Jihad Watch
November 24, 2008
"Muslim civil rights" group outraged over NYPD report that says young Muslim men are susceptible to "jihadization"
"Muslim Civil Group Blasts NYPD `Terrorism' Report," by Nicole Neroulias for
RNS, November 21 (thanks to Pamela):
NEW YORK (RNS)
A New York City Police Department report that characterizes young Muslim men as susceptible to Islamic extremism and "jihadization" is biased and unfair, a Muslim civil rights group said Thursday (Nov. 20).
The Muslim American Civil Liberties Coalition, created last year in response to a NYPD analysis of terrorism plots, said it has already met with Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly several times to protest the 90-page report, "Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat."
Although the NYPD report states "there is no useful profile" of a potential terrorist, it notes that most of the plotters of 11 global cases over the past six years -- including the 9/11 attacks -- were Muslim men under the age of 35.
"While the report is not intended to profile Muslims or Islam, the report does exactly that," said Naoma Nagahawatte, New York City office director of the
Muslim Public Affairs Council, during the Thursday protest on the steps of City Hall.
Ah, MPAC. That explains a lot right there.
European Muslim plotters, who face different socioeconomic barriers and are considered more vulnerable to extremist beliefs, should not be lumped together with Americans, the coalition members agree....
Yeah, those jihadi doctors in the UK faced horrific socioeconomic barriers, didn't they?
In calling for a complete revision of the report, which has also been referenced by other police departments and the Senate Homeland Security Committee,
the coalition advises law enforcement agencies to increase partnerships with Muslim groups and develop programs to educate police officers and Muslims about each other.
"Through a more cooperative strategy," the report said, "we can be safe while free."
Remember:
MPAC's idea of "a more cooperative strategy" is to advise Muslims that they don't have to speak to the FBI (
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=F6895223-91ED-4BA3-AF45-1C556C04E379 ).
The Muslims' critique is endorsed by civil liberties advocates, the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, and the Sikh Coalition, whose members also experienced anti-Muslim discrimination and hate crimes in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks because of their traditional turbans and beards.
You're breaking my heart, folks. In the first place, many of the reported anti-Muslim hate crimes have proven to be trumped up (
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2627 ).
Secondly, I myself have been subjected to extra searches in airports on occasion, perhaps because I am a bearded, swarthy type with a Qur'an in my luggage. Once I was surrounded by airport police and taken for questioning because they saw the word "jihad" on my laptop screen while I was working and waiting for a delayed flight. And
I would never dream of complaining about any of this. I'm willing to put up with inconveniences for the sake of the effort to protect America from jihad attacks. That anyone would not be similarly willing, and would instead put their personal convenience above national security, is unconscionable.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023618.php
