|
24 Feb 2012 By Juan Cole It has now been unearthed that the NYPD has been
using racial profiling to illegally target the
American Muslim community, spying on Muslim students
without reason or warrant. Michael Bloomberg, the
billionaire mayor of New York, was questioned
yesterday about this unethical practice; he defended
it using the typical, disgusting, and morally
repugnant justifications that have become so
commonplace in our national discourse thanks to the
War on of Terror. (Here is an article documenting
Mayor Bloomberg's response.) Bloomberg ominously warned journalists: "You are
not going to survive. You will not be able to be a
journalist and write what you want to say if the
people who want to take away your freedoms are allowed
to succeed." This cowardly fear-mongering has long been used by
authorities to strip citizens of their rights: They
are going to get you, unless you surrender your basic
civil rights! Actually, I should clarify that statement; it
should read: They are going to get you, unless you
surrender the basic civil rights of those
dark-skinned, foreign-looking Moozlums! Sadly, most Americans succumb to this alarmist
rhetoric, readily surrendering what is not theirs to
give away to begin with: the Constitutional rights of
our nation's most vulnerable minority. Bloomberg continued: We have to keep this country safe. This
is a dangerous place. Make no mistake about it. It's
very cute to go and to blame everybody and say we
should stay away from…[policies like] intelligence
gathering. The job of our law enforcement is to make
sure that they prevent things and you only do that
by being proactive. A dangerous place? In fact, those big bad Islamic
terrorists have killed zero civilians in the United
States since 9/11, which was over a decade
ago. A similar situation exists in Europe,
with Europol's annual terrorism
reports showing zero civilian deaths from Islamic
terrorism in the last half decade (which is as far
back as the annual terrorism reports go). Quite
simply, as an American I have a higher chance of
being struck by and killed by lightning–or of
being killed by peanuts–than of being killed by
Islamic terrorists. No amount of fear-mongering,
alarmist propaganda, and Islamophobic rhetoric can
overcome this simple fact, which is why it
bears repetition: In the past decade, zero civilians
have been killed in this country by Islamic
terrorists. Therefore, it is a boldfaced lie to claim that the
threat of terrorism is so grave and ominous that we
must resort to such illegal and unethical tactics to
Keep Us Safe. Bloomberg regurgitates the standard nationalistic
myth, saying: Remind yourself when you turn off the light
tonight, you have your job because there are young
men and women who have been giving their lives
overseas for the last 200 plus years so that we
would have freedom of the press. And we go after the
terrorists. We are going to continue to do that and
the same thing is true for the people that work on
the streets of our cities. This "argument" is often used to quell debate and
stifle criticism: "[our] young men and women have been
giving their lives overseas for the last 200 plus
years so that we would have freedom of the press."
This argument, steeped in uber-patriotism and
drenched in nationalistic propaganda, is intended to
fly over rational debate (what does the "giving [of]
lives overseas for the last 200 plus years" have
anything to do with "freedom of the press"?), and tap
into our basest emotions: anyone who dares reject this
argument by pointing out that it is not just a
non-sequitur but patently false runs the risk of being
accused of lack of patriotism and of being
"un-American". This is so, as I wrote earlier, because the
military is our country's most sacred institution: The military is our national religion, its
soldiers are our holy warriors, the Navy Seals are
our highest religious order, those soldiers who died
in war are our martyrs, 9/11 was our Karbala,
Patriot Day is our annual holy day, the flag is our
holy book and symbol, Osama bin Laden is Lucifer,
Terrorism is the greatest Evil, supporting the
troops is our greatest religious obligation, and
failure to do so is the greatest blasphemy and the
highest of sins. It is true that our military has been waging wars
(of aggression) "overseas for the last 200 plus
years", as I documented in another article of
mine: "We're at War!" — And We Have Been Since 1776:
214 Years of American War-Making. But, this is hardly
something to be proud of…and these wars had nothing to
do with "freedom of the press"–most of them had
everything to do with spreading American hegemony and
usurping the resources of other peoples (and in doing
so, stripping them oftheir most basic civil
liberties). In fact, the greatest insults to the freedom of the
press have historically been during times of war. The
First Amendment Center notes in The First Amendment: A
Wartime Casualty?: Sanford Levinson, a law professor at the
University of Texas, writes: "It is difficult to
read our constitutional history … without believing
that the Constitution is often reduced at best to a
whisper during times of war." The First Amendment is no exception. Attorney
Michael Linfield, author of Freedom Under Fire: U.S.
Civil Liberties in Times of War, writes: "Rather
than being an exception, war-era violations of civil
liberties in the United States are the accepted norm
for our government." The article goes on to mention numerous instances
in American history when civil liberties (including
freedom of the press) were stripped by the government
during wartime. The War I hesitate closing this article with the standard
meme of "it is un-American to curtail civil
liberties", but after second thought, I will save my
readers from this trite, mythical, and nationalistic
mantra. As our military history will attest to, it is
actually very, very American to do so, at least when
it comes to minorities: racism has beset our nation
during most of her many wars, whether it was against
American Indians, Hispanics, or Asians. Today's wars
against Arabs/Muslims overseas–and
the concomitant stripping away of their human rights
both at home and abroad–simply mean staying true to a
long-held American tradition. Mayor Bloomberg affirms the fundamental myth of the
War Update I: A reader, Christian-friend,
commented: I don't see him justifying racial profiling, be
more accurate! From the ACLU's website: Racial Profiling: Definition (2005 resource):
"Racial Profiling" refers to the discriminatory
practice by law enforcement officials of targeting
individuals for suspicion of crime based on the
individual's race, ethnicity, religion or national
origin. Whenever in doubt, substitute "Jewish" for "Muslim"
and see if it sounds right, i.e. it would be racial
profiling if police targeted Jewish citizens. Danios was the Brass Crescent Award Honorary
Mention for Best Writer in 2010 and the Brass Crescent
Award Winner for Best Writer in 2011. |