Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Now the US Is Suffering from “Structural Islamophobia”
You may recall that, back on May 30, lawyers Urooj Rahman and Colinford Mattis were arrested for allegedly tossing a Molotov cocktail into a police car during a “peaceful” protest in New York City. According to police, the two were picked up as they drove away from the scene. Evidence of the crime includes a photo of Rahman with cocktail in hand and face partially covered with a Palestinian keffiyeh.
According to a report from IPT (the Investigative Project on Terrorism), “Islamist, Arab American and Palestinian organizations” along with civil rights groups are defending the pair with claims that the charges against them are “motivated by racism and ‘structural Islamophobia.’”
The two lawyers’ defenders include: The Center for Constitutional Rights, The Justice for Muslims Collective, Linda Sarsour’s MPower Change (MPC), the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), Islamic Circle of North America Council for Social Justice (ICNA-CSJ), Arab Resource and Organizing Center (AROC), and lawyers calling themselves the “Fordham Law Community,” and the “NYU Law Community.”
Believers Bail Out (BBO), a group established to “free Muslims who are incarcerated before trial,” stated:
We must understand how the prison industrial complex, anti-black racism, anti-Muslim racism are all inherent to a capitalist system. And we must learn how to dismantle these structures from the freedom fighters who came before us.
The incident and the angry defense of the cocktail bombers brings up some key questions:
- Why are so many lawyers supporting Rahman and Mattis?
- Is there a lawyer exemption in the law against torching cop cars?
- How are “the prison industrial complex, anti-black racism, and anti-Muslim racism” integral to the Capitalist system?
- Would the Capitalist system crumble without anti-Muslim racism and, if so, what are the mechanics of the collapse?
- Should the fact that Rhaman was using a Bud Light bottle weigh in her favor?
There is no point of asking reasonable questions of a group like BBO. Its creed is not based on reason; it is pure propaganda, tried, tested and honed to a fine art in our universities and now trotted out to society at large. And with great effect. They are not trying to convince, they are trying to silence. They found the magic words that will make America completely take down her defenses. They believe that the systemic racism charge is unassailable. And why shouldn’t they? It has toppled statues, provided a looting loophole, eviscerated law and order, and caused American citizens to kneel before them. That’s heady stuff, so there will be more and more of them. They are empowered and emboldened.
They are not accusing “all Muslims” of firebombing a cop car. They are accusing you two knuckleheads.
“Muslim” is not a race.
The “prison-industrial complex” exists to incarcerate all kinds of people, including knuckleheads who firebomb cop cars.
Oh yeah? When is the last time you saw a Methodist get arrested for trying to set a cop car on fire? We know from the “systemic” racism crowd that all groups commit the same crimes at the same rates. The difference in arrest rates is only due to racist cops.
Another question (slightly altered): “is she drinking Bud Light ’cause she thinks she’s fat? Cause she’s not. She could be drinking whole if she wanted to.”
See, there you go. Racism is the default explanation for everything. Maybe Methodists have methodically devised devious methods of firebombing police cars, and that explains their low arrest rate. For example, instead of Bud Light bottles, perhaps they use clear vodka bottles, which are harder to spot.
Funny, she’s not supposed to drink at all.
Local Methodist church is flying rainbow flags now, so I wouldn’t be entirely surprised.
All you racists have bough right into the Molotov cocktail line, but that’s a racist lie. Bud Light is up there with Schlitz and Pabst for worst “beer” ever, and it’s obvious that she was just trying to get rid of it while protecting herself from the aroma, and being Muslim, of course she didn’t know what she was getting into when she took a sip. Poor thing.
Oikophobia. They are anti-white, anti-American and anti-Western. The evils of Islam and don’t interest them in the least.
Are you judging her body? Is there no limit to your masculine toxicificatory oppressions?
Trump pretty much gave us the solution for this problem with Suleimani. Let God (Allah) sort them out.
Terrorism disguised as “peaceful protest” . . .
I haven’t yet read all the responses, but as far as I am concerned it isn’t racism, it is pure unaltered hated for Islam.
Did you ever notice that they call out the “racism” that they want to see, but aren’t finding sufficient evidence of?
That is a really strange story. What were they hoping to accomplish, and are they being dealt with differently than others in their position?
Yes, but it’s beginning to effect my black, great grandchildren. all of whom used to be adorable. As adults, one is an alcoholic, one is in college on his way to achieving, one is a little jerk, and the youngest, autistic.
From the Intelligencer article:
…
Much of the article is devoted to telling the two lawyers’ life story and arguing that they are good people and do not deserve to be facing life in prison for torching an abandoned police car that had already been “badly damaged” in earlier rioting.
I’m not a lawyer, but I suspect that this information would be relevant only at the time of sentencing – assuming that they’re convicted – and not in the trial itself. The question at the trial is whether they broke the law.
Trying the case under federal law seems questionable to me. Apparently, the argument for the move is that, because they used an incendiary/explosive device, their crime was an act of terrorism punishable under federal law. This seems to be a bit of a stretch. The article strongly implies that racism drove the decision to move the case to federal courts:
“Racism” seems to be the knee-jerk explanation for everything, so my bias is to push back against it. But I’m not a mind reader.
I don’t think it’s racism either. So, why? Seems like the interesting angle. What’s the purpose of treating these two differently? (If that’s true.)
Possibly the people who made the decision see this as a way to advance their careers given that this is a high-visibility case. Whether the case turns out to be a career builder or a career destroyer might depend on who wins in November. This is all speculation, though, and way above my paygrade.
Remember that lawyers tend to be thoroughly corrupted left-wingers. And that’s from ctlaw who is himself a lawyer.
Rather than ask why these two are getting the book thrown at them, I’d like to know why the rest aren’t.
By my understanding, where the other arrested protestors were not so easily identifiable in the vicinity of illegal things happening, these two were very identifiable, caught on camera doing something clearly illegal.
Do you believe someone becomes alcoholic because of racism? That’s disappointing. But if true, and since presumably all four were subject to racism, why aren’t all four alcoholic?
Autism doesn’t have much to do with racism. It’s partly genetic and it is partly what happens in the womb.
I believe what she is saying is that they are all over the place.
Being a jerk isn’t exactly a handicap. For me, it’s just a fact of life.
Indeed, but doesn’t being “all over the place” actually suggest that racism was not really a/the major factor in any of their cases?
Gee? Ya think?
Yes, but that was addressed more to @kayofmt who seems to think it’s because of racism. Unless she later explains that her comment was poorly worded or something.
Sorry, I didn’t explain very well. The 3 oldest were raised by their Black father, and he hates whites. Their Black grandparents had a lot of input who also don’t seem to like the white side of the family. The youngest child may turn out OK. Different father, and actually likes the white side of the family. The little guy came with his parents to MT at Xmas, and as they were getting ready to go back to CA, he was bouncing all over the place. I told him to stand still so his great granny could give him a kiss, and he did!
Okay then, so it might be fair to blame racism, but it would be anti-white racism on the part of (one of) their father and grandparents.
Leaving open the question of why a white-hating black father would apparently marry or at least have children with a white woman? Unless these were all adoptions or something.
Islam is not a race.
Since its founding in 622, Mohammed and his followers have displayed nothing but animus against the West.
https://www.raymondibrahim.com/2018/08/20/battle-yarmuk-historys-consequential-muslimwestern-clash/