|Home | Articles | News | Blog | About | Mailing List | Resources | Prominent Islamists | Middle East Forum | Keep Us Informed | Donate|
IW News Brief: Fort Hood Fiasco, UK Jihad Denial, and More
by David J. Rusin • May 31, 2013 at 9:16 am
Islamist Watch (IW) maintains an extensive archive of news items on nonviolent Islamism in the Western world. The complete collection can be found here; lists organized by topic are accessible on the right side of the IW homepage.
The following are some of the recent developments covered in the IW database:
Fort Hood jihadist earns $278,000 while survivors suffer
The U.S. Army's classification of the Fort Hood massacre as "workplace violence" deprives its victims of key benefits, but Major Nidal Hasan has been paid $278,000 and counting since his murderous rampage in November 2009. According to the Army, his salary cannot be halted until he is convicted. Hasan's newly confirmed windfall "makes me sick to my stomach," said Logan Burnett, a reservist shot by Hasan. "There have been times when my wife and I cannot afford groceries." In March, the Army nixed Purple Hearts for soldiers like Burnett, arguing that awarding medals would "set the stage for a formal declaration that Major Hasan is a terrorist."
As survivors look to override the "workplace violence" label in court, several congressmen are pressuring the Pentagon directly. Two House Republicans and one Democrat recently sent a letter to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that calls the designation "irresponsible" and links it to the "'political correctness' that caused the horrible toll of deaths and injuries at Fort Hood. … We ask that you swiftly reclassify the victims' deaths and injuries as 'combat-related' so that they and their families may qualify for the full scope of benefits provided to service members and DoD civilian employees who are killed or injured in combat." Meanwhile, Congressman John Carter, a Texas Republican, has introduced legislation aiming to thwart future Hasans by granting whistleblower protection to military personnel who report "ideologically based threats" in the ranks. Many had been aware of Hasan's radicalism but stayed silent out of fear.
Woolwich aftermath: Groundhog Day in the UK
The two Muslim fanatics who hacked soldier Lee Rigby to death in London's Woolwich district on May 22 set a new standard for jihadist barbarism in the country, but the response was the same old, same old: Sidestepping religious motives articulated by one of the attackers, Prime Minister David Cameron sought to exonerate their faith by calling the murder "a betrayal of Islam." Furthermore, officials once again promised to tweak the "Prevent" counter-extremism program that has been a colossal failure, police rounded up Britons for "anti-religious" comments, and media followed the usual recipe of emphasizing anti-Muslim backlash, both real and imagined. Trapped in a cycle of denial, we relive the same sorry events over and over.
Considering the establishment's reaction and a post-Woolwich survey that indicates little change in public opinion regarding the fruits of Britain's multicultural experiment, the process that Daniel Pipes dubs "education by murder" clearly has a long way to go in the United Kingdom.
Discrimination against non-Muslims in Muslim-dominated businesses
The IW archive contains many examples of companies charged with discriminating against Muslim employees, but two controversies from England flip the script. First, the Birmingham Employment Tribunal has awarded £2,550 in compensation to Christopher Turton, a Christian who served as a manager at the National Halal Food Group alongside hundreds of Muslims. At issue was an "offensive and racist" internal email suggesting that Turton, described as not being a "Muslim brother," had been given his position because he is white. Turton resigned and filed a complaint.
Second, Christian worker Nohad Halawi, who says that she was wrongly fired from her job in a duty-free shop at Heathrow Airport following a "race hate" campaign, has won the right to appeal her legal case, which she previously lost on a technicality. According to Halawi, her Muslim colleagues bullied Christians wearing crosses, pressured them to convert, distributed extremist literature, and praised 9/11. After management ignored her concerns, she claims that she was terminated when Muslim coworkers branded her as a bigot. Expect more instances of Muslim-on-non-Muslim workplace harassment as demographics continue to shift.
Aussie Muslim who will not stand in court receives accommodation
"A man accused of rioting during last year's violent Muslim protests has been berated for his 'disrespect' after refusing to stand before a magistrate at his court hearing," Australia's Daily Telegraph reports. Mohammed Issai Issaka — whose response to the anti-Islam video Innocence of Muslims allegedly included kicking and punching police officers' shields, "hissing" at police dogs, resisting arrest, and referring to a policewoman as "filth" — maintained that his Muslim faith prevents him from rising as typically required. Magistrate Jacqueline Milledge expressed annoyance, but the dispute ended in pusillanimous surrender nonetheless: Issaka was allowed to wait outside the courtroom while everyone else stood, after which he rejoined the hearing.
As documented by IW in 2012, Muslims increasingly enjoy procedural accommodations in Western courts. Indeed, the Australian case parallels a capitulation three years ago in which an English judge permitted Islamist defendants, who had insisted that rising for anyone but Allah would constitute a sin, to enter the courtroom after she did. The judge explained that she had not wanted to set a precedent by citing them for contempt, but caving sets its own precedent. In the words of a Daily Telegraph editorial about Issaka, special treatment for Muslims is a "deeply concerning step towards separate legal systems. … Like Issaka himself, this cannot stand."
* * *
For additional news and analysis, please visit the IW website.