Thursday, October 26, 2006

Working the Dhimmi Dummies

Scott Johnson at PowerLine lays out the playbook being followed in the Minneapolis taxi drivers farce. I didn't know that we had a fatwa issuing authority in the States, let alone one linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The muslim hack drivers should be free to relinquish their hack licenses should they feel that the fatwa outweighs the carriage laws governing the exercise of their privilege to exercise trade. The Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport could have become the first in the world to ruled by a fictious fatwa. The multicultis are strong there and 'special class' stupidity is not unknown - they may elect one of Farrakhan's fakirs to congress.

This time it appears that the airport authorities decided that the camel's nose really didn't belong in the tent but there is no question that sharia proponents will try again - and there is no question that they will find addle headed support from those unable to separate right from privilege.

UPDATE: VDH explores the theme at length.
Third, civilization is forfeited with a whimper, not a bang. Insidiously, we have allowed radical Islamists to redefine the primordial into the not-so-bad. Perhaps women in head-to-toe burkas in Europe prefer them? Maybe that crass German opera was just too over the top after all? Aren't both parties equally to blame in the Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan wars?


Rick Ballard said...


Link fixed, thanks.

I agree about it being fascinating to watch. The French multicultis are either going to have to drop the hammer or risk losing elections. Power is everything to their leadership, so I'm betting that firing over their heads is going to switch to firing into their heads.

Luther said...

Yes, the old canary in the coal mine. Though sad of course, at least it will serve as illustration to those here, about what will be coming if action is not taken. I do not think that can be spun.

truepeers said...

The international Muslim Brotherhood "preaches that religion and politics cannot be separated and that governments eventually should be Islamic," according to the Tribune. U.S. members emphasize that they follow American laws, but want people here to convert to Islam so that one day a majority will support a society governed by Islamic law. Link

So it is ultimately a question of whether some group has the right to try and change the culture and constitution by "peaceful" means, like getting a majority of votes/dhimmis. I think not - if they were ever to come to power, like the Nazis, by election, the responsible thing would be violently to resist the constitutional usurpers, especially if the constitution is to be replaced by a fantasy ideology which proclaims the end of conflict will happen when everyone signs on to the Sharia.

Once again, we see (link above) that there are many ordinary Muslims (Somali-Americans) who don't want a part of the foolishness and want to ignore much of what the institutional leaders of Arab Islam proclaim to be law. Implicitly, they recognize that making Mohammed and the Koran into serious, be all and end all, models is a bad idea.

But, the taxis and the bigger struggle of which it is a part, is not a conflict between totalitarian and moderate Muslims. The moderates don't really have a public voice and show no signs of getting one. So, defending their side is really besides the point. To speak for Islam in this day and age is to be pressured to focus in the totalitarian, or at least anti-Western, direction. Ultimately, this is a war between Western-led modernity and insitutional, i.e. totalitarian, Islam.

Once one sees this, it becomes rather hard, in my view, to justify the legal presence of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood in our midst. When are we going to get serious and lock these guys up? It has been said in some of our blogging discussions in Canada that we may not be able to deport every totalitarian radical since some of them are home grown. I say, this is what arctic islands are for.