Tuesday, July 26, 2005
I was at a loss at where to begin with this op-ed that appears today in a Connecticut newspaper. Do I outright fisk it? Do I link it and just shake my rhetorical head at it? Question the paper's standards in printing it?
This article contains barely a single true statement of fact including "and" and "the." Daniel Pipes did not say the things he is purported to have said, Israeli forces did not massacre 1000 people in Sabra and Shatila, Ariel Sharon did not oversee it, Muslim scholars have not been unambiguous in their condemnations of terror -- in fact, they have trouble agreeing to a definition when it involves people in Iraq or Israel. On and on... Further, not a single matter of judgement follows-on logically from -- how could it, when the factual foundation is so cracked. (Goodness, the author quotes Juan Cole for analytical backing!)
The Day identifies the author, Hassan Fouda, as simply a "resident of Groton," rather than providing his relevant interest, that he is the Connecticut head of Al-Awda, the Right to Return Coalition -- a group which seeks the destruction of the State of Israel. One would think that would be a relevant biographical fact the reader may want to know in framing the author's perspective, rather than the location of his house -- not that The Day had any business printing such distortion-filled tripe in the first place.
The article is here: The Real Double Standard On Islam (Requires registration. Don't forget BugMeNot)
There's not much point in excerpting it.
Fortunately, Daniel Pipes makes my job of blogging easier, by defending himself in this letter sent to the paper. I reprint in full:
self proclaimed “terrorism expert” Daniel Pipes, who has in the past called the American Muslim community “a seditious conspiracy aimed at undermining American values” and warned Americans of “the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene,” suggested the possibility of detaining Muslims in internment camps like those used against Japanese Americans in World War II.
There are two remarkable things about this passage. The first is the falsehood of every single assertion.
- I am not a self-proclaimed terrorism expert but a historian of the Middle East and Islam; I have never proclaimed an expertise on terrorism, a quite different field.
- I never uttered the words “a seditious conspiracy aimed at undermining American values,” much less applied them to the American Muslim community. This is rank fabrication.
- I did not warn Americans of “the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene.” This is a half-fabrication; for what I did say, go to “Reply to CAIR's Attack on Daniel Pipes” on my website, www.DanielPipes.org.
- I never suggested detaining Muslims in internment camps but to the contrary have denied this explicitly (see “Department of Corrections (of Others’ Mistakes about Me),” a blog entry on my website) and even won an apology and retraction from someone who wrote this about me (on which see “An Islamist Apology,” also on my website).
I now demand an apology and correction for this passage. If one is not swiftly provided, I will consider legal remedies.
The second remarkable thing about this passage is that The Day would print an article by the chair of the Connecticut chapter of Al-Awda, “the Palestine Right to Return Coalition.” If you are not familiar with it, this organization (as described by Alyssa A. Lappen and Jerry Gordon at FrontPageMag.com) “seeks Israel’s political destruction.” At a Wesleyan University conference last year, the Connecticut Jewish Ledger reports, Al-Awda distributed antisemitic literature bearing swastikas. Fouda wrote for The Day on Dec. 7, 2003 (and available on Al-Awda’s website) the obnoxious statement that “To deny Israel's role in the dispossession of the Palestinians is the moral equivalent of denying the holocaust.”
Mr. Fouda clearly has some problems. I am appalled that you publish this extremist, and do so repeatedly.
Yours sincerely,
Daniel Pipes
For something of an antidote to Fouda, take a look at Egyptian columnist, Mona Eltahawy's piece in Asharq Alawsat, We must speak with one voice. No excuses, no finger-pointing, just good sense.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Journalistic Irresponsibility -- Pipes strikes back...again.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.solomonia.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-renamedtb.cgi/4504
At least, that's what it felt like reading a couple of articles in Connecticut newspapers yesterday. The first is an op-ed appearing in the New London paper, The Day, by... Read More
The Day seems to specialize in providing a platform for Muslim propaganda. They have published many Al-Awda op-eds.
Of course, newspapers are allowed to be as biased as they please on their opinion pages (although Al Awda's support for the "martrydom" of suicide bombing and calls for the destruction of Israel "by any means necessary" are pretty far out thre for a respectable daily paper. Nevertheless, op-eds are free speech.
What is considered a crime among journalists is to publish an op-ed and neglect to mention that the writer is an officer of an organization that takes a strong position on the issue.
It is similarly considered acceptable to publish extremenopinion, but a journalistic crime to fail to make certain that the facts are accurate. Fouda's op-ed is a farrago of slander and outright lies.
It was highly irresponsible for the Day to publish an article filled with bot factual inaccurscies and lacking a proper identification of the author.
Today, they compounded their irresponsible journalism by publishing a letter telling the same basic fib, that Muslim leaders clearly condemn terrorism, but not a ingle letter on the other side.
I hope that some of your readers will compose letters to The Day (M.McGinley@theday.com.)
Published on 7/26/2005
Letters To The Editor:
Regarding The Day's editorial titled, “Muslims must speak out,†published July 20, you fail to recognize that Muslims worldwide have condemned the London attacks. This has not just included the Muslim laity, who have always condemned such attacks, but also the Islamic religious establishment.
Recently, Britain's largest Muslim group issued a fatwa condemning the London attacks.
In fact, just hours after the attack, the Connecticut chapter of the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR-CT), sent The Day a news release condemning the attack. However, your paper did not publish it. It's unfortunate that the media consistently fails to report Muslim condemnations of these horrific atrocities, further polarizing the Muslim and non-Muslim communities and thus handing a victory to those that wish to divide us.
Sarah Aziz
New London
Editor's note: The writer is director of media relations for CAIR-CT.
Journalistic integrity ranks right up there with academic integrity.
These are pleasing myths to keep genuinely moral people from speaking out (at best, these bend over backwards in efforts to be fair), but these concepts don't apply to politically fashionable ideas.