Under her hijab
Murder juror ‘listened to music under hijab’
A juror could face an unlimited jail sentence after she was arrested for allegedly listening to an MP3 player under her headscarf during a murder trial.
The judge at London’s Blackfriars Crown Court thought he heard “tinny music” during the testimony of a man who brutally beat his disabled wife to death.
The Muslim woman in her early twenties, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, had repeatedly tried to avoid jury service.
advertisement She was finally ordered to serve on the jury in the trial of pensioner Alan Wicks who was subsequently convicted of bludgeoning his wife to death after 50 years of marriage.Problems started the next day with the first of a number of late arrivals at court, prompting Judge Roger Chapple to repeatedly ask her to change her ways. The woman not only continued to be late, but left lawyers wondering whether she was “in a world of her own”.
A member of the defense team saw a wire sticking out from under the Muslim woman’s hijab. I guess they should be glad all it was attached to was a music player.
he judge warned that her behaviour, if proved, would not just give “cause for concern” but would amount to “contempt of court”.
He also told her she would be arrested. A police officer then stepped forward and escorted her from court. Outside, she was searched and the MP3 player found and confiscated.
The alleged offence can carry an unlimited fine and indefinite imprisonment.
Observation: Isn’t listening to music haram?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama: All troops out of Iraq by end of year
October 21, 2011 01:00 PM by Michelle Malkin
191 Comments
Arab Fall, Arab Fail: Coptic Christians slaughtered in Egypt; Plus: Nadarkhani update
October 10, 2011 11:34 AM by Michelle Malkin
46 CommentsPastor Nadarkhani update: Bogus charges, renewed call for action
October 4, 2011 11:18 AM by Michelle Malkin
20 Comments
Second U.S. jihadi reportedly killed in drone attack; Plus: Refresher course on American bloggers vs. Samir Khan
September 30, 2011 11:24 AM by Michelle Malkin
92 Comments
Pastor Nadarkhani update: State Department, Boehner weigh in
September 30, 2011 10:46 AM by Michelle Malkin
36 Comments
Dead again? New reports of jihadi cleric Awlaki’s demise; God bless our military
September 30, 2011 10:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
75 Comments
Iranian Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani faces execution for refusing to renounce Christianity: Where are the Hollyweirdos and Euroweenies now?; Update: White House statement; Britain, EU stand up
September 29, 2011 09:30 AM by Michelle Malkin
153 Comments
A few more words about Koward Krugman Update: Take two!
September 12, 2011 12:53 AM by Michelle Malkin
74 Comments
Categories: Islam
Riehl World View
» Whitney Houston: If I should stay I would only be in your wayPatterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the NonconformistsJustOneMinute
» Cat Blogging In A Harsh New Light
I hope they give her “unlimited” jail time! A couple of months/years behind bars may make her see the light ^j^ They’ll probably wimp out in the end though…
At my health club, which is women only, no men anywhere, we have a few Muslim women who wear the headscarf in the locker room and also when excercising. If it is true that the head covering is worn in the presence of men as a modesty measure, but is not required to be worn in the presence of other women, then why would they do this? I have become convinced that the wearing of the headscarf (or hijab or whatever) is being done as an “in your face” jab at we infidels. I suspect many Muslim women, and probably the woman in the story above, have begun wearing head covering only recently, in a deliberate attempt to set themselves apart and make the rest of us uncomfortable. They really really need to get rid of the head covering and get a life.
I’m not surprised this happened. Assimsilation and respect for laws other than those in the Koran seem to be a problem for many Muslims. I doubt she will spend much time behind bars. The British verison of CAIR will start wailing and the dhimis will cave in.
She was probably one of the O.J jurors and didn’t want anyone to recogize her for already letting one murderer away.
What a little rebel . This young woman not only defies the courts but her own religion. Could the lure of western civilization be threatening the islamic way of life ?
I think that she will learned her lessen and wear a “burqa” in the future. I bet they are better at muffling the sound and hiding the wires.
WWMD? He probably would have her stoned or beaten to death for owning an MP3 player.
Where is CAIR? Oh wrong country. Obviously security is lax there too.
As bad as things are here with the muslim cowtowing….England is 10x worse and sinking rapidly.
I’m always shocked at the audacity of some in the face of authority. I can’t even imagine have the gall to try and listen to an mp3 player while serving in front of a judge. Hope he throws the book at her!
She may not have been listening to music– it might have been lectures from some lunatic extremist talking about the importance of avoiding involvement in Western society (except for collecting the lickies and chewies they give out, like welfare and free medical care). In any case, as Michelle points out, if the wire sticking out of a Muslim’s clothing only leads to an MP3, you really should consider yourself lucky.
Don’t forget that Muslim men have dressed in the burqua in order to evade arrest and prosecution.
Every time I see a woman in a hijab, I’m suspicious.
There are two women who live across from my parents. The other day, it was about 90 degrees (F), so I was wearing capri pants and a tank top. They stared at me something fierce as I loaded my son into our car. It made me very uncomfortable.
#12:
Absolutely. It’s like watching someone walk around wearing a ski mask.
And then they stared at you! Creepy.
And they wonder why we’re feeling less and less comfortable trusting them…
Oh my God. Hijabs are harmless. Obviously this woman should be punished for listening to mp3s in court. So should a Christian man sneaking a discman into a jury box. Her religion has nothing to do with this.
I hate how I’m becoming such a drag on this site. I really like MM’s writing even when I (usually) disagree with her. However it’s clear to me that the majority of people taking the time to comment are fantastically bigoted. If you’re suspicious of every person in a hajib, then live under a rock. It’s no harm to you so it shouldn’t be a foul.
I don’t like how the “MSM” (and this is my only problem with the “MSM”) often treats Islam with kid gloves. But I don’t see why MM bothered with this harmless little story.
To Queen of Enland: Off with her head!
So, the country grants her the freedoms should couldn’t find elsewhere and this is how she displays her appreciation. I guess asking for a few hours of her time so that she could contribute to the process that helps to keep EVERYONE safer was too much to ask. She’s filth.
I wonder what her attention span would have been if the person on trial was a muslim.
JLP
I have to admit I’m with Rusty on this one.
It’s about the MP3 player. Not the habib.
We don’t know if we are talking about a radical Muslim from the Mid East that thumbs her nose at everything British.
For all we know from this article she could be a spoiled little kid from some suburb in England who decided she wanted to convert to Islam just to be a rebel. Conviently, the habib hid her MP3 player rather well.
Likely she’s just a little brat, not representitive of the threat of Islamic extremism.
Blowing up civilians, subverting the judicial system – whatever benefits the umma.
Correction, Hajib. Whatever. The scarf thingy.
Rusty, I disagree that there is no harm. This is more than a peice of clothing, this is a political statement by a member of a group that comes into our society and expects us to assimilate to them. If a man were to come into a courtroom wearing a ski mask, they would tell him to remove it. Even if he said he wore it for religious reasons, he would be required to remove it or face contempt.
In addition to her hijab, her previous and ongoing behavior indicates that she has no respect for our legal system.
Asking that immigrants assimilate or go home is not being bigoted. Just asking for respect for the culture that you live in. Try moving to Saudi Arabia and ignoring the rules of that culture. The punishment would be a lot more severe than possible jail time.
walterc hits it right on the head. If we were to do this in Saudi Arabia or Iran or Egypt or any other muslim country we would end up in a far worse state than possible prison time It truly is about the hijab and what they are hiding by wearing it. I highly doubt she was wearing it b/c she is a devout muslim b/c if that were the case then she wouldn’t have had an MP3 player underneath it and there wouldn’t be a story!
OK, perhaps I’m mistaken, but someone PLS enlighten me.
Is this Hajib something covers everything but the eyes, or is it one of those head scarves that just cover the hair and the face is still visible?
If its the former I might have to rethink my position.
It’s a head scarf. Like this.
Listening to an mp3 player during a trial is a terrible thing to do. No one is denying that. But if a Christian did this no one would pay any attention.
Walter, if a man came into court wearing a yarmulke, there is no doubt he would be allowed to keep it on. A ski mask isn’t part of any religion. Hijabs are.
This woman shouldn’t have to assimilate any further into society than her religion dictates. Forcing others to assimilate to Islam is something else altogether. We both agree that’s unaccpetable. She wasn’t guilty of that though. She was just guilty of being horribly disrespectful to her judicial system. That’s something a lot of people in all religions are guilty of.
I think everyone here has a point about this story. Unfortunately, we just do not know enough about this woman’s attitude toward the system to be accurate in this case.
She might have been trying to be political, or she might have been simply in contempt of the court proceedings because she didn’t want to be there for selfish reasons.
My mother was on a juror list the last few weeks, had to call every night at 6pm to see if she would be required to show up the next day. They never called her in, and she was relieved to be spared the hassle. Had she been called in of course she would have done what is required by law.
Given what we know about Islam in general, this could have been a larger political statement. I would like to know what was loaded onto that MP3 player. It would answer many questions raised here if we could know whether she was playing Spice Girls or M.C. Qaradawi.
Regardless of the motivation though, judges don’t like being ignored in their own courtrooms and she’s in trouble. Anybody who’s seen 5 minutes of Judge Judy can say that for sure.
I also have to add, if I was on a jury and there was a woman with hijab on and a wire sticking out of it, I would absolutely have to tell a baliff or someone with some alarm. Does that make me Islamophobic, or just Jihadophobic?
The picture MM posts along with this post is a bit misleading. It’s not the full body wrap – a hijab is the scarf thing they wrap around their head.
If an Amish juror were listening to an mp3 player under her bonnet, would you care? Would MM even post anything about it? Hmmmm….
@14 Rusty said: “I hate how I’m becoming such a drag on this site.”
There is an easy solution for that, Rusty. A couple of easy solutions, actually. I prefer the simplest one, as it allows you the widest possible freedom of thought and expression…elsewhere.
Neither. I just makes you someone who doesn’t want to be blown up.
From Wikipedia, a clarification on garb:
And burqua:
They don’t provide a picture of a hijab, but the article makes it seem as if it’s the non-face covering veil and dress/outer garment.
Whereas the burqua is the full body, including face, covering.
If you’re not being sarcastic, I’m going to say no. When was the last time an Amish man used a carriage bomb to attack his neighbors?
Last I checked – even when horrible tragedy befalls them – the Amish are peaceful, and forgive their offenders.
Meanwhile, as MM pointed out, the Muslims are up in arms because someone they dislike was knighted according to the cultures and customs of the United Kingdom. No lives were lost, no one was oppressed.
The British simply did something the Muslims disliked and now there are calls for attacks in response to Rushdie’s knighting.
How can anyone be so blind as to not see jihad, terrorism, and the ideologies of Islam as being a very real, very present, and very dangerous threat? Not only to western civilization, but to women’s rights and our laws?
How can anyone be so blind as to not see jihad, terrorism, and the ideologies of Islam as being a very real, very present, and very dangerous threat? Not only to western civilization, but to women’s rights and our laws?
Edit: Boxed the wrong text in, obvi.
.Oh, goody goody. A twin-planked legal system, then: Sharia law for those who “shouldn’t have to assimilate any further into society than [their] religion dictates,” and the present system for everyone else. Honor killings and the like finally established as “a valid alternative cultural norm,” for those whose preferences swing that way. Golly moses, what’s not to love — ?
Ok, touche. You got me. I meant regarding dress. Obviously I rightfully demand my Muslim cashiers handle my bacon and my Muslim taxi drivers put my bag of vodka in their trunk.
“When was the last time an Amish man used a carriage bomb to attack his neighbors?”
Are you being sarcastic? That is a complete non sequitur.
The issue here is she was listening to music during a trial. This is wrong no matter the religion of the person doing it. And I would like to thank MM for being brave enough to tackle this grave threat to our national security.
Ooops. Didn’t mean to italicize the whole thing….
Rusty – regarding your comments (#14 and #32) on muslim dress being benign, I beg to differ. I see more and more head coverings, including at our local Lebanese restaurants, where no head coverings were worn before. I said above (comment #2) and I’m saying it again: I think the wearing of the headscarf is being done to take a very open jab at we infidels. Sort of telling us that the time is near when they will be in charge and we’d better get used to it or else. I’m not bigoted against Muslims; but I am bigoted TOWARD our wonderful way of life, and scared to death that it very well could be taken over by people unfriendly to tolerance and openness.
This was a worthwhile story as it is the small straws that break the camel’s back. Each instance showing the truth about the behavior may wake people up eventually.
It also shows a weakness in the security at that court. Consider how many times someone has behaved oddly and seen what security response was like. That is useful information for ‘..the next time.’ They call them ‘dry runs’. Now they know how long it takes to get a wire noticed under a hijab.
She’s religious enough to wear hijab, but irreligious enough to listen to music which is haram? (i.e., not kosher)
The reason is simple. This is another example of shari’a creep in the UK and an example of the on-going conflict between Muslims and their respecting and assimilating into western countries.
This woman tried repeatedly to avoid jury duty (which, I believe is a civic obligation in the UK as it is here), and showed not only disrespect for the family of the murder victim, but for the UK laws, too. By listening to her MP3 player, she was essentially giving the court the finger and could potentially ruin the entire prosecution of someone accused of a horrible crime.
I agree that the Iran stoning is a worthy story.
Of course, merely being Muslim doesn’t make you a threat. It’s that attitude that riles me up in these comments. Listening to an mp3 player is not one of the threatening ideologies of Islam.
Rusty, believe me – I’d love for there to be “moderate” Muslims. I would have no problem with the religion if its ideologies weren’t such a clear threat. I have no problem with Buddhists, Hindus, Protestants, etc. so long as their ideologies don’t pose a threat to me.
I believe Islam does. Time and again, clerics and imams and the heads of the Taliban/al Qeada say they wish to see the “Great Satan” toppled and the world brought under an Islamic caliphate. I take that threat seriously – just as I would if a stranger in the street threatened to kill me.
Islam’s most holy texts – the Koran and (I believe) the Hadith – repeatedly teach and preach that anyone who is not Muslim is an “infidel” that must either be converted by the sword, forced into a state of subjugation, or killed.
And one need only look at the differences in response to the Rushdie knighting and the attempted Londong/Glasgow bombings to see a vast difference. There is no shortage of articles about the outrage over Rushdie’s knighting (just as there is no shortage of outrage in general). However, there are few condemnations from within the Muslim community with regards to the bombings. Silence is, in this case, acceptance.
Or, at least, a willful ignorance of terrorism and jihad.
There is no reason, no excuse for any Muslim who opposes violence and jihad and terrorism to be ignored if he/she decides to speak out. If the Taliban can get videos on the Internet with such consistencey, so can a Muslim who opposes terrorism and the hateful ideologies that permeate Islam.
Perhaps part of this is failure on the part of the MSM, but I doubt it.
Good.
So, what was she listening to? My guess it was Rock the Casbah by The Clash.
Brian72 made a good point and it ties in with what I was saying.
We don’t know enough about the particulars to know whether or not this has anything to do with some kind of problem with Muslim intergration.
That is, is this about a Muslim woman who could give a damn about the laws of Great Britian because shes a proud Muslim and the rules do not apply to her?
Or, and I think this is more likely, is she just some punk kid who thought a hajib would be a good way to disguise her listening to rap, the Spice Girls, or some other kind of music that would clearly place her in the non-threating, punk kid, who happens to be a Muslim category.
The only way I can see this becoming a real issue concerning the PC crowd bowing to dhimmitude would be if she got a smack on the wrist. I don’t see that happening.
reine.de.tout said:
So it’s perfectly ok for us to believe that wearing a yarmulke is an open jab at we infidels? In my mind, there is no difference between a yarmulke and a hijab.
Rusty @ 40: “In my mind, there is no difference between a yarmulke and a hijab.”
In your mind there is perhaps no difference between lightening and lightening bug.
??? One is a bug and the other is an electrical current?
While my example is more germane since both a yarmukle and a hijab are clothing items that are required by members of certain religions?
An “Amish person” listening to an mp3 player would be extraordinarily suspicious as well, since I’m pretty certain their faith prohibits personal electronic devices even more strongly than Islam forbids music.
No normal person should be threatened by a yarmulke. Yes, it’s similar to the hijab in that it is a reminder of the wearer’s submission to God (some believe both cultures derive their headcovering customs from the same desert Bedouin tradition). The two are different in the sense that no one wears his yarmulke to threaten his neighbors.
To go one better, I think it’s ridiculous that anyone in America would worry about a Sikh and his kirpan. Let him in a courtroom or on a plane. When they start using their religious traditions as an enabler for terrorism, then we should reconsider.
If the Amish were practicing jihad, suicide bombing, cartoon rioting . . . then yes, I would care and MM would post about it.
Also, the cries of racism are a bit played by this point. France and Britain (and probably some other European countries) are presently in the process of banning Muslim headwear due to the safety concerns and the division it causes from assimilating into the culture. It is not up to an Muslim immigrant to decide how much they want to assimilate – either they want to or they don’t. And if they don’t, the society they are invading has every right to ask them to assimilate or leave.
I still fail to see what jihad has to do with listening to an mp3 player during a trial. A lot of you seem to have very strong opinions about this – surely one of you can explain why?
I also fail to see how democratic societies telling their citizens what they can or cannot wear is a step in the right direction.
When you are in a court of law you follow the rules of that court or you land your butt in jail.
Judging from your posts, you fail to see a lot things, like the difference between Muslims and Amish, the severity of an electronic device being hidden under Muslim dress (in a government building no less), the refusal of groups of people to assimilate into a culture they have chosen to join and the steps that governments will need to take to control the growing threat. These are all regular topics on MM and this article fits right in with it.
“the severity of an electronic device being hidden under Muslim dress (in a government building no less)”
I’m sorry, what? If we don’t call in the national guard everytime a muslim wears headphones, we’re “failing to see” a threat? Have you been inside a government building lately? I just had jury duty a couple months ago – they run you through the same wringer as at the airport. I even had to take my shoes off.
The prevailing logic here appears to be that if you don’t believe that all muslims come out of the womb wrapped in plastic explosives, you’re not taking the threat of terrorism seriously. I understand everyone’s fear about another terrorist attack – surely one is inevitable – but being completely irrational about that fear doesn’t exactly help matters. Aren’t there bigger things to worry about than a woman listening to music?
On a somewhat related note, it appears the Iranian government has severely beaten and detained a pro-democratic group in Tehran. Now surely such things are more newsworthy than a juror wearing an mp3 player?
Here’s a question. Why should one have to completely assimilate into a culture one has chosen to join? Should we not allow West African-Americans to wear dashikis?
Dear God. There are Japanese restaurants using chopsticks as we speak!!! Surely this affront to the American dining culture of forks and knives should be noted on this site and then endlessly commented upon!
OK, I am going to have to throw my hat into the ring with Rusty and Huggybear.
I met my wife in Korea while I was serving there. She has recently become an American citizen and I am very proud of that.
However, she obviously still holds onto many aspects of her culture from Korea and I have adopted some things as well. We often eat with chopsticks, we take our shoes off in the house, little things like that.
So, I don’t really have a problem with Muslim dress unless of course there are security concerns (ie, must remove a face covering when getting a drivers license photo or when getting pulled over.)
As I have said, I don’t think this is a case of a Muslim women refusing to integrate. It’s about some brat hiding an MP3 player under a piece of clothing.
The fact that she is Muslim and the clothing in question was tradional Muslim garb is irrelevant UNLESS she gets away with a slap on the wrist because she is Muslim. THEN, it will become about something larger than just one woman with an MP3 player.
Bringing it back to my personal example:
I have no problem with Koreans in the US eating with chopsticks or otherwise. However, if some Koreans started talking about juche and hanging up pictures of “Dear Leader” I think that would be cause for concern because that would be an aspect of failing to integrate that would be a security issue.
Wearing a hajib into a courtroom isn’t such a failure to integrate that it is a security concern. Furthermore, my suspicion is that she was listening to Spice Girls and she’s probably pretty darn integrated otherwise.
LOL huggybear, you are so obtuse. It’s amazing you can’t see how Muslim dress being used to hide something as harmless as an mp3 player would also apply to more dangerous things to hide under Muslim dress and how that factors into the current debate on Muslim dress in non-religious places within non-Islamic nations. It’s not about a woman listening to music. You obviously have not been following MM if you can’t see how it fits into the debate.
And Rusty, why should someone have to assimilate into a culture one has chosen to join?? Are you serious?? Why on earth would someone choose to move somewhere and then not assimilate into its society? That is beyond me. As far as the silly comparisons with chopsticks and dashikis, we’re not discussing West Africans nor Japanese (and why would we?). They are not the same in my book. Your posts are as if Muslims have been randomly singled out without any cause, which is simply not the case. And I look forward to the day that the only we have to worry about Muslims hiding under their dress is mp3 players, but that’s not reality.
Maybe she just doesn’t see any point in paying attention.
The case is about a man who beat his wife to death.
In islam that don’t count for much,especially if the wife brings it on herself,which is usually the case.
JLP
Bipartisan, it seems that despite all this talk of sharia and whatnot, that you’re the one who wants two sets of laws. You went a special set of laws restricting Islamic practices. I understand why, but that’s not the way it works. Nor should it be.
Although MM did write that defense of Japanese internment so who knows if you’ll agree with me.
Rusty, if you look back in American history, you’ll find that it is precisely how it works, especially when a threat is at hand. I actually haven’t suggested any laws that I would want in regard to Muslims so you are drawing your own misled conclusions with your two sets of laws theory. But I have pointed out that this article does fit into the debate on Islamic dress and where it’s place is in Western society. As far as internment goes, I don’t think we need it yet, but it is always a viable option and one that in the past has proven necessary and understandable.
My point, bipartisan, is simply that we cannot/should not run to the authorities everytime we see a muslim person wearing headphones. There are 1.5 billion of them in the world, several million in the US. That would get pretty tiresome after a while, don’t you think? And should we not at least put *some* faith the security measures currently in place that try to prevent such attacks [see my previous post about security in gov't buildings]?
More to the point, when people cry wolf everytime something like this happens, the public grows more weary of the terror threat, and become less vigilant. You can almost feel the collective eyes of the American people glaze over. When you set that against a backdrop of an administration that regularly exploits our fear of terrorism for political gain [and one which most Americans don't even trust to begin with], you’ve got a recipe for cynicism and complacency – neither of which we can afford in such dangerous times.
bipartisancomplainer:
I see where you are coming from and I don’t completely disagree.
However, I think where we aren’t seeing eye to eye is on just what Islamic dress constitutes failure to integrate.
I would say the burka covering everything but the eyes does constitute failure to integrate that is cause for concern, I would say the hajib does not and is on par with Koreans using chopsticks.
I see what you are saying, but I would say that Muslims trying to conceal anything that has wires is cause for concern whether they are using a hajib or a hoody or any other form of clothing, Muslim or otherwise. Of course, anyone concealing wires in a courtroom is cause for concern, but since I don’t have a problem with profiling, perhaps one could say a Muslim doing it is cause for a bit more concern.
So, all that said, I think an issue doesn’t really need to be made of a hajib. It is entirely possible, based on what we know, that this woman is an otherwise very integrated woman who might not drink alcohol (probably not a bad thing), might not eat pork, but enjoys the Spice Girls and could possibly wear tight jeans along with her Hajib. She could be just a immature brat.
Now, it could also be that she ISN’T integrated, but if that’s the case, I don’t think the hajib alone would be the issue. It would be an issue, if for example, she supports legislation that ALL Britsh women wear hajibs, but we don’t know she thinks that way.
Anyhow, sorry if I that was long, but I hope I was clear. Take care all.
Correction:
Muslims trying to conceal anything that has wires
should read:
Muslims in a courtroom trying to conceal anything that has wires
ZeroAngel, I basically agree with what you are saying and I must point out that I haven’t suggested the banning of hajibs. I also have not posted anything about this girl specifically beyond I was appalled at her lack of respect for authority.
I HAVE SAID that MM posting this article is relevant to the debate of how Muslim dress fits into Western society, that debating and taking actions against possible issues with Muslim dress in the name of security is not racist and that immigrants (from anywhere to anywhere) should be expected to assimilate to the culture they are choosing to join. I have not suggested that assimilation means erasing all hints of any cultural or religious heritage but I do strongly disagree that someone’s religion should dictate how much they assimilate in a society they are choosing to become a part of (not said by you but I’m cataloging what I have actually posted).
Huggybear, aside from the fact I have not recommended going to the authorities because someone is wearing headphones, I still disagree with you. Public vigilance has already thwarted several plots that were not headed off by government. Frankly it is the only thing the nation has asked of us so far and it truly is the least any of us could do. Will mistakes be made? Yes. Should we stop? No. I also don’t think public vigilance is the culprit for the glazed eyes of a lot of Americans. Those eyes were glazed over long before Islamic terrorism was even an issue.
Sorry that should have said “banning of hijabs”
Let’s see, if it is bigotry, where does it come from? Did I look at people with in Islamic dress or of apparent Middle East descent suspiciously while growing up? Nope. Did I in college? Nope. Actually, it has only been in the last 10 years that I have become suspicious. Why is that? Did I change? Did I suddenly develop a phobia about Islamic dress? Nope. People who dress that way and look that way started blowing up things I care about, started killing people I know and threatened numerous times publicly to kill everyone I care about if I choose not to share their religious belief system.
In that framework, looking suspiciously at people who look and dress like people who have threatened to kill you for no reason is NOT bigoted, it is self-preservation! The bigotry in that context is not the fault of the threatened but instead the fault of the aggressor. When nearly half of Muslim male youths in this country say that suicide bombings of innocent civilians is sometimes justified, I am damn suspicious of young Muslim males because today may be the day they feel justified. I’d feel a lot different if 90%+ of Muslims openly stated that randomly killing civilians is wrong. I would feel different if 90%+ of Muslims openly protested strapping a suicide bomb on a 6 year old as morally reprehensible. I would feel a heckuva lot different if they loved their children more than they want to see me and my loved ones dead.
I don’t support harming a person who appears to be Muslim, however, I have every right and justification in being suspicious. I am really tired of the bigot label being thrown out at those of us who want to stay alive and refuse to be sheep led to slaughter when some innocent looking 12 year old girl in a hajib walks into the local grocery store and sets off her bomb because nobody wanted to offend her by being suspicious of her.
Exactly. This is one of the common sense points Michelle is making. Political Correctness will murder many Americans (and others) if we allow it to dictate how we respond.
Good point to expound on and to explain – thanks DDiver, for clearly & succintely cutting through the baloney preoffered by those (e.g. this Islamic woman) who have zero respect for our laws.