I acted in this play in 1994 in Hong Kong, playing the part of Captain Horster. The play is about a small town which "has recently invested a large amount of public and private money towards the development of baths, a project led by Dr. Stockmann and his brother, Peter Stockmann the Mayor. The town is expecting a surge in tourism and prosperity from the new baths...
... prosperity from the new baths, said to be of great medicinal value, and as such, the baths are a source of great local pride. However, just as the baths are proving successful, Dr. Stockmann discovers that waste products from the town's tannery are contaminating the waters, causing serious illness amongst the tourists.... The townspeople - eagerly anticipating the prosperity that the baths will bring - refuse to accept Stockmann's claims, and his friends and allies, who had explicitly given support for his campaign, turn against him en masse. He is taunted and denounced as a lunatic, an "Enemy of the People."
The parallels with Bawer's case are obvious. The man pointing out the clear and present danger is the one demonised, while "the people" ignore the danger. Bawer writes of the the Muslim imams and other radicals who condemn freedom and call for sharia law. Instead of the focus being on those Imams -- demonstrably numerous, clamorous, viciously anti-semitic and supremacist -- it is Bawer on whom the guns are turned. It is he, not the murderous imams, who is the "enemy of the people".
The new British PM, David Cameron apparently said in his campaign that the UK should deport radical imams and prohibit entry to those who preach violence, overthrow of western democracies and the rest of that bigoted panoply of Islamism. If Cameron did make that promise, he's already not fulfilling it. He he has allowed into the country the execrable Dr Zakir Naik [that's him, above], who has notoriously called for all Muslims to be terrorists [he justifies this by saying that the US, the whole country is a "terrorist" and that it's a "must" according to Islam, to "terrorise the terrorist"] and has said that it is perfectly acceptable to prohibit any places of worship other than mosques. He approves of death for apostates from Islam.
I have just filled in a visa application for the UK. Question 69 is "have you ever, by any means or medium, expressed views that justify or glorify terrorist violence or that may encourage others to terrorist acts...?" and number 70 is: "Have you engaged in any other activities that might indicate that you may not be considered a person of good character?".
Either Naik answered "No", in which case he is lying. That is easily provable on his numerous videos and via his public statements. A few minutes on the web by the Immigration department would ascertain this. Or he answered, truthfully, "Yes", in which case what is he doing being allowed in?
These are serious questions.
It is Naik and his ilk who are the true perpetrators of hate crimes, of intolerance (to other religions, to women and minorities, to freedom of speech, that apostates must be killed). It is Naik and his ilk who are the "enemies of the people".
