I expect to see outrage from those who regularly post about the sanctity of
freedom of religion on these pages.
Bravo, NYPD!Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all the
terrorists killing Americans are Muslims.The "tolerance and
diversity" crowd will be outraged at this "attack on religious
freedom." But, Islamist radicals have been at war with the west
for many years now, and to deny or ignore that puts us all at risk. The murders
at Fort Hood and the Boston marathon are only the most memorable examples.
Jihad does not involve declarations of war by nation states, nor uniformed
armies as is customary among civilized nations and the laws of war.To blindly ignore the reality of those who are killing us puts us all at risk.
Identifying the seething hotbeds of covert activity against us is the first
step to protecting us from those who mean us harm. Than you NYPD.
Now, who believes that the only Mosques harboring radicals are in New York
City?Again, not all Muslims are terrorists, and the peaceful ones
are free to practice their faith. But we must stop those who are intent on
killing us, and our culture and our Constitution and thereby extinguish all
religions except Islam.
This is a real problem that I fear we sweep under the rug of political
correctness (i.e., civil liberties) at our peril. The problem is
this is a religion whose two most important scared books (Quran and Hadith)
contain many passages that implore and even command believers to subjugate and
kill non-believers.I believe the vast majority of Muslims are just
like anyone else – decent, law abiding, love their families, etc. But if
there was ever a potential for otherwise good people to be deranged by a
religion, Islam is it. And polling data seems to bear this out – look at
responses by Muslims to questions like “is it OK to kill in defense of the
faith?” The percentages who agree with this mindset, even in relatively
moderate countries like Turkey, should trouble us deeply.No doubt
the answers will require us straddle the fence between liberty and safety, but
there is no question that, prior to 9-11, had the Hamburg police been doing at
least some of what the NYPD has done the World Trade Center Towers would likely
still be standing.
We wouldn’t tolerate this if the police were targeting a church or
synagogue. If a terrorist suspect or suspects are known to frequent a certain
house of worship, that shouldn’t make everyone who worships there a
suspect. I agree that police must follow tips to wherever the trail of evidence
leads but they mustn’t designate an entire religious congregation as a
terrorist cell or organization without hard evidence. What in blue blazes is
going on here?This policy sounds like an open season hunting license
for cops. In a case like this, the mosques being so designated could have its
legal counsel ask for an immediate Federal court injunction instructing the
police counter-terrorism unit to show cause.
This is a good decision by the NYPD.Our safety is more important
than ensuring some Muslims aren't offended.How many terrorists
have to scream "In the name of Allah" while killing innocent men women
and children before we admit there is a relationship between those who follow
Allah and terrorism?They themselves admit there is a relationship.
@GZE --"I expect to see outrage from those who regularly post
about the sanctity of freedom of religion on these pages."Nah.
"Freedom of religion" only applies to Christians.
Go to the wrong church (your guess as to which ones), wear the wrong clothes,
say the wrong things, have the wrong household stuff in your kitchen/garage/
storage shed, join the wrong clubs, be a veteran --- and you too can be the
secret target of warrantless searches/ surveillance/ incarceration, etc.
OK, I'll try again without the link ( to get the posting approved).How about adding some confusion to the issue with facts --- less than
10% of terrorist attacks in the US have been by Muslim extremists according to
this (which has links to the FBI stats --- including a list of the specific
incidents) The real issue is not Muslims being investigated: it is
the abusive (and illegal IMHO) use of the terrorist label to dodge
@ Contrarius:Your ongoing political bias, combined with your
untactful sarcasm are not nearly as appealing or appreciated as you obviously
wish them to be. The record speaks for itself. There are less than
2% Muslims in America. Yet Muslims have been involved in a very high percentage
of terrorist related attacks in America and overseas on Americans. With those
facts well known, how can any Muslim not expect a higher degree of scrutiny by
law enforcement officials? Safety is important to Americans... just
like it is to others around the world. The secret is in trying to find the right
balance of personal freedom and personal safety. Under most conditions,
it's pretty much impossible to have a completeness of both. It
seems evident that the reporter of this article has a political ax to grind and
didn't give the NYPD a sufficient opportunity to respond to his
allegations. Perhaps he's just trying to win a Pulitzer Prize for
investigative reporting without regard to the consequences of his actions.
It's difficult to determine. But readers should keep in mind that crime
rates have come way down in NYC in the past decade.
@ContrariusThey're free to exercise their religion within the
law, not sure how this has changed that. If a Christian, jewish, Hindu, or some
other denomination had been responsible for the 9-11 attacks I'm sure it
would have caught law enforements attention as well.
If members of my religion caused the events in NYC on 9/11, 1 would more than
expect this scrutiny (and more) from the NYPD.
I understand the obvious links. But Muslim terrorism appears to come from a
specific, radicalized strain. I can understand a mosque that teaches such
radical views being targeted but not all mosques. From my (admittedly brief)
search online, this does appear to be all mosques in the city.I find
U.S. News and World Report: "Of the more than 300 American deaths from
political violence and mass shootings since 9/11, only 33 have come at the hands
of Muslim-Americans..."Wired:" Since 9/11, ...33 Americans
have died as a result of terrorism launched by their Muslim neighbors. During
that period, 180,000 Americans were murdered for reasons unrelated to terrorism.
In just the past year, the mass shootings that have captivated America’s
attention killed 66 Americans, 'twice as many fatalities as from
Muslim-American terrorism in all 11 years since 9/11...'"A
few examples of non-Muslim terrorism in the US over the last 20 years --1. Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre 2012. White supremacist Wade Michael
Page killed 6 Sikhs.2. Suicide attack on IRS building in Austin
2010. Stack, the pilot, left a suicide note attacking the IRS, health insurance
companies, and bank bailouts. 3. Dr. George Tiller 2009. Shot and
killed by anti-abortion terrorist Scott Roeder, after years of repeated attacks
and violence by Christian extremists.4. Knoxville Unitarian
Universalist Church shooting 2008. I was living in Knoxville at the
time this one happened. (continued)
(continued)Christian Rightist Jim David Adkisson walked into the
church and shot nine people. His excuse was that he hated "liberals,
Democrats, blacks, and gays". He considered neocon Bernard Goldberg’s
book, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America, his political manifesto. 5. Dr. Barnett Slepian 1998. Killed by a radical Christian terrorist. Another
abortion provider murdered. 6. The Centennial Olympic Park bombing
1996. Eric Rudolph -- also praised by the Army of God -- serving life without
parole for a long list of terrorist attacks committed in the name of
Christianity, including the Olympic Park bombing, which wounded more than 100
people, as well as the bombings of two abortion clinics and a lesbian bar.7. Oklahoma City bombing 1995. 168 people were killed and more than 600
were injured. 8. Dr. John Britton 1994. Paul Jennings Hill,
associated with The Army of God -- Christian radicals -- killed Britton (an
abortion provider) and his bodyguard. The Army of God has a long history of
terrorist attacks on abortion providers. 9. Planned Parenthood
bombing, Brookline, Massachusetts, 1994. Another Army of God member. @Mayfair and @paintandestory --These attacks were all carried out
by Christian terrorists. Where is the scrutiny of Christian churches?
If the goal is to stop terrorism, doesn't it make slightly more sense to
listen to whats' going on in mosques than to wiretap EVERY phone/computer
in America and spend billions of dollars listening to inane conversations?
The Westboro Baptist Church and its members are labeled with a similar
So much for freedom of religion.
@There You Go Again --"The Westboro Baptist Church and its
members are labeled with a similar designation?"No.They are annoying, and their members have broken multiple laws over the years,
but so far as I know they have never physically harmed anyone.They
are labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti
Defamation League, but they are not designated as a "terrorism
organization" by any group I know of.
Can you imagine how peaceful this planet would be without Islam?
@Contrarius – “These attacks were all carried out by Christian
terrorists. Where is the scrutiny of Christian churches?”The
difference is one of degree, and in this case a large degree (i.e., a few wacko
religious fanatics vs. a mindset that believes it is “God’s
will” to do horrible things to sinners & infidels).Every
religion has the capacity to produce fanaticism, some more than others. And far
be it from me to defend the sacred books of Christianity – the OT is a
mess of barbarism and moral relativism that often reads like a biography of an
all-powerful psychopath – but in the case of Christianity, almost no one
takes the book literally anymore (thank God!). Do you know any
devout believers who kill their children for talking back, stone their neighbors
if they mow on Sunday or kill those who pray to graven images (e.g., Hindus)?With Islam there are millions who still take it all that literally
– the Taliban is pretty much a government built on a literal
interpretation of OT and Koranic commands and values.
what do you expect but an attack on religion from the secularists in charge in
DC and NYC?
Contrarius, you can keep adding to your list but it will never match the blood
soaked record of Islam.
There would be someone designated as "enemies" by the
military/industrial/political/religious complex even if Islam had never existed.
Someone will always point the finger at someone else "worthy" of hate.
Islam is NOT a religion. It is a political system that promotes the destruction
of all that are not followers of Islam. Islam is a cancer. Mosques are
terrorists organizations where those bent on destroying our country foster
hatred and violence against everything that is American. Islam and muslims
should all be deported. Look at what is happening in Dearborn, Michigan? It will
become another France and UK. Sharia law has no business existing in America. It
will NEVER supersede The Constitution. Islam is anti-free will, anti-free
agency. It is a danger to all of us who live in America.
I guess terrorists of all kinds are succeeding, based on the fear expressed by
some on this board who would gladly give up an entire religious group's
Constitutional rights to feel somewhat safer. And just because the focus is on
Islam doesn't mean similar methods won't (or aren't) being used
on other groups. It's tough for the Constitution to compete with an
ends-justifies-the-means policy and once government fully embraces said approach
it is the end of our personal freedoms. Maybe it's useful to have an
"enemy" now that the Cold War has been over for years and years. Doing
so keeps the Security business and National Defense fully funded and in a power
position. Let us all pray for peace...and in New York they will be
able to listen in on the Muslims as they do so.
@podunk utah --"Contrarius, you can keep adding to your list but
it will never match the blood soaked record of Islam."How short
the memories are around here.Christian forces have killed
**millions** over the centuries. No religion is innocent.Yes, there
are worrisome things about Islam. But there are worrisome things about every
religion. In the meantime, we can either choose to defend our
Constitution or abandon it. And defending it means protecting EVERYONE equally,
whether we happen to like them or not.If NYPD identifies a specific
group of Muslims that presents probable cause for investigation, then by all
means investigate them. But declaring whole mosques as terrorist organizations
based on flimsy or no evidence is blatantly unconstitutional -- and I hope NYPD
gets taken to the cleaners for it.Remember Ben Franklin --
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Freedom of religion GZE, not freedom to do terriorism. Any organization,
religious or not, that was known to support, organize, fund, and or act as
terriorists would be put under the same scrutiny.
@SCfan --"Any organization, religious or not, that was known to
support, organize, fund, and or act as terriorists would be put under the same
scrutiny."The problem is that these mosques have been designated
as terrorist organizations even WITHOUT any evidence.From the
article:"often without specific evidence of criminal
wrongdoing."and"even though the NYPD has never
criminally charged a mosque or Islamic organization with operating as a
terrorism enterprise."If the NYPD actually had probable cause,
I'd say more power to them.But they don't.And
that makes their surveillance unconstitutional.
@DN Subscriber 2"Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all the
terrorists killing Americans are Muslims."Terrorists have killed
4 people in America this year (the victims of the Bostom bombing and the cop who
died in the subsequent shootout with them a few days later). Guns as a whole are
on pace to be used to kill over 10,000 Americans this year.
@Tyler D"No doubt the answers will require us straddle the fence
between liberty and safety"I thought we were outraged about the
NSA and TSA... oh right, this involves brown people being surveyed, not white
people. I forgot that it's okay if it's not "us" having our
@Tators"Yet Muslims have been involved in a very high percentage of
terrorist related attacks in America and overseas on Americans"First off, overseas they're more like 20% of the world population.
Secondly, we're at war in at least one (some say half a dozen due to
drones) predominantly Muslim nation (one tends to disproportionately face
blowback from people you're bombing). Thirdly, what's a terrorist
attack? How does that differ from the other 10,000 murders we have in the US
each year? I consider the people threatening abortion clinics to be terrorists
but others disagree with that. If we define terrorist attack in such a way that
you basically limit it to only attacks by Muslims... then you're going to
get a disproportionate percentage of them as attacks by Muslims. The shootings
in Aurora and Newtown, those weren't considered terrorist attacks. Would
they have been if it weren't some white guy doing it?
C....How are the police supposed to get evidence without
surveillance? This is really just the profile thing all over again. It is only
smart police work to watch places that have been known in the past as places
where terriorists may be meeting. Remember the wall of seperation under
Clinton/Reno? One agency like the CIA can't know what some other agency
like the FBI knows due to privacy or some such thing. So when some person
reports suspicious activity to the FBI, the CIA cannot help connecting the dots.
Had that not been the policy, then maybe 911 could have been stopped. And with
these special judges that sign off on warrents, the NYPD could and should use
them when they get a tip and or have reasonable suspicion of bad activity at
mosques. If they get reasonable suspicion of come Christian church doing
something then they should surveil that too. Just good pre-emptive police work.
@SCfan --"How are the police supposed to get evidence without
surveillance?"That's the argument used by the NSA.Unfortunately for them, we have this thing called the US Constitution. And the
Bill of Rights specifically guards us against unreasonable searches and
seizures, and stipulates that government forces MUST have probable cause before
instituting their searches."It is only smart police work to
watch places that have been known in the past as places where terriorists may be
meeting"The problem is that the mosques being targeted have NOT
been known as places where terrorists have met. There is NO EVIDENCE that these
mosques are involved in anything illegal.There is no probable cause
here. And that makes the surveillance unconstitutional.It's
worth pointing out that Bloomberg is the same guy who tried to ban 44 oz soft
drinks. He firmly believes in the nanny state. He himself has said:
"our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to
change.."IOW, he couldn't care much less what the
Constitution says.I do care. And you should, too.