Pipes Makes No Apologies for Muslim Remarks

Pipes Makes No Apologies for Muslim Remarks

WASHINGTON — Daniel Pipes (search), the Middle East scholar who has been called a bigot by Muslim groups and denounced by senators, makes no apologies for his views, and said he believes some of his Muslim critics are dangerous extremists who need to be exposed.

“The problem is, right now, the Muslim institutions are dominated by militant Islam. Part of my work is to make that clear,” Pipes told Foxnews.com. “I am exposing them.”

As for his nemesis here in the United States, the Council on American Islamic Relations (search), which last week said Pipes’ appointment to the U.S. Institute of Peace (search) would “poison the well” of interfaith relations and “hurt American interests worldwide,” Pipes reserved his harshest comments.

“They are the lobbyists of bin Laden and Ayatollah Khamenei, and they want to replace the U.S. Constitution with the Quran,” Pipes said, referring to the sacred Islamic texts. “There is no surprise that my greatest opposition are the allies of our enemies.”

more.....................

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95181,00.html

(I don't like using Fox, but it works for this story.)

that * makes this recess appointment. Only in the sense that the outrage will be enormous. There is no way Pipes is appropriate for this position.

but I think he may have been appointed. I was zooming around a while ago looking for something and I caught a headline out of the corner of my eye. No idea where sorry. And I may well be wrong.

cancell that, I had a brainwave and used my history list to find out where I'd been, the word was 'nominated' and the article is 22nd of july.

At what point will even moderate Republicans finally say, "enough of this horseshit, these clowns are egomanical antagonists?" and kick 'em out?!?

That isn't happening any time soon -- the demonization has been too complete and thorough. Of course, it's people like Pipes who have helped create that situation, and will continue to foster it.

If there an organization that truly is alarmed by militant Islam vs. the so-called "religion of peace" that keeps being touted, if Pipes doesn't represent it?

As a Western female I am extremely concerned about the spread of Islam, as much as I am about the Christian right's crusade to repeal Roe vs. Wade. Denial of the civil rights of women is one of the characteristics of muslim dominated countries, and I am sick to death of hearing it said over and over that "all Western women are whores."

I grew up in a fundamentalist religion, so I don't see why people are denying that militant islamics want to run their governments with their religions, just as fundamentalist Christians do and as many members of orthodox religions do. I don't have any use for any of it, personally, and as someone who has read about the various and sundry horrors perpetrated against women by muslims, from honor killings to genital mutilation to the spree of battery acid attacks a few years back, I am finding myself growing more and more uneasy every day.

Because someone is concerned about the denial of the human rights of women that is characteristic of the muslim faith does not make them "anti-arab". Of course I am sure there is some stuff going on in these sentiments having to do with the Israeli vs. Palestinian arguments, which should be enough to turn people into atheists especially given the violence both sides have perpetrated in the name of religion.

The spread of Islam scares the living shit out of me as a Western female. Anyone who wants to read about one womans life as a fundamentalist muslim should read Waris Diri's story that came out several years ago. She talks about having her outer genitalia scraped off with a jagged piece of glass at the age of five. She disassociated herself from her body as the gypsy woman who did it laid the strips of her flesh up on a rock in the desert (Sudan)....It's graphic and horrible...Another book to read is "The Nine Parts of Desire" written by a journalist who spent time in the mid-east and writes about her experiences as a woman in muslim culture.

I'm feeling overwhelmed with the assault on gay rights causes and roe v. wade from the Christian right here, and ever more horrified to see the terrorism that is going on every day in the mid-east, especially the picture in the paper of the man holding the bloody child after the bus bombing. I'm not under any circumstances taking up the torch of political correctness here when it comes to yet another woman-hating fundamentalist religion.

It isn't so much the fundamentalism, Pipes, as a fundamentalist neo-con Zionist in the Richard Perle mold, simply despises all Muslim\Arabs and is intent on portraying them all as the uncivilized subhuman species of evil. certainly not the ideal chice to promote peace - unless it is from the warped perspective of the criminal Bush administration.

As for the twisted practices of corrupted Islam, another worthwhile reading to get a better perspective would be Karen Armstrong's insights:

One of the stereotypes of Islam is that it oppresses women. Is there precedent in the Muslim tradition for the way in which Afghanistan’s Taliban rulers require women to wear a head-to-toe burqa and forbid them from holding jobs or attending school?
No. none of the great world religions have been good for women. And I’d include Christianity in that. These are male-dominated religions. But Muslim feminists are now speaking against this. The prophet Mohammed was very keen on the emancipation of women—and there is nothing in the Qu’ran to insist that all women must be veiled or secluded. The Muslim women in the first community often fought beside men in battle and in the early Muslim community, the prophet’s wives had immense political power.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/649424.asp?cp1=1

I appreciate the effort.

Any religion that opresses women doesn't qualifty as "great" in my opinion. "Regime" is the word I am most comfortable with. It's interesting to hear the term "muslim feminist" though, that is a new one. The prophet Mohammed married a nine year old when he was in his fifties, (Aisha), so he apparently wasn't keen on the emancipation of little girls.

As for the revisionist history, the woman needs to educate herself about the great neolithic matristic religions and then reconsider. "Whore of Babylon" ring a bell?

As far as "nothing in the Qu'ran" stuff, there's nothing in there about genital mutilation either, but it sure happens.

As Brooks puts it (Nine Parts...) "As revolutionary pressure mounted in the late 1970's, wearing the chador became a symbol of protest against the shah and his Western backers." I have also read that women took up the veil in the early days of islam because wives of the wealthy wore them, it was a class climbing gesture, and now in some countries where there are no hard and set rules it is a political statement.

I honestly don't know why I am bothering. Religion needs to stay the hell out of government. Period

you are unfamiliar with Karen Armstrong and her books.

More Muslim feminists:

http://rawa.fancymarketing.net/points.html

The very second it stops being so damn profitable to be an anti-Arab bigot, or when those useful mouthpieces quit being so useful. People like Pipes get where they are and stay where they are because they follow orders so well.

talkin out of his ass.
this is the hit man appointed to legitimize the extreme pnac devotees.

After all, he is beloved by the "progressives" in the I/P forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=6767

a moderate muslim organization of supporting Osama Bin Laden?

people have tried to pin him down on who the "good ones" are and he's never been able to come up with an answer.

President Bush has nominated Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes to the board of directors of the United States Institute of Peace. But radical and pro-Wahhabi groups are trying to kill the nomination, discredit Pipes and silence one of the most powerful and knowledgeable voices for the energetic prosecution of the war against terror. Gerard Alexander, a professor of political science at the University of Virginia -- and an FDD Academic Fellow -- is circulating a petition in support of Pipes's nomination. The petition has already been signed by a former U.N. ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick, military historian Sir John Keegan, and such prominent scholars as James Q. Wilson, Harvard's Harvey Mansfield, Yale's Donald Kagan, and Cornell's Jeremy Rabkin. Even some influential figures who frequently disagree with Pipes have signed the statement in support of his nomination. Among them the New Republic's Martin Peretz, Johns Hopkins University professor Fouad Ajami, and Yale's Paul Kennedy.

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/research_topics/research_topics_show.htm?doc_id=185056
(that's all there is though)

is extemely well known to me. He is the biggest most war-mongering prick writing for the Daily Telegraph.

He's also famous for having defended holocaust denier David Irving, I guess he just hates every non-white, non-Christian equally :shrug:

Fouad Ajami is the biggest pro-war whore on earth.

He is what you might call a "self-hating" Arab, if there is such a thing.

Pipes is a very scary, fascist, nightmare type.

Creepy!!!

I think he found out he could make shitloads more money as Mort Zuckerman's pet Arab.

on edit: in reference to Fouad Ajami

is sickeningly cynical. Of course, it makes sense if the goal is to destroy the organization from within by appointing people whose goals are the exact opposite--like James Watt to EPA.

I'm posting in reply to this article you posted, legin, because I wanted to thank you--I hadn't heard of all of the names on the list. Have to add them to my list of PNACers.

Anybody know in what particular Marty Peretz would disagree with Pipes? I can't think of one...

Pipes' comrades share among themselves credit for advancing Palestinian suffering, advocating war on defenseless Iraq, urging the Bush regime to sneer at international opinion and law, and congratulating themselves endlessly for their remarkable contempt for humanity.

Bad eggs!

But worth another look at their "distinguished panel" of democracy defenders:

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/biographies/biographies.htm

...who (unlike Ann the Man's characterization of liberals) is actually guilty of high treason against this country through his support of the Strauss/Likud/Wolfowitz/Perle/Bush/Satan agenda. :grr:

with the Bible.

This man is a racist and has no business occupying a position in the US government.

Pipes might feel more at home as a member of the outlawed Kach Party, founded by Meir Kahane.

Pipes OPPONENTS labeled as McCarthyites. Thats funny!

According to National Review: "Pipes is scrupulous in making the distinction between radical Islam and moderate Islam. Indeed, he says, "Militant Islam is the problem, and moderate Islam is the solution.""

But here are other comments on Pipe's "scholarship." on this site:

http://www.cair-net.org/misc/people/daniel_pipes.html

DANIEL PIPES SAYS ALL MUSLIMS MUST BE WATCHED

THE WAR'S MOST AGONIZING ISSUE
Daniel Pipes, Jerusalem Post, 1/22/03

<There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military, and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism, as do Muslim chaplains in prisons and the armed forces. >

DANIEL PIPES: WAR OF THE DIATRIBES
Peter Rodgers, Weekend Australian, 11/16/02
Peter Rodgers is a former Australian ambassador to Israel.

Militant Islam Reaches America
By Daniel Pipes, Norton, 296pp, $49.95

<READING Daniel Pipes's latest book, brimming with dire warnings of Islamic threats, made me deeply envious. I so wish I could be a polemicist, then I'd never have to worry about accuracy and balance, about passing off egregious nonsense as alarming statement of fact, about repetition and self-contradiction. I, too, could trumpet mediocre fictions as insightful prophecies…

Pipes's solution to the problem of militant Islam amounts to supporting its enemies, whoever they are and no matter what they do...>

BALTIMORE SUN SLAMS DANIEL PIPES' BOOK

'MILITANT ISLAM' -- IGNORING HISTORY AND CURRENT REALITY
Robert Ruby, Baltimore Sun, 9/29/02

<...Citing Iran's eight-year war against Iraq, Pipes suggests that Islamic states are inherently war-like, ignoring the fact that the war was started by secular Iraq. Afghanistan's civil wars are blamed on militant Islam, a gross simplification ignoring the venality and murderousness of the warlords who opened the way for the Taliban…

A chapter devoted to the unmasking of Islamic sleeper cells could be mistaken for self-parody. Clues to search for include, "Sending or receiving large amounts of money; criminal activity, especially reliance on counterfeited money and smuggling; a promising career that failed, descent into drugs and alcohol, then redemption through Islam; an offer to work for the enemy's intelligence service…" >

DANIEL PIPES LAUNCHES "ENEMIES LIST" WEB SITE

Pro-Israel Web Site To Monitor Views Of US Academia
Daniel Golden, Dow Jones News Service, 9/17/02

DANIEL PIPES AND "THE WAR ON ACADEMIC FREEDOM"
Kristine McNeil, The Nation, 11/11/02

<The year since Congress passed the USA Patriot Act has brought an ever-growing enemies list from our nation's thought police…

Based in Philadelphia and headed by anti-Arab propagandist Daniel Pipes, Campus Watch unleashed an Internet firestorm in late September, when it posted "dossiers" on eight scholars who have had the audacity to criticize US foreign policy and the Israeli occupation. As a gesture of solidarity, more than 100 academics subsequently contacted the Middle East Forum asking to be added to the list…

As with redbaiting during the 1950s....>

< Pipes is also a regular contributor to the website of
Gamla, an organization founded by former Israeli military officers and settlers that endorses the ethnic cleansing of every Palestinian as "the only possible solution" to the Arab-Israeli conflict… >

THOUGHT CRIME ON CAMPUS
John Sugg, Creative Loafing, 10/2/02

<Pipes is best known for his strident and often racist denunciations of Arabs and Islam. In an effort to divide Americans -- one that if you inserted "blacks" for "Muslims" and "whites" for "Jews," would be vigorously damned as KKK-speech -- he told the American Jewish Congress a year ago that he worries "the presence and increased stature, and affluence, and enfranchisement of American Muslims...will present true dangers to American Jews.">

DANIEL PIPES: GREAT LEAPS OF UTTER NONSENSE
Don Wycliff, Chicago Tribune, 10/31/02

<Last Friday, while all the talking heads who had filled the airwaves with their expert opinions during the D.C.-area sniper crisis were wiping egg from their faces, Pipes was declaring in his column that the outcome was really quite unsurprising and elementary. "It came as no surprise,"...>

<And why was what so many others found remarkable "no surprise" to Pipes? Because, he said, "it fits into a well-established tradition of American blacks who convert to Islam turning against their country." Huh? "Well-established tradition"? "Turning against their country"…? >

DANISH POLITICIANS REFUTE DANIEL PIPES' "FACTS"
Elisabeth Arnold and Elsebeth Gerner Nielsen, National Post, 9/6/02

<The further assumption that more than half of all rapists in Denmark are Muslims is without any basis in fact, as criminal registers do not record religion. >

And on and on and on and on....

It's like they're supporting Pipes and agree with him that the remarks are ok. If Faux believed Pipes' comments were wrong, they would have swept this under the rug.

But I guess it could have been clearer.