Rampant Racism...

Racism is everywhere these days, isn't it?

First stop: New York City. The tragic story of Sean Bell. Unfortunate set of circumstances leading to an untimely death? Absolutely. Excessive forced used? Mayor Bloomberg thinks so.

Racist? Debatable. Keep in mind the backgrounds of the officers: two black, two white, one Hispanic.

Linked to Michael Richards' rant at a comedy club? ABSURD.

No surprise Amnesty International is weighing in:

"Police violence has shown its ugly face in New York yet again. This tragedy is not an isolated incident -- it is part of a pattern of questionable police tactics and abuse. The question should not be 'is this case another Amadou Diallo?' but 'why is the NYPD still shooting unarmed black men?'"

Is Amnesty International right? I don't think so...what's really going on here?

Here seems to be a good round-up from New York Daily News. Note that the names of only the white officers on duty have been released.

Also, take note of the criminal records of the victims. The New York Times explains that Joseph Guzman, present with Sean Bell that night, "has a criminal record including convictions for robbery, criminal possession of a weapon and criminal sale of a controlled substance." (emphasis mine). And, according to Wikipedia, Sean Bell was a criminal four times over... It's also being reported that Mr. Bell used his vehicle as a weapon by "(ramming) into an undercover officer and then (hitting) an unmarked NYPD minivan twice." as a precursor to the shooting outside the nightclub.

Justification for 50 shots being fired? Not sure anyone could defend that...

Racism?

Debatable...

Second stop: Minneapolis. Six Muslims cry "flying while Muslim!" after being removed from a flight last Monday from Minneapolis, bound for Phoenix.

Racism!!! Islamophobia!!!

Really? Kirsten Powers (a Democrat, no less!) doesn't think so. If the imams' actions were only religious, as Kirsten says, they may have a case - I can honestly agree with that. Maybe public prayer should be kept silent in respect for other people, but that's not a debate I'm going to have here. It doesn't appear that religion was their only motivation, however...it seems as if the "Minneapolis Six" did at least the following (via Sister Toldjah):

1) "switched from their assigned seats to a pattern associated with the September 11 terrorist attacks,"
2) "spoke in Arabic and English, criticizing the war in Iraq and President Bush, and talking about al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden."
3) "asked for seat-belt extenders, although two flight attendants told police the men were not oversized."

Also, of note, the six tickets were one-way tickets.

To me, regardless of your religion, race, sex, whatever - these actions are at the very least, suspicious, and should be treated as such. It seems to be the classic case of "threat profiling" versus "racial profiling". All the factors I listed above constituted a threat to the safety of everyone on that flight, and the crew responded appropriately.

What's the response of the Democrats? Let's hope Sheila Jackson-Lee's is not typical:

"(the September 11 terrorist attacks) cannot be permitted to be used to justify racial profiling, harassment and discrimination of Muslim and Arab Americans...Understandably, the imams felt profiled, humiliated, and discriminated against by their treatment."

Like she has the right to talk, being banned from Continental Airlines and all...

As for Omar Shahin, the "leader" of the Minneapolis Six? Well, he has ties to KindHearts, a Muslim charitable organization whose assets have been frozen by the U.S. Treasury Department.

Why? They have provided funding to Hamas.

Why is that problematic? Because Hamas does things like this. And this. And this. And this.

AND MUCH MORE.

Robert Spencer's take, via Front Page Mag:

"If America is to survive, it is eventually going to have to choose national security over political correctness. Shahin has complained that he was 'humiliated' and that the way the imams were treated was 'terrible.' Indeed. It is terrible. It is terrible that he and the other imams who were taken off the plane, as well as other Islamic leaders in America, have allowed those who commit violence in the name of their religion to do so unimpeded and unchallenged. It is terrible that these and other Islamic scholars have responded only with vilification when asked about the teachings of their faith that promote violence, instead of with honest dialogue and attempts to reform those teachings. It is terrible that, if they were indeed removed from the plane for praying, they are among those who have allowed their religion to become so associated with violence that American citizens on an airplane become alarmed at the sight of Islamic prayer.

"In a sane world, officials would tell the imams that if they’re upset about being taken off the plane, they should redouble their anti-terror efforts in the Muslim community in the U.S. – which are sorely deficient in any case. They would ascribe their inconveniencing to the sacrifices that are incumbent upon all of us during wartime. But instead, they are compared to Rosa Parks, and it is likely that their canonization is just beginning.

"Osama bin Laden, who predicted after 9/11 that soon many more planes would be falling out of the skies, is no doubt enjoying the spectacle."

Finally, here's Mona Charen's take.

Racism? Nope.

Threat profiling? ABSOLUTELY.