The riots in New York City have now given us two examples of the Leftist/jihadist alliance: Urooj Rahman, a Muslim lawyer and activist for the Palestinian jihad, threw a Molotov cocktail into a police cruiser, and last Wednesday night in Brooklyn, a Muslim migrant from Bosnia named Dzenan Camovic stabbed a NYPD officer, Yayonfrant Jean Pierre, in the neck while screaming “Allahu akbar.”
Camovic’s attack was duly woke: he attacked the officer while he was guarding Brooklyn businesses against looters, and we all know now that anyone who has the temerity to clean up after the looters, or to get in their way while they are expressing their righteousness, is a racist who must be destroyed.
The manner of Camovic’s attack reveals the other side of the alliance. It is unlikely to have been accidental that he stabbed the police officer in the neck: the Qur’an tells Muslims, “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks” (47:4). Striking their victims specifically in the neck is, accordingly, a hallmark of jihadis worldwide.
While jihad attacks by Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” is an unfortunately recurring feature of contemporary life, particularly in Europe, Camovic chose an especially opportune time to attack a police officer, when amid all the hysterical frenzy over supposed police “racism,” he could be assured of a legion of sympathetic admirers.
Maybe Salmah Rizvi, a Muslim lawyer who has received a Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) scholarship and a Soros fellowship and who guaranteed bail for her “best friend” Urooj Rahman, could take Camovic’s case and argue that, well, yes, he did attack a police officer while screaming “Allahu akbar,” but “Allahu akbar” is simply a beautiful expression of the greatness of God, and as for the attack on police, well, these racists have it coming, don’t they? For good measure, Rizvi could even argue that Camovic, a migrant, was simply lashing out at Trump-era anti-immigrant nativism and fascism.
That kind of defense could have Camovic out on the street again in no time.
In the meantime, the possibility that Camovic has links to jihad terror groups is being investigated. Amid that investigation, one of his relatives, unnamed in a New York Daily News report, is showing that despite being an immigrant, he or she already knows how to play the victim card that Islamic advocacy groups and their Leftist allies in the United States so skillfully and frequently deploy. When asked about whether Camovic had any ties to terror groups, the relative responded emphatically: “Absolutely not.” And he laid the victimhood on thick: “I have the utmost respect for law enforcement, but it’s easy to accuse a Muslim of terrorism. It’s the first offense that comes to mind when someone mentions Muslim. He might have been attacked yesterday. He could have been provoked, and he might have mentioned, like anyone would mention, God. He might have said Allah, but no one knows. I just hope law enforcement will do their due diligence.”
Camovic “could have been provoked, and he might have mentioned, like anyone would mention, God. He might have said Allah.” Sure, pal. That’s it. But in reality, there is abundant evidence that “Allahu akbar” (“Allah is greater,” i.e., superior to your god, your government, and any other authority) signifies something much more sinister than that. Chief 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta wrote in his letter to himself before carrying out his jihad mission: “When the confrontation begins, strike like champions who do not want to go back to this world. Shout, ‘Allahu Akbar,’ because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers.” The Fort Hood jihad killer, Nidal Malik Hasan, shouted it as he shot thirteen Americans in November 2009. Numerous other jihadis have used it essentially as an announcement that non-Muslims are about to die.
But few people in America today are aware of this. That is in part due to the establishment media’s full-court press a few years ago to convince Americans that “Allahu akbar” was a benign phrase that only greasy Islamophobes could possibly be concerned about.
In the New York Daily News, Zainab Chaudry of Hamas-linked CAIR argued that non-Muslims shouldn’t “believe the worst” about “Allahu akbar” because Muslims don’t just scream it while murdering non-Muslims, but use it in a variety of contexts. She even offered this chilling advice, certain to get people killed were it ever heeded: “So the next time you hear Allahu Akbar — whether it’s in a media report, on an airplane, or in a shopping mall, remember that the phrase used by millions of Muslims and Christians daily to praise God regardless of their circumstances, can never be justified for use when harming His creation.” So stay put; evidently, fleeing would be “Islamophobic.”
On CNN, Omar Suleiman — the imam who prevailed upon Google to alter their search results so as to bury any negative information about Islam — also argued that Muslims say “Allahu akbar” in a variety of contexts, many of them positive. And the New York Times actually tweeted that the phrase “Allahu akbar” had “somehow” become “intertwined with terrorism.”
Somehow! How could this have possibly happened? Could it have anything to do with the thousands of Muslims who have screamed “Allahu akbar” while in the process of murdering or trying to murder infidels?
Nah. Just like a Muslim stabbing a cop in the neck while screaming “Allahu akbar” has nothing to do either with terrorism or anarchy; it’s just a victim of racism giving vent to his frustration. Salmah Rizvi or some other slick lawyer of that ilk will have young Camovic back on the streets in no time.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 19 books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is The Palestinian Delusion: The Catastrophic History of the Middle East Peace Process. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.