Bush Appointee is a Bigot Disguised as a Scholar

[djxeno]

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0828-06.htm

Published, August 28, 2003 by the St. Paul Pioneer Press (Minnesota)

Bush Appointee is a Bigot Disguised as a Scholar

by Fedwa Wazwaz

President Bush's back-door appointment of Daniel Pipes to the United States Institute for Peace is an act of injustice. This appointment, which bypassed the normal approval process in the Senate, allowed a racist to masquerade as a peacemaker.

What are Pipes' qualifications? His resume reads:

Launched Campus Watch, a Web site that included "dossiers" on professors and academic institutions thought to be too critical of Israel or too sympathetic to Islam and Muslims.

Advocated the unrestricted profiling of Muslims and Arabs.

Declared that 10 to 15 percent of all Muslims are "potential killers."

Recommended the "vigilant application of social and political pressure to ensure that Islam is not accorded special status of any kind in this country."

Does Pipes have any experience in peace and conflict resolution? None.

Pipes' supporters mention his "prophecy" of warning Americans that Muslim terrorists were going to attack America. Keep in mind that the terrorists were not exactly secretive that they were planning a "surprise attack." Even so, Pipes fails to comprehend that 9/11 was an act of terrorists and not the Muslim people en masse.

One does not hear Pipes or his supporters replay and remind the American people of Baruch Goldstein, who massacred scores of Muslims kneeling in prayer during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan or of Allan Goodman, who entered the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem and started firing shots randomly at Muslims. These are two American Jews, among the thousands of illegal settlers who exported violence and terror from America to the Palestinian Territories.

Pipes claims it is militant Islam and Muslims he is attacking. However, he gives no measurable criteria to differentiate between a radical Muslim and a moderate one. More troublesome is that Pipes supports Mujahedeen-e Khalq, a group designated as a terrorist group by the State Department. One gets the impression that if you disagree with his political views, you're a Muslim radical.

Regardless of how many columns Pipes wrote on Islam and Muslims, his writings lack an empathetic understanding of Muslims. He never explores Muslim or Arab feelings and perceptions. He writes from a position far away, looking down in disgust at them and obsessively looking for dirt to smear their image in public discourse. The tone is always accusatory, hostile and blaming, destroying any possibility of discussion, communication or dialogue. In his own words, "the Palestinians are a miserable people and they deserve to be."

Pipes' scholarship lacks an appreciation of Islamic traditions, history or culture. Rather, Pipes consistently attacks any positive portrayal of Islam or Muslims, such as the positive portrayal of Islamic history and beliefs in public schools and the PBS documentary "Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet."

Pipes' boasts of a doctorate from Harvard, yet he falsely claimed that Muslims have no real religious attachments to the city of Jerusalem. When he cannot prove his wild accusations, he resorts to paranoia suspicions, claiming to have a special mental "filter" which allows him to detect those who want to "create a Muslim state in America."

When he can't find dirt on Muslims, he fabricates it. In one of his New York Post columns, Pipes fallaciously wrote, "Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim." To make such a false statement clearly illustrates a malicious intent.

Pipes' supporters argue his criticism is in the best interests of Muslims and America. They need to explain, then, why he attacks the acceptance, equality and liberty of Muslims and Arabs in America. He compared the American Muslim voter registration drives to those of the Communist Party USA and incited fear that "as the population of Muslims in the United States grows, so does anti-Semitism," and "black converts (to Islam) tend to hold vehemently anti-American, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic attitudes."

I can sum up Pipes' logic in one word: bigotry. Bigotry is the child of an extremist, not a peacemaker. President Bush lost any credibility to attack extremism anywhere with his appointment of an extremist to the Institute for Peace.

Wazwaz is a Muslim activist residing in Crystal, Minnesota and a former Pioneer Press community columnist.

Copyright 1996-2003 Knight Ridder

[normalnoises]

Originally posted by djxeno

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0828-06.htm

Published, August 28, 2003 by the St. Paul Pioneer Press (Minnesota)

Bush Appointee is a Bigot Disguised as a Scholar

by Fedwa Wazwaz

President Bush's back-door appointment of Daniel Pipes to the United States Institute for Peace is an act of injustice. This appointment, which bypassed the normal approval process in the Senate, allowed a racist to masquerade as a peacemaker.

What are Pipes' qualifications? His resume reads:

Launched Campus Watch, a Web site that included "dossiers" on professors and academic institutions thought to be too critical of Israel or too sympathetic to Islam and Muslims.

Advocated the unrestricted profiling of Muslims and Arabs.

Declared that 10 to 15 percent of all Muslims are "potential killers."

Recommended the "vigilant application of social and political pressure to ensure that Islam is not accorded special status of any kind in this country."

Does Pipes have any experience in peace and conflict resolution? None.

Pipes' supporters mention his "prophecy" of warning Americans that Muslim terrorists were going to attack America. Keep in mind that the terrorists were not exactly secretive that they were planning a "surprise attack." Even so, Pipes fails to comprehend that 9/11 was an act of terrorists and not the Muslim people en masse.

One does not hear Pipes or his supporters replay and remind the American people of Baruch Goldstein, who massacred scores of Muslims kneeling in prayer during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan or of Allan Goodman, who entered the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem and started firing shots randomly at Muslims. These are two American Jews, among the thousands of illegal settlers who exported violence and terror from America to the Palestinian Territories.

Pipes claims it is militant Islam and Muslims he is attacking. However, he gives no measurable criteria to differentiate between a radical Muslim and a moderate one. More troublesome is that Pipes supports Mujahedeen-e Khalq, a group designated as a terrorist group by the State Department. One gets the impression that if you disagree with his political views, you're a Muslim radical.

Regardless of how many columns Pipes wrote on Islam and Muslims, his writings lack an empathetic understanding of Muslims. He never explores Muslim or Arab feelings and perceptions. He writes from a position far away, looking down in disgust at them and obsessively looking for dirt to smear their image in public discourse. The tone is always accusatory, hostile and blaming, destroying any possibility of discussion, communication or dialogue. In his own words, "the Palestinians are a miserable people and they deserve to be."

Pipes' scholarship lacks an appreciation of Islamic traditions, history or culture. Rather, Pipes consistently attacks any positive portrayal of Islam or Muslims, such as the positive portrayal of Islamic history and beliefs in public schools and the PBS documentary "Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet."

Pipes' boasts of a doctorate from Harvard, yet he falsely claimed that Muslims have no real religious attachments to the city of Jerusalem. When he cannot prove his wild accusations, he resorts to paranoia suspicions, claiming to have a special mental "filter" which allows him to detect those who want to "create a Muslim state in America."

When he can't find dirt on Muslims, he fabricates it. In one of his New York Post columns, Pipes fallaciously wrote, "Muslims are only 4 percent of Denmark's 5.4 million people but make up a majority of the country's convicted rapists, an especially combustible issue given that practically all the female victims are non-Muslim." To make such a false statement clearly illustrates a malicious intent.

Pipes' supporters argue his criticism is in the best interests of Muslims and America. They need to explain, then, why he attacks the acceptance, equality and liberty of Muslims and Arabs in America. He compared the American Muslim voter registration drives to those of the Communist Party USA and incited fear that "as the population of Muslims in the United States grows, so does anti-Semitism," and "black converts (to Islam) tend to hold vehemently anti-American, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic attitudes."

I can sum up Pipes' logic in one word: bigotry. Bigotry is the child of an extremist, not a peacemaker. President Bush lost any credibility to attack extremism anywhere with his appointment of an extremist to the Institute for Peace.

Wazwaz is a Muslim activist residing in Crystal, Minnesota and a former Pioneer Press community columnist.

Copyright 1996-2003 Knight Ridder

Won-der-ful

[sassa]

yeah, bush and pipes are definitely bed buddies.....clowns. words cannot describe how sad it makes me that they exist. i wish someone would put them out of everyone's misery.