Today the nation is remembering the five-year anniversary of the terrorist attacks which murdered 3000 of our fellow Americans. We shouldn’t have been too surprised, since the followers of Islam have been killing infidels throughout its history.

Instead of explaining the true nature of Islam, however, much of the media wants to spin stories about Muslim suffering at the hands of cruel Americans. Poor Achmed, he is pulled aside for extra checking when he boards an airplane (like every American I know).

Muslim complaints of abuse by Americans are encouraged by fifth-columnist groups like the Council for American Islamic Relations, which is particularly relentless in beating the victim drum. (No surprise, since CAIR recently received $50 million from a UAE donor for a media campaign to present a warm and fuzzy image of Muslims to Americans.)

The article highlighted here [Muslims feel sting of distrust, Detroit News 9/10/06] is standard victimhood propaganda, which makes a big deal over very little. Muslims were not rounded up and lynched after the murder of 3000 Americans by jihadists screaming “Allahu ackbar” (Allah is the greatest) when the hijacked planes went down. So the alleged victimhood being flogged is of the most trivial sort.

Evidence of intolerance abounds. A Quinnipiac University poll Aug. 29 revealed that American voters say, by 60 percent to 30 percent, that authorities should single out people who look “Middle Eastern” for security measures. Only 6 percent of Americans have a positive first impression of Muslims, according to a poll conducted last year for the Council on American Islamic Relations Research Center, and about 20 percent admit to being intolerant of Muslims.

Anecdotes also are plentiful. Taxi drivers of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent in Metro Detroit describe the scorn and derision of passengers, who sometimes holler epithets at them and refuse to pay fares.

Scorn, derision, epithets — the horror!

In fact, hundreds of Muslims have been convicted of terrorism charges all around the country in the past five years. But the cases are covered mainly by local media, so there is no broad recognition that there is a serious terror infiltration problem in this country caused by foolish immigration policies.

And how horrible can America be to Muslims when they continue to immigrate here in increasing numbers? [Just in Time for 9/11 — Muslim Immigration Up]

Or perhaps Islamic immigrants believe Americans are too weakened by multicultural propaganda to react to the growing numbers of Muslims, some (many?) of whom would love to see an Islamic USA.

Yesterday’s Washington Post supplied some astonishing news about the upcoming Republican National Committee election ad campaign:

The first ad run by the new RNC effort criticizes Ohio Rep. Sherrod Brown (D) for voting against proposals designed to toughen border protection and deport illegal immigrants.

(In a Pivotal Year, GOP Plans to Get Personal –by Jim Vandehei and Chris Cillizza Sunday September 10 2006 - Access requires free registration)

Now Rep. Brown may well be vulnerable on immigration issues – his long term ranking by the invaluable Americans for Better Immigration web site is a resounding F.

But what standing has the Republican National Committee under the leadership of the deplorable Ken Mehlman to say anything? The Ken Mehlman who appears as responsible as any for ram-rodding the Senate’s Amnesty/Immigration Acceleration measure, which is clearly the White House choice?

The bulk of the article discusses the main RNC planned tactic – a serious of petty personal attacks on individual Congressman. That is the kind of sliminess more representative of the Mehlman RNC.

This is from Reason Magazine’s Brickbats column:

Reason
Don’t Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor (8/21)
The Escondido, California, City Council has voted to begin drafting a law prohibiting landlords from renting property to anyone who can’t prove U.S. citizenship. Council members say the law would help reduce overcrowding in residential neighborhoods. But landlords say it will set them up for potential lawsuits under federal and state fair housing laws.

Actually, the council is not asking landlords only to rent to US citizens, that would be highly unusual. The council is asking them not to rent to illegal immigrants. Lawful permanent residents are fine. [Escondido votes to draft ban on renting to illegal immigrants, By David Fried, NCTimes.com, August 16, 2006 ]

A commenter on the story pointed out that even HUD doesn’t consider it discrimination to ask if someone is in the country legally. They will only call it discrimination if they feel you’re treating illegal Swedes better than illegal Muslims or Mexicans.

Screening and Rental Procedures

It is unlawful to screen housing applicants on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or familial status. In the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, landlords and property managers have inquired about the legality of screening housing applicants on the basis of their citizenship status. The Act does not prohibit discrimination based solely on a person’s citizenship status. Accordingly, asking housing applicants to provide documentation of their citizenship or immigration status during the screening process would not violate the Fair Housing Act. In fact, such measures have been in place for a number of years in screening applicants for federally-assisted housing. For these properties, HUD regulations define what kind of documents are considered acceptable evidence of citizenship or eligible immigration status and outline the process for collecting and verifying such documents.* These procedures are uniformly applied to every applicant. Landlords who are considering implementing similar measures must make sure they are carried out in a nondiscriminatory fashion.Rights and Responsibilities of Landlords and Residents in the Wake of the Events of September 11 - HUD

Media Mogul Conrad Black, that is. The New English Review has a piece called The tragedy of Conrad Black, intermezzo,
which describes the prosecutorial misconduct that Paul Craig Roberts has often written about here, and quoting his book, The Tyranny Of Good Intentions.

The trial by attrition of Conrad Black has exposed the dark underbelly of the legal system, where the government can ruin a man, take his property, his means of livelihood, and make him a social pariah – all without the hassle of securing a conviction. There is an insidious little worm that has crept into the legal system, an iconoclastic mentality that is distorting the rule of law. Focused less on securing justice than on bringing down the high and mighty, all the while pandering to the politics of envy, it affects the entire system of corporate governance.

And as I remarked a while back, this is the only case where you’re likely to see a headline that says “ Black charged with fraud.”