Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Do Sharia No-Go zones exist?

First, I'm going to be clear that I can't answer this question. It's hard to prove that something doesn't exist, while it's much easier to definitely show that something does exist. If you want to prove that Big Foot exists, produce a living or dead example that can be probed and x-rayed. If you want to prove that a Sharia No-Go zone exists, it's somewhat harder, but it should be possible. Get eye-witness accounts along with photos and hopefully video.

The reports of a sharia No-Go zone in Dearborn are fake. Evangelists were heckled, and objects were thrown at them when they crashed an Arab celebration. Based on that distinct provocation, and the reaction, some biased news outlets are claiming that 'Christians were stoned.' To me, that sounds like an organized, quasi-governmental suppression and punishment, not a dust-up between two unfriendly groups during the equivalent of a county fair.

It's even harder for me to know what's the story in Europe, where there have been much higher levels of immigration from Muslim countries. This article refers to many sources, but is still dubious. It features someone (an caucasian convert putting up one 'sharia zone' sticker), and few other pictures of these supposed zones. This list of French zones, supposedly sharia No-Go zones, may just be a list of high-crime or high-need areas. My French is too rusty, but maybe that's the point. A translation would be likely to reveal the knowing misuse of this piece of information. Snopes debunks it.

Why should I worry about one of many faked news stories? I suppose it got my goat that a nationally known and probable GOP presidential candidate would promote such dreck. I'm referring to Bobby Jindal. As this article says: "I'm tired of being semi-alone in viewing the Louisiana governor as especially cynical and dangerous." Yes, that's the way it looks to me too.

So it's strange to be agreeing somewhat with Jindal that Muslim immigration has brought some big problems. Jindal says "it is completely reasonable for nations to discriminate between allowing people into their country who want to embrace their culture, or allowing people into their country who want to destroy their culture, or establish a separate culture within." Muslim enclaves have too often been places where radicalism flourishes without pushback from non-radical voices.

I'm a strong believer in diversity and pluralism, but also in not inviting avowed enemies to share your house. The US and European countries, in the name of diversity and charity for refugees, have been lax in screening out those who would bomb us, kill us, and take over our countries. We should have been more careful in vetting refugees and other immigrants, but since we weren't, we have the problem of an unknown number of bombers and terrorists among us.

This leads to a lot of complications that I haven't been able to sort out. How do we keep an eye on potentially violent Muslim terrorists without shredding the rights guaranteed by the Constitution? I hoped I could work out an answer in time for this post, but I can't. This is a tough issue that we face here in the US, but is even tougher in Europe. This is the real question, as opposed to the fake worry about sharia zones and Christians being stoned.

Don't like the neighbors? Don't move here.

Extras. I also looked for Youtube videos showing these sharia zones. Most of the videos are of talking heads, except this interview with two English women, and an interview with a pro-Sharia spokesman. No good evidence for sharia No-Go zones at Youtube.

No comments: