Journalistic Malpractice: Time Magazine, 'Does America Have a Muslim Problem?'

I've not published anything about the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, simply because I'm still trying to think about it in a detached and objective manner. As a strong proponent of religious liberty, I can see the reasonableness of the pro-Mosque position. But as someone who will never forget what happened on September 11, 2001 -- the consequence of Islamic terrorists putting their beliefs into practice -- I fully understand the objections raised against the Mosque. However, when a magazine like Time attempts to paint one side of the debate as consisting of nothing more than bigots moved by an irrational fear, I see Rhetorical McCarthyism. It is a shameful and undemocractic way to conduct a discussion in a Constitutional republic, since its purpose is to end the discussion rather than to advance it, to shut people up rather than to treat them with equal respect and dignity. It is the plagiarized cultural cliff notes of the intellectually lazy. — Francis J. Beckwith, Return to Rome, "My Rhetorical McCarthyism Beats Your Islamophobia."

If I was contemplating teaching a seminar on ideological bias in the contemporary press, Time Magazine's recent cover story on the Ground Zero mosque controversy would be hard to beat. And keeping with dead tree media ethics, the full article's available only in print. Perhaps the editors were hoping to avoid a savage thrashing at the hands of bloggers. I started reading the essay at my son's orthodontist's, then finished it at Barnes and Noble on the way home (no way would I fork over cash for such a pathetic hatchet job, sheesh). There's absolutely no mention of or engagement with any of the arguments Mega Mosque opponents have offered. And at one point the piece argues that Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan are leaders of the U.S. Muslim community's "interfaith outreach." The only problem, of course, is that throughout the controversy the developers have shunned any dialogue with "interfaith" critics of the project. And then there's this passage, available at the homepage:

You don't have to be prejudiced against Islam to believe, as many Americans do, that the area around Ground Zero is a sacred place. But sadly, in an election season, such sentiments have been stoked into a political issue. As the debate has grown more heated, Park51, as the proposed Muslim cultural center and mosque two blocks from Ground Zero is called, has become a litmus test for everything from private-property rights to religious tolerance. But it is plain that many of Park51's opponents are motivated by deep-seated Islamophobia

That's blanket condemnation. And it's too bad. I'd be perfectly happy to condemn outright hatred and bigotry toward Muslims (and I have at American Power). But folks are barking up the wrong tree with Pamela Geller. Mostly, she's just doing a fabulous job at calling these people out. Leftists don't like it, and they're lashing out the only way they know how: with allegations of RAAAACISM! From the Imam's excoriation of the United States to Little Miss Daisy's Islamic anti-Semitism, the Cordoba developers are offering up a whole lotta fodder for opponents. And as you have the press so completely in the tank --- and so oblivious to the manifestly non-bridge-building aims of the initiative --- it's no surprise that conservatives are even more outraged at the shameless indignity of building a jihadi worship center on sacred ground.

Americans are not prejudiced against Muslims. It's more likely that the families of the fallen and their grassroots supporters are now subject to a broad-based pattern of harassment and discrimination, from the White House all the way down to the communists on the streets screaming anti-Semitic epithets at the "Jewish Zionist" state.

Daisy Khan and Islamic Anti-Semitism

From Pamela, "Islamic Antisemitism 101: The Daisy Khan Con":

How dare Daisy Khan evoke the holocaust and the mass genocide of the Jews to smear those brave Americans who dare to stand up against Islamic supremacism and the tower of triumph under proposal for Ground Zero?

What has Daisy Khan done to expunge the Koran, hadiths and sira of the virulent antisemitism and calls for Jewish genocide enshrined in Islamic teachings? What has Daisy Khan done to denounce and rebuke the pivotal role the leader of the Muslim world and Hitler's ally (the Mufti haj al Husseini) had in the holocaust and the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Jewish women and children? Her husband, Imam Rauf of the Cordoba Imitative, pals around with the notorious Jew hater and America hater, Sheik Qaradawi. Is that the kind of mutual respect and mutual understanding we can expect to see fostered at the Ground Zero mosque and "islamic Cultural Center?" Will Qaradawi be asked to speak?

Who among my readers will gift Daisy the Con all of the complete works of the world's leading scholar on Islamic antisemitism, Bat Ye'or.

Also, Robert Spencer, "Wow: Daisy Khan says opposition to Ground Zero mosque 'like metastasized antisemitism'."

I wrote on this previously: "Daisy Khan: Moving Islamic Center ‘Not’ On the Table for Now."

The Myth of an Anti-Muslim Backlash

From Jonah Goldberg:

Here's a thought: The 70% of Americans who oppose what amounts to an Islamic Niketown two blocks from ground zero are the real victims of a climate of hate, and anti-Muslim backlash is mostly a myth.

Let's start with some data.

According to the FBI, hate crimes against Muslims increased by a staggering 1,600% in 2001. That sounds serious! But wait, the increase is a math mirage. There were 28 anti-Islamic incidents in 2000. That number climbed to 481 the year a bunch of Muslim terrorists murdered 3,000 Americans in the name of Islam on Sept. 11.

Now, that was a hate crime.

Regardless, 2001 was the zenith or, looked at through the prism of our national shame, the nadir of the much-discussed anti-Muslim backlash in the United States. The following year, the number of anti-Islamic hate-crime incidents (overwhelmingly, nonviolent vandalism and nasty words) dropped to 155. In 2003, there were 149 such incidents. And the number has hovered around the mid-100s or lower ever since.

Sure, even one hate crime is too many. But does that sound like a anti-Muslim backlash to you?

Let's put this in even sharper focus. America is, outside of Israel ,probably the most receptive and tolerant country in the world to Jews. And yet, in every year since 9/11, more Jews have been hate-crime victims than Muslims. A lot more.

In 2001, there were twice as many anti-Jewish incidents as there were anti-Muslim, again according to the FBI. In 2002 and pretty much every year since, anti-Jewish incidents have outstripped anti-Muslim ones by at least 6 to 1. Why aren't we talking about the anti-Jewish climate in America?

Because there isn't one. And there isn't an anti-Muslim climate either. Yes, there's a lot of heated rhetoric on the Internet. Absolutely, some Americans don't like Muslims. But if you watch TV or movies or read, say, the op-ed page of the New York Times — never mind left-wing blogs — you'll hear much more open bigotry toward evangelical Christians (in blogspeak, the "Taliban wing of the Republican Party") than you will toward Muslims.

No doubt some American Muslims — particularly young Muslim men with ties to the Middle East and South Asia — have been scrutinized at airports more than elderly women of Norwegian extraction, but does that really amount to Islamophobia, given the dangers and complexities of the war on terror?

More at the link.

'There is No Moderate Islam in the Mainstream of Muslim Life'

Andrew McCarthy cuts to the heart of the matter (via Cold Fury and Memeorandum):

The sad fact, the fact no one wants to deal with but which the Ground Zero mosque debate has forced to the fore, is that Qaradawi is a moderate. So is Feisal Rauf, who endorses the Qaradawi position — the mainstream Islamic position — that sharia is a nonnegotiable requirement. Rauf wins the coveted “moderate” designation because he strains, at least when speaking for Western consumption, to paper over the incompatibility between sharia societies and Western societies.

Qaradawi and Rauf are “moderates” because we’ve abandoned reason. Our opinion elites are happy to paper over the gulf between “reformist” Islam and the “reformist” approval of mass-murder attacks. That’s why it matters not a whit to them that Imam Rauf refuses to renounce Hamas: If you’re going to give a pass to Qaradawi, the guy who actively promotes Hamas terrorists, how can you complain about a guy who merely refuses to condemn the terrorists?

When we are rational, we have confidence in our own frame of reference. We judge what is moderate based on a detached, commonsense understanding of what “moderate” means. We’re not rigging the outcome; we just want to know where we stand.

If we were in that objective frame of mind, we would easily see that a freedom culture requires separation of the spiritual from the secular. We would also see that sharia — with dictates that contradict liberty and equality while sanctioning cruel punishments and holy war — is not moderate. Consequently, no one who advocates sharia can be a moderate, no matter how well-meaning he may be, no matter how heartfelt may be his conviction that this is God’s will, and no matter how much higher on the food chain he may be than Osama bin Laden.

Instead, abandoning reason, we have deep-sixed our own frame of reference and substituted mainstream Islam’s. If that backward compass is to be our guide, then sure, Qaradawi and Rauf are moderates. But know this: When you capitulate to the authority and influence of Qaradawi and Rauf, you kill meaningful Islamic reform.

There is no moderate Islam in the mainstream of Muslim life, not in the doctrinal sense. There are millions of moderate Muslims who crave reform. Yet the fact that they seek real reform, rather than what Georgetown is content to call reform, means they are trying to invent something that does not currently exist.

Real reform can also be found in some Muslim sects. The Ahmadi, for example, hold some unorthodox views and reject violent jihad. Witness what happens: They are brutally persecuted by Muslims in Pakistan, as well as in Indonesia and other purported hubs of moderation.

Meanwhile, individual Muslim reformers are branded apostates, meaning not only that they are discredited, but that their lives are threatened as well. The signal to other Muslims is clear: Follow the reformers and experience the same fury. As Qaradawi put it in the 2005 interview, public apostates are “the gravest danger” to Islamic society; therefore, Muslims must snuff them out, lest their reforms “spread like wildfire in a field of thorns.”

Today, “moderate Islam” is an illusion. There is hardly a spark, much less a wildfire. Making moderation real will take more than wishing upon a star. It calls for a gut check, a willingness to face down not just al-Qaeda but the Qaradawis and their sharia campaign. It means saying: Not here.

'Moderate Muslims Are Going to Be Pushed Into Joining Extremist Movements Like al-Qaida'

So much for moderate Muslims repudiating jihad:

Experts worry the controversy surrounding an Islamic center near ground zero in Lower Manhattan is playing right into the hands of radical extremists.

The supercharged debate over the proposed center has attracted the attention of a quiet, underground audience — young Muslims who drift in and out of jihadi chat rooms and frequent radical Islamic sites on the Web. It has become the No. 1 topic of discussion in recent days and proof positive, according to some of the posted messages, that America is indeed at war with Islam.

"This, unfortunately, is playing right into their hands," said Evan F. Kohlmann, who tracks these kinds of websites and chat rooms for Flashpoint Global partners, a New York-based security firm. "Extremists are encouraging all this, with glee.

"It is their sense that by doing this that Americans are going to alienate American Muslims to the point where even relatively moderate Muslims are going to be pushed into joining extremist movements like al-Qaida. They couldn't be happier."

Hey, Imam Rauf's dreams come true! Build a Victory Mosque at Ground Zero, alienate two-thirds of the American people and piss on the families of the fallen, then turn around and attack them all as a bunch "anti-Muslim bigots," which in turn induces all those millions of "peaceful" Muslims worldwide to show up at al Qaeda's recruiting stations.

Brilliant.

And working true to plan. These folks are da bomb! Really!

Hat Tip: James Taranto.

America Rising: An Open Letter to Democrat Politicians (Repost)

This video came out at the very beginning of the year. It's interesting to see it again. More prescient than ever:

Radical Ground Zero Victory Mosque Imam Thanks Obama For His Support

At Gateway Pundit:

The radical imam behind the Ground Zero Victory Mosque project, who said the U.S. is worse than Al-Qaeda, thanked Barack Obama today for his support on the project. The New York Daily News reported:

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf used his taxpayer-funded Mideast tour yesterday to praise President Obama’s qualified support for the mosque near Ground Zero.

“I am grateful to President Barack Obama and all those who expressed support for our project,” Abdul Rauf said at a dinner for student leaders in the Gulf state of Bahrain. the Gulf Daily News in Bahrain reported.

The 'Professional Left' Calls Conservatives Fighting Ground Zero Mosque Islamophobes

From Lisa Richards, at NewsReal Blog:

Leftists have an crazy obsessive compulsive drive to defend Islam and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s radical plans to build the Ground Zero mosque. Islamophobia is their weak argument for supporting a religion that calls for the death of all non-Muslims and honor killings for Muslims considered dishonorable.

But leftists are losing the fight, because too many Americans know the truth about Islam — it's anti-Semitic. It's the GOP, darling leftists, that loves Jews and welcomes Jews, Islam does not. "Progressives" love condemning conservative protesters as the bigots, yet they defend Islam’s radical anti-Semitic history that continues today.

Americans understand Islam and they know why leftists support Islam and the Ground Zero mosque so ferociously: the Left has a devoted fetish for anti-Semitism, Islam and mosque conquering. Leftists love Islam, because The Left harbors anti-Semitism toward Israel and Jews and is against anything preventing Islam from conquering and destroying western ideals.

RTWT.

Progressive Censorship and the Ground Zero Mosque

See James Taranto, "Is Nancy Pelosi Un-American?":

Also, from Roger Simon, "Censorship in the Era of the Ground Zero Mosque and Islamic Debate."

Continued Debate on Ground Zero

Pamela on Hannity:

Gonna Ride Me a South-Bound...

Enjoy a bit of Marshall Tucker Band:

Rasmussen Reports: 62% Oppose Ground Zero Mosque/Only 25% Support

Another poll finding roughly two-thirds of Americans against a Victory Mosque at Ground Zero:

Now 62% oppose the building of a mosque near where the World Trade Center stood in Lower Manhattan, compared to 54% in the previous survey. Twenty-five percent (25%) favor allowing the mosque to go ahead, and 13% more are not sure.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of the Political Class, however, favor building the mosque near Ground Zero. Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Mainstream voters are opposed.

Since the July survey, the local New York City zoning debate over the planned 13-story Cordoba mosque has escalated into a national controversy. It has even been addressed by President Obama, who supports the building of the mosque in the name of religious tolerance. Opponents of the project, including many who lost loved ones in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, see the mosque as a deliberate provocation that dishonors the memories of the 3,000 people who died that day.

In mid-July, most voters in New York (58%) opposed the building of the mosque near Ground Zero. Twenty percent (20%) supported it, and 21% were undecided.

And yet leftists continue to claim they're the compassionate, enlightened ones. Talk about "the political class." It's pretty much the extreme left-wing and its jihadi allies who support this thing. Most regular folks see this as an affront to decency at least, if not another foot in the door to sharia.

Response to Haris Tarin and Moderate Muslims

I like this response to "Where have America's tolerance and acceptance of Muslims gone?", at the Letters to the Editor at LAT:

I agree with Tarin that the Muslim faith in the U.S. (and in other Western countries) is under attack. This goes against our principles and is very disturbing.

But in our defense, there has been a very muted response from the moderate Muslim community to the vicious attacks by the extreme fundamentalist wing of their religion on the "openness and welcoming nature of the American people."

If we perceived a loud moderate and open voice from the Muslim community, I am sure there would be strong support for it.

We are hungry to hear a clear message from Islam denouncing the extremists and embracing the open and tolerant attitude that drew Tarin's parents to this country in the first place.

Susan Clayton

Santa Barbara

The Muslim Brotherhood Project

Patrick Poole discusses "The Project" at an earlier FrontPage Magazine essay.

And it's not some cooked up fearmongering by the "evil" neocons. Dr. Rafiq Habib made the case for it in an essay from last February, "The New Islam":

The West has been looking for an Islam that protects the territorial nation-state and prevents the establishment of the United Islamic State. But this would be an artificial, cloned form of Islam. This will be the ultimate victory of the West when it reaches an Islamic formula it can support because it is based on preventing any attempt to establish the United Islamic State and, at the same time, has an Islamic title that renders it more popular than the current ruling regimes. This Islamic title shall provide it with popular support that will reinforce its position in office. Then the Islamist shall be the protector of the territorial nation-state after he has given up the dream of Islamic unity.

The United Islamic State is not only a dream, but a symbol of the political unity of the Ummah. It is the first step to its renaissance, because the strength of this Ummah lies in its unity, through which it can rise up. Thus, dispensing with the objective of the unity of the Ummah means giving up the goal of the renaissance, and in its place the creation of the new Islamist who protects the Western project in the region, prevents the establishment of the United Islamic State, and turns the Islamic project into a territorial national one based on nationalism and partisanship like the new Palestinian who is being prepared to protect the security of the Israeli occupation.

What is Islam without an Islamic State? What is the Islamic project without an Islamic Caliphate? This is the issue and the essence of the conflict with the dominant Western civilization. The West will end up victorious if the Islamic project is besieged from within by territorial nationalism. The only way for the Islamic project to win this battle is to go out of the siege of territorial nationalism and declare the dream of its Ummah to restore the United Islamic State.

Hat Tip: Bare Naked Islam, "Why Muslims are so ‘pig-headed’ about the proposed Victory Mosque at Ground Zero."

Mosque Developers Won’t Rule Out Taking Money from Terrorist States

I missed this one, from Dana Loesch:

SHOCKER.

The developers behind the Islamic center planned for a site near Ground Zero won’t rule out accepting financing from the Mideast — including from Saudi Arabia and Iran — as they begin searching for $100 million needed to build the project.

[...]

“We’ll look at all available options within the United States to start. We’re hoping to fund this predominately from domestic donors. That can be everything from institutions all the way down to personal [contributors,]” said Sultan.

When asked if they would then turn to foreign donors, Sultan replied, “I can’t comment on that.”

[...]

Iran has been designated a sponsor of terrorism by the U.S. government...

More at the link.

Ground Zero's Imam Rauf Partners With Jamal Barzinji – 9/11 D.C. Mosque Founder Sponsored Anwar al-Awlaki

Man, it just keeps coming. And "six degrees of separation"? Give me a break. It's pretty much the case that even so-called Muslim moderates are deeply implicated with Islamic jihad. See, "Ground Zero mosque modeled after notorious 9/11 mosque? Founder of hijackers' D.C. worship center partners with N.Y. imam pushing shariah":

The New York imam behind the Ground Zero mosque has struck a partnership with the founder of the so-called 9/11 mosque in the Washington suburbs that gave aid and comfort to some of the 9/11 hijackers, WND has learned.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf counts the lead trustee of the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center among partners in his Cordoba Initiative, which features a 13-story mosque and a "cultural center" for his project to bring shariah, or Islamic law, to America.

Families of 9/11 victims oppose construction of the proposed site so close to Ground Zero.

Jamal Barzinji, one of the founders of the radical Muslim Brotherhood in America, also founded Dar al-Hijrah in Falls Church, Va., which is run by the pro-jihad Brotherhood. The mosque has been tied to numerous terrorism plots, including the 9/11 attacks.

In December 2008, the Brotherhood's U.S. think tank -- the International Institute of Islamic Thought, or IIIT – hosted Rauf. During their meeting, IIIT's leadership, including Barzinji, "pledged cooperation and support" for Rauf's project, according to this screenshot of the description of the event from IIIT's scrubbed Web archives.

Rauf's partner Barzinji is a founder and director of IIIT, which is under active federal investigation for funneling funds to Palestinian terrorists. Its Herndon, Va., offices were raided by federal agents after 9/11.

The U.S. government has accused Barzinji of being "closely associated" with the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other terrorist organizations. He has not been charged with a crime, however.

Barzinji personally authorized the development of Dar al-Hijrah, according to Fairfax County, Va., property records obtained by investigative journalist Paul Sperry, author of "Infiltration" and "Muslim Mafia."

Records also show the North American Islamic Trust, a recently named unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror-financing case in U.S. history, holds the deed to the radical mosque. Barzinji is listed as a NAIT trustee on the document, and his signature appears on the deed.

In November 2008, Barzinji personally chaired a meeting at IIIT's Herndon headquarters to launch an abridged edition of Rauf's book, "What's Right with Islam Is What's Right with America," in which he calls for the establishment of a parallel system of justice in America run by Islamic jurists. Barzinji's brother's printing company published the digest.

Rauf's partnership with Barzinji and IIIT worries critics of the Ground Zero mosque in New York, who fear it will attract the kind of dubious foreign sponsorship and terrorist elements associated with Dar al-Hijrah.

Built in 1991 with $5 million from the Saudi Embassy, Dar al-Hijrah employed Imam Anwar Awlaki as its prayer leader from 2000 to 2002. Awlaki, aka Aulaqi, counseled two of the 9/11 hijackers in closed-door meetings, and is believed to have played a central role in the plot. The fugitive al-Qaida leader is now hiding in Yemen.

He also radicalized Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, Christmas Day airline bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and, most recently, Times Square car bomber Faisal Shahzad.

The U.S. last month designated Awlaki a "key leader of al-Qaida" and froze his assets.

More at the link.

RELATED: "'Moderate' Imam Rauf Condemns U.S. — ' More Muslim Blood On Its Hands Than al Qaeda'."

The Climate Change Industry Keeps Digging

You know what they say about holes — when you find yourself in one, stop digging. The climate change commies haven't figured that one out. So, well, just go read this post: "James Cameron — King of Hypocrites." You'll see what I mean.

Plus, at The Hill, "Director James Cameron calls climate change skeptics 'swine'." (Via Memeorandum.)

James Cameron, director of the eco-tinged smash film Avatar, on Sunday called global warming skeptics “swine” at a renewable energy conference in Aspen, Colo., according to a news report.

“I think they're swine,” he said at the American Renewable Energy Day Summit, the Aspen Times reported.

Kinda like being smeared as racist, but as that slur lost its punch, perhaps a more animalistic classification is needed. (Leftists are generally bad people, as I've said — but most of those on the Democrat side of things just hafta figure that out on their own.)

'Moderate' Imam Rauf Condemns U.S. — ' More Muslim Blood On Its Hands Than al Qaeda'

Great scoop, from Pamela:

And at Jawa Report:

Once again, this is not evidence that Rauf is an extremist wolf in moderate sheep's clothing. For Muslims, the idea that US foreign policy is hostile to Muslims and that Americans don't care about the deaths of innocents is widely held. By definition, this makes Rauf's opinion mainstream in most majority Muslim countries.

On other issues, Rauf would be considered quite liberal in the Muslim community.

But to equivocate between the intentional killing of civilians by al Qaeda and the unintended killing of civilians by the US is worse than wrong -- it is evil.

Yes, we kill civilians sometimes. That is truly one of the many sad realities of warfare.

When al Qaeda kills civilians they not only do it intentionally, but they also celebrate it.

No one in the West praises the Predator drone operator who accidentally blows up a wedding party. We think of such acts as the regrettable but inevitable outcome of war.

But in many parts of the Muslim world "The Magnificient 19" -- the men who carried out the 9/11 attacks -- are praised as heroes and martyrs.

Obama Weekly Job Approval Average at New Low of 43%

Hmm, I wonder why that could be?

At Gallup:

President Obama's job approval rating slipped to 43% for the week of Aug. 16-22, down one percentage point from the previous administration low point of a week ago.

Also, from Chris Cillizza, "Poll numbers in 1994, a bad year for Democrats, don't bode well for them in 2010" (via Memeorandum).

It's gonna be a electoral bloodbath.

Image Credit: No Sheeples Here!

Anti-Semitic Communists Slur 'Jewish Zionist Israel' at Ground Zero Counter-Protest

This video's at Dana's, but I recognized some of communist cadres from Weasel Zippers' post yesterday. (The group's website is Internationalist Group and the League for the Fourth International.) And the Pakistani dude launching into the Jew-hatred is "Comrade Shahid," seen at the Worker's World Party homepage. Might as well have been some of the folks from Booman Tribune or Daily Kos. This is classic leftist agitation. I document this stuff all the time. And apparently the similar hatred from Charles Johnson is really about "building pluralism." The Big C.J. has yet to comment on the mosque backers excoriations of the "Jewish Zionist Israel."

SCROLL FORWARD TO 3:55 MINUTES.

Related: "Anti-Semitic Incident at Ground Zero Mosque Counter Protest."