Wash. Times Op-Ed Cites Recent Alleged Ft. Hood Plot To Push For Profiling


In an August 1 Washington Times column, Daniel Pipes asserted that while "Muslims can be patriotic Americans and exemplary soldiers," "common security demands" the "additional scrutiny of Muslims." From the Times:

This case highlights a profound issue: Is Islam incompatible with serving in the U.S. government? Pfc.Abdo's conscientious-objector claim and his would-be terrorism in opposite but complementary ways argue for their incompatibility. The U.S. Army tacitly accepted his point on granting him CO status, a decision perhaps influenced by repeated Muslim attacks on the U.S. military, including Sgt. Hasan Akbar's fragging attack in Kuwait, Maj. Hasan's Fort Hood rampage, and Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad's assault on a military recruiting center in Arkansas.

That said, the Abdo case once again points to the need for additional scrutiny of Muslims, whether serving in government or boarding aircraft. It's unfortunate, it's distasteful, but the common security demands no less.


Right-wing media return to demanding "misleading and, arguably, dangerous" racial profiling

Wash. Times (!) Lectures Against "Hateful Bile"

Palin to TSA: "Profile away"

Posted In
Diversity & Discrimination, Religion
The Washington Times
Daniel Pipes
We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.