Sultan Knish
June has been a banner month for Muslim lawsuits against the NYPD. First "Muslim Advocates" filed a lawsuit
against the NYPD on behalf of some New Jersey Muslims attending mosques
that the NYPD had assessed as a potential terrorism risk. The "Muslim
Advocates", like every other Muslim "civil rights" group, has a history of covering up and defending terrorism.
The media is full of sympathetic interviews with Muslims, who are
baffled as to why the NYPD might be surveiling mosques and Imams.
Farhoud Khera, the head of Muslim Advocates, complains, "There was
explicit reference to the fact that they weren't targeting Syrian Jews
or Iranian Jews or Egyptian Christians, but really, the focus was on
Muslims."
The extensive Coptic Christian and Persian Jewish terrorism sprees
aside, the goal here is to get the NYPD to play the same "Three Blind
Monkeys" game that Federal law enforcement has taken up. And the only
answer is the TSAization of the NYPD, as the last remaining
counterterrorism force will prove that it isn't singling out Muslims, by
surveiling Methodist churches and Chassidic synagogues for signs of
terrorist sympathies.
Less notable, but in some ways more significant, Farhan Doe,
a Muslim rejected by the NYPD because he said gays should be
imprisoned, has sued the police for rejecting him because of his views.
Farhan Doe isn't alone in believing that, but unlike non-Muslim
applicants, he comes out of a cultural and religious background in which
imprisoning people because they offend your morals is the duty of law
enforcement.
Farhan's, (predictably, Jewish), lawyer says that his client has the
right to believe whatever he pleases, and he has a point. But the
question is with enough Farhans in the political, judicial and
enforcement arms, how long will the rest of us have that right?
Tolerating people who will not tolerate you is fine, so long as they
draw the line between ideas and action. The NYPD isn't surveilling New
Jersey mosques because there are some bigots in blue who dislike
immigrants, as the Associated Press, the American Civil Liberties Union
and the whole lawyer-media complex would like you to believe. It's doing
it because New York City's biggest serial killers and aspiring serial
killers are Muslims who kill in the name of their ideas.
Their biggest idea is that Allah had sent Mohammed to make Islam
"victorious over all religions, even though the infidels may resist."
(Koran 61:9) And when the infidels resist, that's when you kill their
soldiers, sue their police officers, and blow up a few buildings. Then
you complain to the media that the infidels are persecuting you by
spying on the mosques where the "Big Idea" is declaimed to the faithful
and refusing to allow you to join the police force just because you
think that Islamic law supersedes American law.
The Clash of Civilizations is all-encompassing. It doesn't just cover
the big thing, like ramming planes into skyscrapers, but also the little
things. Police forces don't enforce law, as much as social harmony. The
Nineties were a grand experiment in changing troubled neighborhoods by
improving their quality through selective enforcement on quality of life
offenses. The NYPD's successes were credited to that experiment. But
who decides what social harmony and the social good are?
For Mayor Bloomberg, it's banning large sodas. For Farhan Doe, it's
banning homosexuals. When there is no limit to government infringement
on rights, then the law is a collection of bugbears and control
mechanisms. Islamic law on covering up women got its start when one of
Mohammed's companions spotted one of Mo's wives at night and was able to
tell her apart due to her height. This somehow made for a convincing
case for compelling every woman to be covered up head to toe.
It's senseless, but so is fighting obesity by banning people from buying
large sodas. When the obsession of a few men is turned into law, then
the result is equally contemptuous of the individual as a rotting sack
of vile habits which he has to be forced to abandon by the majority of
the law. Once you abandon the rights of the individual to the fiat of
activists, judges and politicians-- then laws can be made by anyone who
wants them badly enough. The same process of judicial activism,
hysteria, violent attacks, and pressure groups that created gay marriage
can one day lock up the happy couples. It's only a matter of who is
making the laws.
The Arab Spring has revealed the ugly truth that, given the vote, the
Farhans in Egypt, Tunisia and Turkey will vote to imprison gays, oppress
Christians, suppress women and all the way down the long awful
checklist of the Islamic formula for a moral society. Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale
is a fantasy in America, but it's how most people agree things should
be in the Muslim world. The media is selflessly dedicated to lying about
that simple fact, no matter how many of their reporters get raped,
taken hostage or killed, until the truth becomes impossible to conceal.
Back in cosmopolitan New York, the idea that we're about to go the way
of Cairo is absurd, but then Cairo was also once a cosmopolitan place.
(At least until the more cosmopolitan parts of it were burned down.)
Oslo, Paris and London still are, but, like Weimar, the clock of
cosmopolitanism in those places is ticking down to its final hours. The
secret of all societies is that they are all democracies in their own
way. A government can repress its people, shoot them in alleyways and
run them over with tanks-- but it cannot be at odds with their values
for very long.
The jet-setting dictatorship of the enlightened who clink champagne
glasses over international law is a global Weimar that will collapse in a
rotten heap when enough men shouting, "Allah Akbar" march through their
streets. And the timeline for that is set by biology and airline
schedules, but it's also set by power and the acceptance of the
inevitable.
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer has suggested that it might be
possible to outlaw burning the Koran because it gets people killed. This
is shorthand for saying it upsets Muslims, who then go out and kill
people. Given a choice between doing something about the Muslims who are
killing people or the freedom of speech that infuriates them, Breyer,
like most of the transatlantic left, chose to do something about
freedom.
But homosexuality also upsets people like Farhan Doe. What happens when they decide to kill people every time an episode of Glee airs? Do we outlaw Glee?
If we can outlaw burning the Koran, then why not? If it's a question of
pressure groups, the followers of Mohammed can easily top rallies and
"It Gets Better" videos. And when the time comes, they will. Is a
society that is unwilling to draw the line at the Bill of Rights, really
going to draw the line at Greenwich Village and Castro Street?
Why don't we do as Farhan Doe suggests and lock up gays? Ask a liberal
and the answer will be sputtering outrage, just as if you were to ask an
Imam from Al-Azhar why you shouldn't lock up gays, the response would
be sputtering outrage for the opposite reason. There might be some
mention of the Bill of Rights, but the Bill of Rights is dead in the age
of the Living Constitution. If rights are whatever the sophistry of a
panel of Federal judges says that they are, then they are no different
than Bloomberg's soda laws or Mohammed's Burqa mandate or ObamaCare's
health insurance mandate.
In a society like this, laws are like levers. If enough pressure is
applied in the right place, they get put up or torn down. Farhan Doe on
his own wouldn't be able to lock up too many homosexuals, though as a
police officer, he would have plenty of discretion for taking in people
on the usual charges like "Disturbing the Peace" or "Failure to Obey a
Police Order" that can be used to arrest nearly anyone at any time.
But what happens when a police force has a lot of Farhan Does working on
it? For the answer to that, we can take a trip to sunny Dearbonistan,
where Christians were arrested for "Disturbing the Peace" and "Failure
to Obey a Police Order", which as it turned out was a legalism for
"Being Christian in a place claimed by Muslims".
Dearborn Police Chief Ron Haddad (not to be confused with Ron Haddad Jr
of Illinois, charged with domestic terrorism) testified that a protest
outside an area mosque should not be allowed to take place, because its
Imam had told him that it would be worse than a thousand deaths.
Presumably three of them would be worse than September 11.
That's how it works. Add enough Farhans together and suddenly the system
operates on a different set of assumptions that signify that the clash
of civilizations has happened, and civilization has lost.
For decades now, the civil rights movements have been dedicated to
taking away other people's rights in the name of entitlement. That has
brought us to a state of affairs in which religious institutions are
obligated to cover abortions, white students are seated at the back of
the college admissions bus behind black students, and wedding
photographers are sued for not wanting to shoot gay weddings. This is
not a society that frees people from oppression, it's a society that
oppresses everyone in the name of someone else's greater good.
The Muslim Brotherhood's arms in America operate as civil rights groups,
and Islamization is a civil rights movement, as much as any of them.
Like them, it believes in taking away the right of other people to be
left alone, to live and let live and to be treated equally under the
law. Like every radical group it is demanding the right not to be
investigated by the police, the right not to have its ideology treated
as the contemptuously vicious creed that it is, under the "Red-Baiting"
or "Islamophobia" clause, and the right to aspire to one day take away
everyone else's rights.
There are police forces in the Muslim world, but they're tasked with
arresting blasphemers, jailing runaway brides and conducting virginity
tests on women found alone in the same room with a man. And occasionally
hanging the homosexuals, who as Messr Ahmadinejad assured us don't
exist, because as soon as they exist, they are killed, resolving the
paradoxes of Islamic morality and Schrodinger's cat in one instant.
The difference between their forces and ours is... Farhan Doe.
No comments:
Post a Comment