Fort Hood killings, was a jihad warrior acting on principle. Today, having learned that the Jock Bomber--who tried to bring down the Amsterdam-Detroit flight on Christmas Day--had already drawn attention to the crux of his beliefs two years ago, our authorities slither to the conclusion that every last man woman and child ticketed to fly to the United States has to be thoroughly searched. Flights out of Paris were subject to three-hour delays this weekend. Baby strollers are deemed no less dangerous than a Muslim engineer whose father actually alerted US consular authorities in his native Nigeria to his son’s dangerous “radicalization.” Families, stockbrokers, grandmothers, and librarians will be subjected to embarrassing pat downs (what are the directives on crotches pray tell?) for one simple reason: to hide the fact that they are not suspect because they are not “radicalized” Muslims. Or “un-radicalized” Muslims. Dhimmitude increases apace with the mortal danger that it is forbidden to identify. Why be content with half-measures? Why not ground all the infidels, and just let Muslims travel? No one will be able to accuse us of profiling. They can leap through passport control like Russian ballet stars and come to orgasmic conclusions in 80% empty airplanes. Only a small minority of Muslims are dangerous jihadis. The chances of one of them sneaking into an infidel-free plane are not that great. Let them slather carbon footprints all over the planet.

Dhimmis don’t have to travel by plane. When you’ve lost your essential liberties, what’s the big deal? Dhimmis can travel on donkeys as prescribed by sharia law.

This story reminds me of a gruesome crime committed a few years ago in Pau. A former inmate broke into the psychiatric hospital where he had sojourned and beheaded two nurses. The murderer was schizophrenic. Professional experts glibly reassured the public: only a small minority of schizophrenics act out. The families of the beheaded nurses were of course instantly cheered up. Their savagely murdered loved ones were only a small minority. A neighbor of the beheader told journalists that the guy had been roaming the streets at night armed with a scimitar and a gun. Asked why he didn’t alert the police he responded with a Gallic shrug. “If you’re going to go to the police every time a guy walks the streets with a gun and a scimitar…”

The neighbor can be forgiven. He was a down n’outer trying to imitate a Parisian intellectual. How about the doctors in that hospital who knew this particular patient reveled in beheading fantasies? Police investigators repeatedly visited the hospital looking for clues. The killer was still roaming the streets. Weeks (or was it months?) later, when he was arrested--by chance--the psychiatrists proudly admitted that had not violated the patient’s privacy by giving the police his name.

In fact he tried to kill the patrolmen who approached him one night because of his strange behavior. The killer pulled the trigger but his gun jammed. The policemen had no idea that they were arresting the man who had beheaded the nurses. They might have been toppled into that small minority of victims of the small minority of schizophrenics who behead nurses and then roam freely.

Nine years ago, when American Airlines personnel sent Richard Reid to French border police for double checking, he was rapidly cleared. His passport was okay. He looked like the angel of death but anyone who has gone through passport control at a French airport knows that the agents don’t bother to look at you. It is beneath their dignity. Reid told them he was from Sri Lanka. Why not? Could they tell the difference between a London-Jamaican accent and a Sri-Lankan? Would they ask a few probing questions? Why bother? Besides, what do they know about Sri Lanka? Or Jamaican Londoners?

French media were calling the shoe bomber a Sri-Lankan for days, just to show that no one should be blamed for missing a silly detail. They made fun of the Americans’ “sacrosanct” concern for security. What’s the big deal? The shoe bomb would have damaged only a tiny minority of the fuselage.

That was then and this is now. American authorities, starting at the top, have caught up with the dhimmitude game. They’re not going to update the no-fly list every time a devout Muslim notifies authorities that his son has become a dangerous radical. Only a small minority will actually strap an explosive device to his jones and rev up for the promised virgins.
Nidra Poller

No comments: