Tuesday, September 22, 2015


So in the past week, there was the case of Ahmed Mohamed, a Muslim student in Texas who brought a clock for show at school that looked more like a metal suitcase in which a bomb could be stored. From this, the MSM took to making accusations of "islamophobia" after the student was arrested on suspicion of trying to cause trouble. I'm sure it was deliberate. Mark Davis says that the kid's parents should let the full facts come out:
In view of recent headlines of various types, initial concern about a timing device brought onto school property is not only understandable, it is necessary.

But how did we get from warranted attention to Ahmed Mohamed’s project to the images of him being removed from school property in handcuffs? There are gaping pieces missing from the story of that day, and we should all want them filled in.

But some have already formed conclusions — that a teenager fond of tech tinkering brought a clock to school and everybody freaked out because they thought it was a bomb.

Not content to paint this as a Barney Fife convulsion, accusations of bigotry have been added to the tale, the presumption that since the young man is Muslim, the adverse reaction simply must have been a by-product of institutional hate on the part of the City of Irving, its mayor, its police department and its independent school district.

The weaving of this storyline does not arise in a vacuum. Mayor Beth van Duyne has drawn nationwide attention for opposing the prospect of Shariah law conflicting with state and local statutes and even the United States Constitution. One is free to admire or dismiss that concern, but the presumption that it is Islamophobic is wholly without merit..

But that is the favored narrative of those who wish to portray Ahmed as the victim of vicious racial and religious intolerance. This spin is found among Islamic advocacy groups fond of portraying any staunch opposition to jihad as Islamophobia. This instinct stretches all the way to the White House, where the invitation to Ahmed instantly smacks of opportunism designed to pad the image of a teenager so abused by local haters that he needs a presidential hug.
It's very likely the family was hoping to get 15 minutes of fame they really don't deserve. But surely more puzzling is what hasn't been revealed:
This is a parade of social media expression all are entitled to. But If Team Ahmed is going to lawyer up with such glee, it must mean they have no fear about the public hearing the full story of what happened Sept. 14 from the people who were in the young man’s company, from the school where he walked in with a suspicious and unannounced project, to police detention, where he was taken for some reason we are not fully allowed to know.

Media reports reveal he was told to put his device away, yet continued to carry it to other classes. Irving police describe his answers to their questions as “passive aggressive.” What in the world does that mean?
Could it be he caused a ruckus and that's why he was led out? Was he hostile in the ways of a victimologist? It could be possible, and he certainly did act out of line. Kevin Williamson also says this was just a phony case of islamophobia:
Mohamed’s father says that his son was mistreated because the incident happened a few days after the annual commemoration of the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, and because his name is Mohamed. The story immediately became ubiquitous not because of what actually happened — boneheaded as that was — but because it can be used to further a story that the media already want to tell: that the United States is morally corrupt and irredeemably racist; that Muslims are under siege; that “white privilege” blinds the majority of Americans to the corruption at the heart of everything red, white, and blue. Muslim kid meets paranoia in Texas is A-1 copy; NRA-wearing kid meets paranoia in West Virginia, not so much.
Yet these same grievance mongers continue to reside in a country they don't deserve to be in.

All that told, Mohamed's parents had him withdraw from the school this week. I'd say the school would be better off without him. He/they caused enough trouble as it is, and they're the ones who owe apologies for causing all that trouble they could've avoided.

No comments: