Latest Entry: Mumbai terrorists aided by CNN (Victims compromised)     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« Does AP stand for Al-Qaeda Propaganda? | Main | New Music Video by Pop Singer Helen Reddy »

September 24, 2006

Post Graduate Level Dhimmitude: British Police To 'Seek Approval' From Muslim Groups

Topics: Understanding Islam

You are not going to believe this, but the British police are going to seek the approval of Muslim groups before performing any anti-terrorism raids.

Isn't this like saying, "Gee, Imam Ali-Ali-Infree, may we have permission to arrest your murdering jihadist followers before the blow up a train-load of innocent women and children"?

TigerHawk calls this the single worst idea in law enforcement since Prohibition:

For starters, why wouldn't the principle behind it, if it can be said there is a principle, extend to all groups? Did the British meet with the Irish before raiding the IRA so as to avoid offending Irish sensibilities? If this concept is valid in the country that gave us our legal system, it is hard to see why American police shouldn't meet with Italians and Russians before raiding the Mafia, Columbians before busting cocaine dealers, and a panel of CEOs before pursuing Sarbanes-Oxley violations. Otherwise there might be consequences for "community relations."

Of course, it would never cross the mind of the police to consult a panel of ordinary Londoners, the past and future victims of successful terrorist attacks, to see if they think the evidence in hand before a raid is too "flimsy."

Now reductio ad absurdum arguments are easy to make, especially when political correctness influences the decisions of bureaucrats. There are also numerous obvious practical problems with this idea, including that it runs huge security risks (notwithstanding promises that the panel members will be vetted) and that it gives a particular ethnic group a quasi-veto over police operations designed to interdict crimes that -- like it or not -- are almost always organized within that ethnicity. There are, however, two specific philosophical problems with these consultations that should be extremely troubling to anybody concerned with prosecution of terrorism.

First, we have people who are supposed to determine whether evidence is too "flimsy." They are called judges, and they are expert in applying the law consistently. The British police have obviously decided that judges are not nearly smart or independent enough to declare evidence "flimsy" -- they need a panel of amateurs to do that. Well, if judges are not competent to judge the worthiness of evidence before the issuance of a warrant to raid suspected terrorists, why are they competent to do so in other contexts? By agreeing to a second level of "ethnic" review, have not the British police destroyed the credibility of judges in weighing evidence in any situation? If I am wrong, please explain why in the comments.

Second, the British police are destroying their own credibility with non-Muslims. As Melanie Phillips points out in her oustanding book Londonistan, heretofore the British police have gone to absurd lengths to declare that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam or the Muslim community. While it is in your interests to read the entire book, this lengthy excerpt gives you the core Phillips' argument regarding the police:

Continue reading, "Londonistan: The British police go to Muslims on bended knee."

Clarity & Resolve brings total "clarity" to the decision of the British police by saying, "Behold the anti-sense absurdity of Western multiculturalism's logical end."

I call it Post Graduate level dhimmitude, and the next step is sharia.




Posted by Abdul at September 24, 2006 9:25 PM


Articles Related to Understanding Islam: