Wednesday, January 16, 2019
Muslim Community Patrol Cars In Brooklyn Sparks Backlash...
The new Muslim Community Patrol cars seen driving through parts of Staten Island and Brooklyn have all the hallmarks of an NYPD police car – with identical car model and similar decals and artwork – but they are not an official branch of New York’s Finest.
So who are they?
Ostensibly, they are a group of Muslim Community Patrol “officers” who are on the lookout for abused Muslims who are too afraid to talk directly to the NYPD.
“We can mingle, speak, talk,” Noor Rabah, an MCP patrolman, told Spectrum News 1 NY.
The MCP launched its first patrol unit last November in Brooklyn’s Bay Ridge neighborhood.
“It is extremely important for every community to have their own community patrol because the community has its own culture, its own language, it has its own lingo, its own vibes,” Rabah said.
But is any of this true, that the MCP is a nothing but an altruistic buffer between the Muslim community and the NYPD?
Not according to the NYPD.
“This is not an NYPD vehicle,” Sergeant Jessica McRorie told PJ Media. “The NYPD did not outfit or label this vehicle. This group is not officially sanctioned by the NYPD.”
In fact, the MCP doesn’t have ANY working relationship with the NYPD, which they are trying so hard to emulate and imitate.
(If you’re trying to ally the fears of Muslims who don’t want to talk to the NYPD, then why try so hard to look like them?)
Not surprisingly, the Internet is now filled with blogs and stories that the MCP is really nothing more than Muslim sharia units on the lookout for anyone violating Sharia laws, whether Muslim or not.
Those fears are not unwarranted.
“We have seen Sharia patrols in Austria, Denmark, Sweden, the UK, the Netherlands, and Germany. So why is it inconceivable that they could arise in New York City? It isn’t,” wrote Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch.
No so long ago, an incident arose in England that sparked international outrage when a group of Muslims calling themselves the Muslim Patrol started demanding that non-Muslims in London move away from their mosque.
“Go away now,” they would shout at passersby. “Don’t come back. Don’t come back. Keep your mouth closed.”
“We the Muslim community,” one said, “will continue to patrol the streets and clear the streets of...
A License To Hate
by Victor Davis Hanson
Recently on CNN, former Republican politico and now Never Trump cable new analyst Rick Wilson characterized Donald Trump’s supporters as his “credulous rube ten-toothed base.”
Wilson was not original in his smear of the 63 million Americans who voted for Trump. He was likely resonating an earlier slander of Politico reporter Marco Caputo. The latter had tweeted of the crowd he saw at a Trump rally: “If you put everyone’s mouths together in this video, you’d get a full set of teeth.”
Was the point of these stereotypes that poor white working-class people who supposedly voted for the controversial Trump understandably ate improperly, did not practice proper dental hygiene, or did not visit dentists—or all three combined?
When challenged, Caputo doubled down on his invective. He snarled, “Oh no! I made fun of garbage people jeering at another person as they falsely accused him of lying and flipped him off. Someone fetch a fainting couch.”
Caputo’s “Garbage people” was also a synonym for the smears that two career FBI agents on separate occasions had called the archetypical Trump voters.
In the released trove of the Department of Justice text communications involving the Clinton email probe, an unidentified FBI employee had texted to another FBI attorney his abject contempt for the proverbial Trump voter and indeed middle America itself: “Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS [“pieces of sh*t”].” In fact, Trump in 2016 received about 90 percent of allRepublican votes, about the same ratio as won by both recent presidential candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney.
In the now notorious text communications between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, fired FBI operatives on Robert Mueller’s special counsel team, Strzok right before the 2016 election had texted his paramour Page: “Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support.”
Recently actor Jim Carey tweeted a picture of Trump supporters as apes, as if evolution is now operating in reverse as Trumpians descend into primate status.
Rep. Hank Johnson (who on prior occasions had referred to Jewish residents on the West Bank as “termites,” and believed that too many American troops based on the shoreline of Guam might “tip” the island over and capsize it) recently compared Trump to Hitler, and characterized Trump’s supporters—which included 90 percent of the Republican Party—as “older, less educated, less prosperous, and they are dying early. Their lifespans are decreasing, and many are dying from alcoholism, drug overdoses, liver disease, or simply a broken heart caused by economic despair." For former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump supporters are “virulent people” and “the dregs of society”.
Note the force of such dehumanizing invective that transcends political differences. Trump voters were not just mistaken in their political allegiances. Instead they looked like toothless zombies and stunk up stores, and are not quite human, and are destined to die off. And all this from supposedly progressive humanists, quick to demonize others who would mimic their venom.
At about the same time as Wilson’s recent smear, multimillionaire TV personality Donny Duetsch weighed in on television about the Trump supporters who favor building a barrier on the southern border to discourage illegal immigration:
“This is all [Trump] has left. That one metaphor, that one thing that talks to that 39, 40, 41% base that says: either the black man, or the brown man, or the Jewish man, or the media man, or the banker man is coming to take your wife?” According to Duetsch’s analysis, were the legions of Democrats—including Sens. Biden and Chuck Schumer—who supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006 that authorized hundreds of miles of border fencing, also worried over their virility or is just the working middle class?
Both Wilson and Deutsch in the past had also characterized Trump supporters as Nazi-like. Both, in lieu of any analyses of why or how Trump got elected or has found success in restoring the economy to robust growth, resorted to crude stereotypes of a constituency in a fashion they knew would be exempt from criticisms of bias and crude stereotyping. Similarly, for historian Jon Meacham and Rep. Stephen Cohen (R-TN), Trump’s audience and appeal are similar to those of the Ku Klux Klan’s of the 1920s.
The New York Times takes loud pride in its adamant opposition to hatred and racial, class, and gender bias—at least in theory. That is why it both hired and understandably fired in the same day tech writer Quinn Norton, once it discovered that she had remained friends with notorious Alt-right racist Andrew Auernheimer, despite claims of frequently disassociating herself from his repugnant views.
Yet the Times hired and kept another tech writer on its editorial board, the racist Harvard Law School grad Sarah Jeong. She had not just befriended a racist, but was an abject hater herself—at least if her twitter trove can be believed. But the difference was twofold, Jeong was Asian-American, and the objects of her hatred were purportedly old and white. And she apparently knew well that such a formula provided her exemption from any criticism for expressing toxicity.
Indeed, Jeong was never shy about her crude dehumanizing venom: “Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins?” And “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.” And “White people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.” And on and on.
For decades race and gender studies academics had argued that overtly expressed racism against whites was not real racism, but could be contextualized by prior white oppression. In the age of furor against Trump, their theories now went off campus and were being adjudicated by a wider constituency—and yet they did not seem to win agreement from the general public. The irony, of course, is that these professionals displayed far less humanity in their crude putdowns about smells, toothlessness and apes than did the targets of their smears.
But the hatred was not confined to the media and politicos, but rather also came from the very top of the Democratic Party. After the election, a defeated Hillary Clinton openly doubled-down on...
Judge Orders Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes to Answer Benghazi Questions
Judge Royce C. Lamberth also ordered senior Obama officials, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes, to provide written answers to Judicial Watch under oath.
Judicial Watch’s discovery includes answers to these questions:
- Whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system;
- whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith; and
- whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.
Via Judicial Watch:
Judge Lamberth ordered written responses under oath to Judicial Watch’s questions from Obama administration senior officials Rice, Rhodes and Sullivan, and former FBI official Priestap. Rice and Rhodes will answer interrogatories under oath on the Benghazi scandal. Rejecting the State and Justice Department objections to discovery on the infamous Benghazi talking points, Judge Lamberth reiterated:
Yet Rice’s talking points and State’s understanding of the attack play an unavoidably central role in this case: information about the points’ development and content, as well as their discussion and dissemination before and after Rice’s appearances could reveal unsearched, relevant records; State’s role in the points’ content and development could shed light on Clinton’s motives for shielding her emails from FOIA requesters or on State’s reluctance to search her emails.
Both Rice and Rhodes lied their fool heads off, but they can possibly parse words and finagle their way out of it.
Somehow, we have to get to the bottom of what went on. This appears to be the biggest scandal in U.S. history. Whatever people think of the President, the prior administration has never answered for their corruption and their role in the Russia-Trump probe.
HANNITY SAYS THE PRESIDENT HAS PROOF
On his radio show this week, Hannity said there is still a lot of information to come out proving corruption. He reminded listeners that the investigations of John Huber and Michael Horowitz are still ongoing. Then he said the President is holding information proving corruption.
“The president has five different buckets of information that he’s...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)