NY Post 
Posted in Real clear Politics 
June 14, 2016 
What we really need to reject is Islamophobia-phobia
Kyle Smith
A dangerous mindset has taken hold in America, but it isn’t Islamophobia.  
It’s Islamophobia-phobia. 
In a large and growing segment of American society, fear of being tagged  “
racist” about Muslims (though Islam is not a race) provides a much more 
direct  threat to your livelihood than radical Islam. 
Former police officer Daniel Gilroy told Florida Today that he repeatedly  
raised red flags about Omar Mateen when both men worked at the same security 
 firm, but his employer did nothing because Mateen was a Muslim. 
The pattern is familiar. Before the Islamist attack that left 14 dead in 
San  Bernardino last December, neighbor Aaron Elswick told ABC 7 News in Los 
Angeles  that shooter Syed Farook was “kind of suspicious” and Elswick “
wanted to report  it” but “didn’t want to profile” him. 
Before Army Maj. Nidal Hasan murdered 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009, “He  
made his views known, and he was very vocal, he had extremely radical 
jihadist  views,” Lt. Col. Val Finnell told FoxNews.com. 
Finnell took health-services classes with Hasan, who said, “I’m a Muslim  
first, and I hold the Shariah, the Islamic Law, before the United States  
Constitution,” according to Finnell. 
That statement alone disqualified Hasan from military service. No one did  
anything, Finnell added, because “they were too concerned about being  
politically correct.” 
Perhaps nothing could have been done to stop Mateen’s rampage, but I have a 
 sickening suspicion that we’re going to learn that many more warnings went 
 unseen by those who blindfolded themselves with political correctness. 
No one wants Muslims to feel harassed as a class, but it’s silly to pretend 
 that being a Muslim makes you just another patch in the glorious American 
quilt,  like being black or Jewish or gay. 
In a poll of British Muslims, a majority said homosexuality should be  
illegal. Nearly a quarter said Shariah law should be imposed in Britain. Four  
percent — that’s tens of thousands of people — admitted they sympathized 
with  suicide bombers. 
The Islamophobic-phobic-in-Chief pooh-poohs both the terrorist threat and 
its  ideological root. President Obama likes to say that bathtubs kill more 
Americans  than terrorists. I’d like to see him try that argument with the 
families of the  victims of the Orlando massacre. 
Last year Obama actually chided us that we shouldn’t look askance at Islam  
because Christians committed violent acts, too, during the Crusades, 600 or 
so  years ago. I’d like to see him tell the Orlando families that, too. 
Obama is the avatar of the false moral equivalence that, having infected  
elite universities in the 1960s, has gradually metastasized to infect 
virtually  the entire elite class of American society, along with a large chunk 
of 
the  cringing, guilt-ridden bourgeoisie. 
The supreme rule is the severely undergraduate notion that everyone and  
everything is roughly equal. We like our ideas, but, hey, if you have a  
different point of view, that’s groovy, too. 
Taking it to its most absurd conclusion, as Obama does, the ideal holds 
that  Western liberal democracy and murderous medieval fanaticism should each 
be given  a fair hearing. 
At his National Prayer Breakfast speech last year, Obama euphemistically  
referred to global jihad as “this”: “This is not unique to one group or one  
religion. There is a tendency in us, a sinful tendency that can pervert and 
 distort our faith … We should start with some basic humility. I believe 
that the  starting point of faith is some doubt — not being so full of 
yourself and so  confident that you are right.” 
They believe this, we believe that. Who’s to say who’s wrong? Obama’s  
response to the global culture clash is a shrug. When it comes to an ideology  
opposed to everything the US stands for — tolerance for gays being one of 
the  top items on the list — Obama must be the first president in history to 
see  himself as a trans-national figure who has to be scrupulously neutral 
about  America’s role. 
Hillary Clinton might be the second. In an unusually candid moment at  
Georgetown in 2014, she let slip that she saw Islamist fanatics as a sort of  
loyal opposition with reasonable requests: “Smart power,” she said then, 
means  “showing respect even for one’s enemies. Trying to understand, insofar 
as  psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of 
view.  Helping to define the problems, determine the solutions.” 
How would that work? “Omar, you want to massacre dozens of gays. Would you 
be  willing to compromise on that?”

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to