web analytics
September 22, 2014 / 27 Elul, 5774
At a Glance

Posts Tagged ‘NYPD’

Everything’s Coming Up Jihad

Thursday, June 14th, 2012

June has been a banner month for Muslim lawsuits against the NYPD. First “Muslim Advocates” filed a lawsuit against the NYPD on behalf of some New Jersey Muslims attending mosques that the NYPD had assessed as a potential terrorism risk. The Muslim Advocates, like every other Muslim “civil rights” group, has a history of covering up and defending terrorism.

The media is full of sympathetic interviews with Muslims, who are baffled as to why the NYPD might be surveiling mosques and Imams. Farhoud Khera, the head of Muslim Advocates, complains, “There was explicit reference to the fact that they weren’t targeting Syrian Jews or Iranian Jews or Egyptian Christians, but really, the focus was on Muslims.”

The extensive Coptic Christian and Persian Jewish terrorism sprees aside, the goal here is to get the NYPD to play the same “Three Blind Monkeys” game that Federal law enforcement has taken up. And the only answer is the TSAization of the NYPD, as the last remaining counterterrorism force will prove that it isn’t singling out Muslims, by surveiling Methodist churches and Chassidic synagogues for signs of terrorist sympathies.

Less notable, but in some ways more significant, Farhan Doe, a Muslim rejected by the NYPD because he said gays should be imprisoned, has sued the police for rejecting him because of his views. Farhan Doe isn’t alone in believing that, but unlike non-Muslim applicants, he comes out of a cultural and religious background in which imprisoning people because they offend your morals is the duty of law enforcement.

Farhan’s (predictably, Jewish) lawyer says that his client has the right to believe whatever he pleases, and he has a point. But the question is with enough Farhans in the political, judicial and enforcement arms, how long will the rest of us have that right?

Tolerating people who will not tolerate you is fine, so long as they draw the line between ideas and action. The NYPD isn’t surveilling New Jersey mosques because there are some bigots in blue who dislike immigrants, as the Associated Press, the American Civil Liberties Union and the whole lawyer-media complex would like you to believe. It’s doing it because New York City’s biggest serial killers and aspiring serial killers are Muslims who kill in the name of their ideas.

Their biggest idea is that Allah had sent Mohammed to make Islam “victorious over all religions, even though the infidels may resist” (Koran 61:9). And when the infidels resist, that’s when you kill their soldiers, sue their police officers, and blow up a few buildings. Then you complain to the media that the infidels are persecuting you by spying on the mosques where the “Big Idea” is declaimed to the faithful and refusing to allow you to join the police force just because you think that Islamic law supersedes American law.

The Clash of Civilizations is all-encompassing. It doesn’t just cover the big thing, like ramming planes into skyscrapers, but also the little things. Police forces don’t enforce law, as much as social harmony. The Nineties were a grand experiment in changing troubled neighborhoods by improving their quality through selective enforcement on quality of life offenses. The NYPD’s successes were credited to that experiment. But who decides what social harmony and the social good are?

For Mayor Bloomberg, it’s banning large sodas. For Farhan Doe, it’s banning homosexuals. When there is no limit to government infringement on rights, then the law is a collection of bugbears and control mechanisms. Islamic law on covering up women got its start when one of Mohammed’s companions spotted one of Mo’s wives at night and was able to tell her apart due to her height. This somehow made for a convincing case for compelling every woman to be covered up head to toe.

It’s senseless, but so is fighting obesity by banning people from buying large sodas. When the obsession of a few men is turned into law, then the result is equally contemptuous of the individual as a rotting sack of vile habits which he has to be forced to abandon by the majority of the law. Once you abandon the rights of the individual to the fiat of activists, judges and politicians– then laws can be made by anyone who wants them badly enough. The same process of judicial activism, hysteria, violent attacks, and pressure groups that created gay marriage can one day lock up the happy couples. It’s only a matter of who is making the laws.

Thanking The NYPD Is The Least We Can Do

Wednesday, April 18th, 2012

The recent shooting of four police officers in the normally tranquil Sheepshead Bay neighborhood of Brooklyn (bringing the total to eight cops shot so far this year) has confirmed a dangerous double standard that threatens the safety of police officers and all New Yorkers throughout New York. It must be confronted.

City police officers are being shot in frightening numbers, with heroes like Peter Figoski paying the ultimate price, killed in the line of duty just for doing his job. Yet the larger public is noticeably, even if unintentionally, absent from championing those officers who put everything on the line every day.

Worse yet, the ACLU-types who never miss an opportunity to vilify and malign Commissioner Kelly and the NYPD for any and every mistake (real or perceived) a police officer makes are conspicuously absent when cops are being used for target practice all across the city.

Instead of recognizing the inherent risks and difficulties of keeping millions of New Yorkers safe and applauding the grace and restraint police officers have repeatedly shown under fire, the armchair critics incessantly continue to heap on criticism and refuse to acknowledge the realities of keeping our city safe (while failing to offer an iota of constructive criticism).

Perennial publicity hounds like the Reverend Al Sharpton, who have made careers out of putting personal ambition and political theater ahead of public safety, exacerbate tensions instead of calming them.

Dedicated crime fighters deserve our staunch support and require the true and tried tools available, under the law, to go about their all-important task of keeping all New Yorkers safe. Second-guessing by clueless libertarians and partisan politicians is counterproductive and insulting to those of us who live and work here. We know the NYPD has made the quality of life for all New Yorkers significantly better. It is time we all said so publicly.

For the silent majority – the law abiding citizens – the NYPD has been doing a masterful job navigating the balancing act of keeping New York City safe while faithfully upholding the civil liberties U.S. law guarantees all citizens.

Are the police perfect? Is anybody? There are bad apples in every profession and the NYPD is not immune. Police officers who engage in wrongful acts should be held to the highest standards, but bad behavior by a handful of police officers should not instigate a broad indictment of the entire department and its practices.

Recently, ten Congressional Democrats, including a member of the party’s leadership and lawmakers involved in the House Intelligence and Homeland Security committees, inserted themselves into the NYPD spying program debate by criticizing Mayor Michael Bloomberg for his “underhanded and unprofessional” response to criticism of the spying program and calling for an end to the NYPD’s out-of-state spying on Islamic communities.

The mayor has repeatedly defended his department’s actions as lawful and necessary to keep New York safe and he and his administration have brushed off concerns, raised by lawmakers and civil rights groups, that the NYPD’s activities are constitutionally suspect.

And while many New Yorkers may often not agree with the Bloomberg administration on various issues, when it comes to safety and security the mayor has earned extraordinarily high marks.

Pragmatic citizens understand that the strategies employed by the NYPD are appropriate given the grave terrorist threats leveled against New York City and its residents. Moreover, with respect to more mundane day-to-day criminal activity, statistics confirm that the city continues to maintain impressive crime reduction numbers in most major categories.

It is reasonable to sympathize with the law-abiding members of the Muslim community who must endure the endless questions and increased scrutiny that have come their way since 9/11. The results, though, speak for themselves. Fact is, New York continues to be the world’s premier terrorist target and the very police officers who are so often criticized have crafted a perfect record in thwarting numerous terror plots hatched against the city since that terrible September morning more than 10 years ago.

Most of those major accomplishments are the result of an aggressive strategy of prevention, employed by a fair but unrelenting police commissioner, with the support of the mayor’s office.

Though it’s hard to blame anybody for feeling unfairly targeted, New Yorkers of all backgrounds must accept the dreadful reality of living in a large metropolis filled with illegal weapons and plenty of bad guys ready and willing to use them, especially on police officers. If added scrutiny is what it takes to save lives, then the police are welcome to stop and frisk me too. New York has come too far to regress to the pre-Giuliani days of rampant lawlessness and widespread fear.

Ray Kelly has earned the benefit of the doubt. Sensible people of all faiths and cultures, especially those of us in the Jewish community, should be thankful and deeply appreciative to the police commissioner and the thousands of heroic officers of the NYPD who daily risk their lives to protect us.

We’re Fortunate To Have Ray Kelly As Police Commissioner

Wednesday, March 21st, 2012

In July 1993, I joined a group of Jewish leaders on a visit to Israel with then-Mayor David N. Dinkins. One morning as we had breakfast at the King David Hotel terrace overlooking the Old City of Jerusalem, Dinkins confided, “I wish Ray Kelly were in charge before Crown Heights blew up.” By this time, Ray Kelly had become police commissioner and had made a clear impact on the mayor.

I thought of the moment when Ray Kelly was chosen by Mayor Michael Bloomberg to reassume leadership of the NYPD not long after 9/11. Whenever there is talk of possible terrorist attacks against New York City, I look at my family, friends and neighbors and feel fortunate that the city’s security is in Commissioner Kelly’s hands (and the hands of the superb people he surrounds himself with).

When I or any member of my family is out late at night, there is a sense of ease because of the way crime has been diminished even further by the NYPD under Kelly.

Whenever there is a perceived threat, I can see the increased security at synagogues and identifiably Jewish locations. Terrorists have made it clear that Jews are significant targets for them. However, if Jews were suspected of being terrorists, I would hope the law enforcement community would be leaving no stone unturned – including surveillance at my synagogue – to get to the threats.

It is for these reasons that I cannot comprehend the recent uproar over a video that actually states at its beginning that it is only a “minority of Muslims” who are suspected of terrorism.

Commissioner Kelly has apologized for appearing in the video. Possibly he felt he had to do so to maintain continued positive relations with Muslim communities, but his upstanding record for a decade should have been enough. Mayor Bloomberg and his police commissioner have been extraordinarily gracious and effective in their outreach to the Muslim community.

And now, in addition to the ongoing concerns about lone wolf terrorists, we learn of Iran’s (and Hizbullah’s and Hamas’s) threats to strike at America and the Zionists (read Jews). Intelligence reports from Washington, D.C. law enforcement confirms that those threats center on areas with significant Jewish populations.

New York City is in the cross hairs of these types of threats. Fortunately, our police commissioner is laser-focused on preventing any attacks. His staff is thoroughly prepared – but imagine if, God forbid, an attack succeeded because somehow the politically correct among us forced the NYPD to decrease its levels of surveillance.

I am disappointed at the speed with which some have forgotten the daily risks that are taken to protect all New Yorkers. Police officers today would rush into danger, as they did on September 11th, 2001, while ensuring the safety of all others. Commissioner Kelly and his department are known to be especially sensitive about religion and ethnicity. I have seen clergy meetings with all faiths take place at One Police Plaza and this commissioner’s outreach to all communities is second to none.

I believe only a small minority of Muslims oppose the NYPD on this because the majority want their families to be protected and all recognize that even one terrible terrorist incident would lead to conditions that might include ethnic profiling or worse. The best protection against that is for the police department to be allowed to do its job.

While I agree that civil liberties must be protected, it is outrageous to suggest that the practices of the NYPD have in any serious way threatened that goal. Tragically, there are some who protested the killing of Osama bin Laden. Not surprisingly, some are now leading the attempt to tie the hands of law enforcement and particularly the NYPD during this dangerous time.

All people of good will – Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, non-believers – need to rally around Commissioner Kelly and other law enforcement leaders to keep each other and our city safe.

William E. Rapfogel is CEO of the Metropolitan Council on Jewish Poverty. He has led other Jewish organizations and served in the administration of Mayor Edward I. Koch and with Comptroller Harrison J. Goldin.

Mayor Bloomberg Links Surveillance to Jewish-School Shooting in France

Tuesday, March 20th, 2012

At a press conference Monday evening, Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered a sympathetic reaction to reports that a gunman killed four people at a Jewish school in France, and linked it with the NYPD’s out-of-state surveillance efforts, Capital New York reports.

“It’s easy to sit here and say New York City should just take care of New York City,” he said. “We are taking care of New York City by having police officers around the world and we’re gonna continue to do that and keep us all safe.”

After prodding by a reporter from the Village Voice, referring to arrests made by NYPD officers of Occupy Wall Street demonstrators, Bloomberg said the police “keep us safe, and next time you walk by a police officer, say Thank you, Sir, because your right to ask this question is protected by that man or woman.”

Monday morning, 110 groups including civil liberties and Muslim advocacy groups asked Attorney General Eric Holder for a justice department investigation of the NYPD’s surveillance program of Muslim individuals and institutions.

“We are in compliance with all the laws as far as we can tell,” Bloomberg responded, adding that “everybody’s got a right to write a letter.” He said polling showed people approved of the practice.

“Overwhelmingly, people say yes,” he said. “Now that doesn’t make it right, but does it mean that a hundred small institutions writing a letter is indicative of what most organizations think or what most organizations would like to do?”

The Gray Lady Versus Our Security

Wednesday, March 14th, 2012

The New York Times recently threw a hissy fit over what it felt were overzealous efforts by Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Kelly to defend NYPD anti-terrorist surveillance programs the Times opposes. And just this week the Times, in editorializing on the exclusionary policies of the TAPPS high-school basketball tournament, chose to focus most of its ire not on the attempted exclusion of the Orthodox Beren Academy over its refusal to play on the Jewish Sabbath – which captivated the attention of the media across the country – but on the experience of some Muslim applicants.

The Times’s biased focus is manifest.

In a March 8 editorial the Times rebuked Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly for having “reacted with defensiveness and hostility to the disclosure of constitutionally suspect surveillance of law-abiding Muslims in New York City, Long Island, New Jersey and beyond.” The paper chided the mayor for saying the issue was not “a political football to play with” and the commissioner for having accused critics of the NYPD of using “the media to spread this information.”

The editorial concluded by saying, “Mr. Kelly loudly defends the operation and an exemplary record of preventing terrorist attacks. He should not do that so loudly that he drowns out reasonable criticisms.”

The Times’s groveling before Muslim groups is nothing new, of course. Remember its relentless criticism of opponents of the Ground Zero mosque?

In an August 3, 2010 editorial, the Times ripped into Republican opponents of the mosque for having the effrontery to disagree: “It was not surprising that Republican ideologues like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin came out against the mosque…. They have been shamelessly playing the politics of fear since 9/11.”

The Times also laced into the Anti-Defamation League for coming out against the mosque. Two weeks later the Times delivered a harsh rebuke to critics of President Obama’s comments in support of the mosque and in yet another editorial a month later the paper said that “The furor over the proposed Islamic cultural center and mosque near Ground Zero keeps giving us new reasons for dismay. As politicians and commentators work themselves and viewers into a rage, others who should be standing up for freedom and tolerance tiptoe away.”

Fast forward to the current controversy over the NYPD’s surveillance program. On March 3 the Times ran an editorial titled, “Surveillance, Security and Civil Liberties.” True to form, it was a one-sided indictment of the NYPD.

On March 7 the Times ran a news story headlined “F.B.I Official Faults Police Tactics on Muslims.” However, while the piece quoted a local FBI official’s criticisms, it also contained the following colloquy between Robert S. Mueller III, the director of the FBI, and Congressman Mike Honda during Director Mueller’s testimony before the House Appropriations Committee. Congressman Honda had asked about the NYPD surveillance tactics. Mr. Mueller’s response:

Let me start by saying, at the outset, that Ray Kelly and the New York Police Department have done a remarkable job in protecting New York. The fact of the matter is New York has been and will continue to be a target. And we have worked closely – very closely – together with them.

So, then, should anyone take seriously The Times’s pontifications about what is acceptable advocacy, especially when the paper skews headlines on news stories to fit its agenda?

Three Cheers For Ray Kelly And The NYPD

Wednesday, March 7th, 2012

According to an Associated Press story in the February 24 Daily News, “Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly dispatched his detectives to surveil every Muslim-owned business and community center in Newark [in] the clearest sign yet that the NYPD’s fight against terrorism has gone terribly awry.”

This has set off a debate on police tactics and surveillance of the Muslim community by U.S. law enforcement agencies.

I have full confidence in Police Commissioner Kelly and believe that whatever police surveillance he directs is done in accordance with the laws that govern what police can do to protect the people of New York City from terrorist attacks.

Instead of saying “the NYPD’s fight against terrorism has gone terribly awry,” I would say the efforts and tactics of the NYPD have been hugely successful and the NYPD, Commissioner Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg should be congratulated and supported.

The tactics used by the NYPD must conform to the guidelines first laid out in a federal case that are now referred to as the Handschu agreement. Wikipedia describes the Handschu agreement as follows:

According to the terms of the agreement, purely political activity can only be investigated by the Public Security Section (PSS) of the NYPD’s Intelligence Division, and then only when the Section suspects criminal activity. When the PSS does suspect criminal activity on the part of political groups, it must obtain a warrant from the three-person Handschu Authority, a commission made up of two deputy commissioners and a mayor-appointed civilian. The agreement also prohibits indiscriminate police videorecording and photographing of public gatherings when there is no indication that unlawful activity is occurring. The department is also prohibited from sharing information pertaining to political activity with other law enforcement agencies unless those agencies agree to abide by the terms of the Handschu agreement. The court order mandates the compiling of annual, publicly-available reports listing the surveillance requests made by the NYPD and the number of such requests granted.

On some occasions, a police officer or program may go too far in carrying out surveillance, in which case, the recourse is to apply to a federal court for relief. As far as I know, those who have criticized the police commissioner – unfairly in my opinion – have not availed themselves of that right and opportunity.

Those seeking to reduce America’s concern about Islamic terrorism had to be elated by an article in The New York Times on February 8 by Scott Shane. According to Shane, “A feared wave of homegrown terrorism by radicalized Muslim Americans has not materialized, with plots and arrests dropping sharply over the two years since an unusual peak in 2009, according to a new study by a North Carolina research group.” The article continued: “Charles Kurzman, the author of the report for the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, called terrorism by Muslim Americans ‘a minuscule threat to public safety.’ Of about 14,000 murders in the United States last year, not a single one resulted from Islamic extremism, said Mr. Kurzman, a professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina.”

I obtained a copy of Professor Kurzman’s report. Its thrust is that Muslim-American involvement in terrorist-related activity is far less than was expected by U.S. government officials.

With respect to the actual number of Muslim-Americans involved in terrorism, Kurzman writes that “the number of Muslim-Americans who have responded to these calls [to engage in domestic terroism] continues to be tiny, when compared with the population of more than 2 million Muslims in the United States and when compared with the total level of violence in the United States, which was on track to register 14,000 murders in 2011.”

Equating terrorism with criminality is ridiculous. They have no relationship to one another. Criminality is generally for the purpose of enrichment of oneself by breaking the law. Modern day terrorism seeks to achieve political or military goals by the use of indiscriminate terror directed primarily at innocent civilians. Further, terrorists seek to demoralize their victims and enhance their perceived power by the destruction of iconic projects, buildings such as the World Trade Center towers, subway systems in large cities such as London and Madrid, and world famous bridges such as the Brooklyn Bridge (not attacked, but surveyed for attack).

So to refer to 14,000 murders in 2011 committed by criminals compared with a far lesser number killed by terrorists in any year since 9/11 is ridiculous.

In addition, no matter how good our intelligence services are – and they’ve uncovered and convicted since 9/11 about 200 Muslim-Americans – in all probability the number of undetected plots and conspirators are surely several times the number detected. Surely by aggressively – but within the law – monitoring the activities of suspected places and groups, in which terrorism may be discussed, we will prevent more attacks against us.

In Response to AP Story, Chicago Police, Mayor Emanuel, Promise: We Won’t Spy on Muslims

Wednesday, March 7th, 2012

Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy announced publicly that his department will never conduct blanket surveillance of Muslims the way the New York Police Department had done in Newark, N.J., when he was the chief of police there.

“We are deeply committed to respecting the civil rights of all Chicagoans,” McCarthy said, the Wasington Times reports.

McCarthy and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel have been laboring to calm local Muslims since The Associated Press exposed the NYPD spying program in Newark. The AP reported last month that in 2007, the NYPD’s clandestine Demographics Unit targeted the heavily Muslim Newark, photographing mosques and eavesdropping on Muslim businesses. Earlier, the AP reported that the department was conducting similar surveillance in New York City, constructing a database of places where Muslims live, shop and pray.

When the AP story broke, last February, New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg offered a strong defense of the NYPD surveillance program, according to the Boston Globe.

“We just cannot let our guard down again,” Mayor Bloomberg said on his weekly radio show on WOR-AM. “We cannot slack in our vigilance. The threat was real. The threat is real. The threat is not going away.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/in-response-to-ap-story-chicago-police-mayor-emanuel-promise-we-wont-spy-on-muslims/2012/03/07/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: