Reader Nosy writes us with his take on the Joel Hinrichs case. I am posting it here in its entirety without further comment.
|OK, so there was an isolated incident in Norman where some kook blew himself up outside a football game. He did/didn’t try to enter the stadium multiple times (but was/wasn’t turned away when he refused to have his backpack searched) he did/didn’t have an Islamic style beard, he did/didn’t have Pakistani room mates, he did/didn’t get involved at the local Moslem association, and this new security process has/hasn’t anything to do with the bomb in Norman.|
|Question: if it was an isolated incident, why change the entire Big 12 security policy?|
|Question: If the incident requires changing the entire Big 12 security policy, aren’t the security people expecting it to happen again, and thus it cannot be regarded as an “isolated incident”?|
|The two facts don’t match up at all.|
|It seems to me that one form of dhimmitude is to refuse to admit that the jihad even exists…|