Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Daniel Pipes Knows How to Mix Just Enough Truth With Doctrine
Arab News ^ | 3/4/05 | Adrienne McPhail

Posted on 04/27/2005 7:50:42 AM PDT by Valin

There are dangerous men in the world and Daniel Pipes is one of them.

He first came to my attention several years ago during a visit to Washington. It appeared that a number of Arab-Americans were concerned about him and the growing influence he was exerting in the media and the political arenas.

Prior to the attacks of Sept. 11 Pipes was voicing his apprehension regarding the dangers of Muslim immigration into the United States as a potential “fifth column” for radical Islamists. After the attacks, Pipe’s media exposure grew. Called upon as a “Middle Eastern expert,” he staged his campaign instilling a combination of fear and prejudice into the American public, particularly concentrating on Saudi Arabia.

He zeroed in on the Wahhabi doctrine and skillfully crafted an entire theory on the cause for terrorism based on partial data but with just enough truth to make it appear reasonable.

In 2003 President Bush nominated Pipes to serve as a director on a government-funded think tank, United States Institute of Peace, that works closely with the administration to resolve international conflicts. Several senators including Edward Kennedy opposed this nomination so strongly that Bush made Pipe’s appointment a “recess appointment” so he would only serve in a temporary capacity until the end of 2004. He will not be reappointed due to his hostile behavior. During his brief tenure, he criticized USIP for hosting a conference with the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy because he claimed that organization had Muslim “radicals” on its staff.

Yet, Daniel Pipes is a long way from finished with his self-anointed work. He is now creating a new “Anti-Islamist Institute” designed to expose the legal “political activities of Islamists”. He is calling this program the new “Center for Islamic Pluralism” (CIP). The funding for this organization will come from contributors in the American Shiite community and from “Sunni mosques once they are liberated from the Wahhabi influence,” according to Pipes.

CIP claims to have some very impressive supporters, including Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, former CIA Director James Woolsey, Senators Charles Schumer and Jon Kyl, terrorism experts Steven Emerson of the Investigative Project, Paul Marshall of Freedom House, Glen Howard of the Jamestown Foundation and journalists such as Fox News anchors David Asman, Brit Hume and Greta van Susteren. Even the editors at the New York Post, the Los Angles Times and the Globe are being mentioned.

The first goal of Pipes’ venture will be “the removal of the Council on American Islamic Relations from their monopoly status in representing Muslims to the American public”. He criticized President Bush for “legitimizing” both CAIR and the Arab-American Institute by allowing their representatives to participate in White House ceremonies and failing to identify “radical Islam” as “the enemy” in the war on terror. He will be working with another interesting character forming CIP, Stephen Schwartz. Schwartz is the author of a book about Islam and Saudi Arabia. He has created a new terminology to describe what he contends is the violent movement within Islam — “neo-Wahhabi”.

Like Pipes, Schwartz is preaching a doctrine that is based on very limited fact. He proclaims that the Wahhabi movement has “violently attacked Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, traditional Sunnis, Sufis and Shiites worldwide”. “Eighty percent of American mosques are Wahhabi-influenced”, he states. As a recent convert to Sufism, Schwartz is a disciple of the 13th Century Spanish mystic Ibn Arabi. By his own admission Schwartz did not travel to Riyadh to learn about Wahhabism; he chose instead Sarajevo, where he could absorb the “true message” of Islam.

The goal of CIP according to Pipes is to enhance the influence of moderate Muslims. According to Pipes, CIP’s president is Professor Kemal Silay, a teacher at Indiana University. But Silay says that although he has spoken with Pipes and Schwarz about the dangers of extreme Islamic groups, he was surprised to find out he was selected to be the president.

In addition to CAIR and AAI, Pipes has targeted the Islamic Society of North America, the North American Islamic Trust, the Muslim Students Association of the US and Canada, the Muslim Public Affairs Council and The American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Extremists, he claims, influence all of these organizations, do not represent the average American Muslim and are dangerous to the United States. Daniel Pipes is a very cleaver man. He mixes just enough truth with doctrine to make some people believe that he has the best interest of Arab-Americans and the security of the US at the heart of his campaigning.

You have to read carefully to understand what he really means. Just four days before the Iraqi elections he endorsed the US government’s goal of making Iraq a democracy but cautioned that the Iraqis had to learn the habits of civil society. It is only 22 months since Saddam Hussein has been deposed, he said, “so elections for chief of a government there should take place more like 22 years”.

Hopefully, no one is listening to him.


TOPICS: Editorial; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: cip; danielpipes; islam; stephenschwartz
Center for Islamic Pluralism

http://www.islamicpluralism.org/

1 posted on 04/27/2005 7:50:44 AM PDT by Valin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Valin

Go Daniel. But watch your back.


2 posted on 04/27/2005 7:54:49 AM PDT by tkathy (Tyranny breeds terrorism. Freedom breeds peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
Prior to the attacks of Sept. 11 Pipes was voicing his apprehension regarding the dangers of Muslim immigration into the United States as a potential “fifth column” for radical Islamists.

Q.E.D.

If Pipes' warning had been taken seriously, close to 3000 more Americans would be alive today.
Often, a reasonable person would conclude, "just enough truth" ought to be sufficient to prevent mass murder.

And, incidentally, it can also save a lot of time in wading through totally useless propaganda.

Why do people give exposure to pro-mass-murder crap like this?

3 posted on 04/27/2005 7:55:47 AM PDT by Publius6961 (The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

There is no terrorist threat. Radical Islam is an illusion people. Just keep moving, nothing to see here...


4 posted on 04/27/2005 7:57:20 AM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
Why do I suspect that Adrienne McPhail might be one of those whining, sobbing "victims" who will be getting world-wide exposure moaning about the permanent loss of her children to some SM* ?

* SM© = Sweet Muslim

5 posted on 04/27/2005 7:59:18 AM PDT by Publius6961 (The most abundant things in the universe are ignorance, stupidity and hydrogen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

Thanks for posting this....Daniel Pipes has been proved accurate on all counts....


6 posted on 04/27/2005 8:00:12 AM PDT by milford421
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
So, for this writer, it's fine for Muslims to proselytize and destabilize Western societies. But anyone who tries to counter that is somehow mean and immoral.

Sorry, Charlie. Take your anti-Western demagoguery somewhere else.
7 posted on 04/27/2005 8:00:38 AM PDT by Joe Bonforte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
And now a word from Arab News...

Non-Muslims in Makkah and Madinah

Adil Salahi, Arab News

Q. Some people argue that preventing non-Muslims from visiting Makkah and Madinah deprives them of a chance to be impressed with Islam. Some say that they could be informed of the protocols they have to observe and allowed to visit the two mosques. After all, Islam is very tolerant in its attitude to other faiths. Please comment.

Muhammad Asif

A. That Islam is tolerant is beyond doubt. But tolerance and kind treatment of the followers of other faiths does not mean contravening the rules of our religion. The question of prohibiting entry of non-Muslims into Makkah and Madinah is not one on which personal points of view can be voiced. It is a religious matter legislated by God. It is He who says: “Believers, know that the idolaters are certainly impure. So, let them not come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year is ended.” (9: 28) The Prophet explained that this prohibition applies to all non-Muslims. We cannot change a clear divine ruling. Besides, there is no question of trying to impress non-Muslims by allowing them to visit the place. If they want to learn about Islam, they can certainly do so without having to visit a place, because Islam is not about places; it is about one’s relations with God. As for Madinah, the Prophet extended to it the same treatment as Makkah.

And let us not forget another Arab News insight...

A Question That Needs No Answer

Commentary by Sayyid Qutb

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent

Paradise will be brought within sight of the God-fearing; whereas the blazing fire will be placed in full view of the ones lost in error.

It shall be said to them: “Where is now all that you used to worship instead of God? Can they help you or even help themselves?”

They will be hurled into hell, as also those who are lost in error, and Iblis’ hosts, all together.

And there, quarrelling with one another, they will say: “By God, we were obviously in error, when we deemed you equal to the Lord of all the worlds. It was only the truly guilty ones who led us astray. And now we have none to intercede for us nor any loving friend. Would that we had a second chance (in life), so that we could be believers.”

Indeed, there is in this a sure sign; yet most of them will not believe. And indeed it is your Lord who is the Mighty One, the Merciful. (The Poets: Al-Shu’ara: 26: 90-104)

This passage portrays a scene of the Day of Judgment, which was feared by Abraham. It is so vivid that he almost sees it with his own eyes as he addresses his humble prayer to God.

The scene starts with the image of heaven being brought near, so as to be within sight of the God-fearing, who actually remained apprehensive lest they might be made to suffer God’s punishment. The fire of hell is also brought in full view of the erring ones who strayed away from the right path and denied the Day of Judgment. As they stand within sight of hell, listening to stern rebuke for their bad deeds before they are thrown in hell, they will be first asked about the deities they used to worship. The question that will be put to them is: “Where is now all that you used to worship instead of God?” Where are they? “Can they help you or even help themselves?” No answer is heard from them. Indeed none is expected. It is only a question given by way of rebuke. Hence, “They will be hurled into hell, as also those who are lost in error.” The very word used here suggests that they fall into it on top of one another, with much noise from the repeated falls. It is the same situation that happens when a landslide takes place followed by further landslides. These people who were lost in error are accompanied in hell with “Iblis’ hosts, all together.” Indeed they are all part of Iblis’ hosts.

We are then made to listen to them as they speak in hell, saying to their false deities and the idols they worshipped: “By God, we were obviously in error, when we deemed you equal to the Lord of all the worlds,” worshipping you, alongside or instead of God, as if you were equal to Him. They say it now when it is too late. They put the blame on the guilty ones who led them into errors and prevented them from listening to divine guidance. They now wake up and realize that it is too late and that apportioning blame will benefit them nothing. “And now we have none to intercede for us nor any loving friend.” Neither deity nor friend will be of any avail to us now. But then they think that if there was a possibility of a return to life, they could still mend their erring ways: “Would that we had a second chance (in life), so that we could be believers.” But this is mere wishful thinking. There can be no return. They are already on Judgment Day.

This is followed by the standard comment in this surah: “Indeed, there is in this a sure sign; yet most of them will not believe. And indeed it is your Lord who is the Mighty One, the Merciful.” This comment is repeated in the surah every time the fate of any community that opposed God’s messengers is shown, such as Aad, Thamud and Lot’s people, and it follows also every sign given to any group who denied God and His messengers. The scene from the Day of Judgment that we have been discussing is shown here in place of a scene of punishment in this world. It shows the end faced by Abraham’s people, and indeed the ultimate end of all idolatry. Hence, it gives the same lesson in every historical account. We should remember that scenes of the Day of Judgment are shown in the Qur’an as if they are taking place in front of our eyes so as to touch our hearts and souls in the same way as they are touched when reflecting on the fate of past communities.

The surah gave its account of Abraham’s story after it had given a more detailed one of Moses, thus going back in history. Now it goes further back to tell us about Noah and his people. The chronological order is not important here because the focus is the ultimate end of idolatry and denying the divine message.

Like the accounts of Moses and Abraham, Noah’s story is referred to in several surahs. It was given in brief in Surah 7, The Heights, within the context of a historical account of God’s messengers and their messages, which means that there it followed Adam’s fall from heaven, concentrating on Noah’s advocacy of God’s oneness and his warning to his people that they would be risking grievous suffering. They accused him of being deep in error, expressing their amazement that God should send them a man messenger. Their punishment by drowning is mentioned without giving details.

In Surah 10, Jonah, the story is given in brief, concentrating on the end of his mission when he challenged his people but they still denied him. He was saved with those who followed him, while the others were drowned.

Surah 11, Houd, gives much more details about the floods, the ark and what happened after the floods. It mentions his prayer concerning his son who was drowned with the rest of the unbelievers. In this surah we are also given an account of the sort of debate on God’s oneness his people had with him.

In Surah 23, The Believers, Noah’s account concentrates on his call on his people to worship God alone, and their objection to the fact that he is a mere mortal like them. They accuse him of wanting to press his favored position. They claim that God could have sent angels if He wished, and they accused Noah of madness. He turns to God, appealing for support. Then follows a very brief reference to the ark and the floods.

In many instances, like the present surah, the story is given together with stories of Aad, Thamud, Lot’s people and Madyan. The prominent features of the account given here are Noah’s call on his people to fear God and his declaration that he expects nothing by way of reward, as well as his refusal to expel the poor who believe in God at the request of the noble ones. This was also demanded of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) by the elders of the Quraysh in Makkah.

8 posted on 04/27/2005 8:02:04 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bonforte

Thank you so much for your imput. Rest assured it will be given all the consideration it deserves.







fluuuuuush


9 posted on 04/27/2005 8:03:03 AM PDT by Valin (There is no sense in being pessimistic. It would not work anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Actually, I am disappointed in Daniel Pipes. He only takes warnings that suit his purpose while ignoring those that don't.


10 posted on 04/27/2005 8:03:19 AM PDT by razoroccam (Then in the name of Allah, they will let loose the Germs of War (http://www.booksurge.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Valin

LOL!!! this guy puts quotes around "radical islam" ... as if there is no such thing? LOL!!!


11 posted on 04/27/2005 8:03:40 AM PDT by RolandBurnam (I WANT SOME PORK RINDS!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

LOL!!! this guy puts quotes around "radical islam" ... as if there is no such thing? LOL!!!


12 posted on 04/27/2005 8:04:21 AM PDT by RolandBurnam (I WANT SOME PORK RINDS!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
Prior to the attacks of Sept. 11 Pipes was voicing his apprehension regarding the dangers of Muslim immigration into the United States as a potential “fifth column” for radical Islamists.

And, OK, he may have been right here but that's besides the point < /sarcasm>

13 posted on 04/27/2005 8:05:12 AM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: razoroccam

He only takes warnings that suit his purpose while ignoring those that don't.


Examples? Thank you.


14 posted on 04/27/2005 8:05:53 AM PDT by Valin (There is no sense in being pessimistic. It would not work anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Valin
Thank you so much for your imput.

Well, my "imput" was intended to be in support of Pipes.

15 posted on 04/27/2005 8:07:04 AM PDT by Joe Bonforte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Valin

"Like Pipes, Schwartz is preaching a doctrine that is based on very limited fact. He proclaims that the Wahhabi movement has “violently attacked Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, traditional Sunnis, Sufis and Shiites worldwide.""

The author appears to indicated that Schwartz' statement is not true. However, the "true fact" is not discussed within the article. So, what is the true fact?


16 posted on 04/27/2005 8:09:46 AM PDT by republicofdavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
He mixes just enough truth with doctrine to make some people believe that he has the best interest of Arab-Americans and the security of the US at the heart of his campaigning.

And, after you get past the ad hominem attacks on Pipes and Schwartz, this author does nothing to illuminate - with specific examples - the mixing together of truth and doctrine that she complains about.
17 posted on 04/27/2005 8:12:58 AM PDT by Captain Rhino ("If you will just abandon logic, these things will make a lot more sense to you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

In an earlier article today on FR this author, Adrienne McPhail, is listed as a radical Whabbist living in Japan.


18 posted on 04/27/2005 8:22:19 AM PDT by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

I contacted him in 1999 (I think) and raised several issues. These included pointing out that Islam is fundamentally different from JC cultures and that I was not sure Islam and US constitution were compatible (though I would be willing to listen to contrary viewpoints on it). His response was to highlight Wahabism but ignore the broader issue.


19 posted on 04/27/2005 8:24:18 AM PDT by razoroccam (Then in the name of Allah, they will let loose the Germs of War (http://www.booksurge.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc
Gee, ya think? According to Adrienne McPhail's interpretation, Wahhabism is the only true form of Islam. That will come as news to non-Wahhabist Sunnis and to Shiites. Liberals claim the Catholic Church is totalitarian but they fail to face the fact Wahhabism is even more grasping. Well a few liberals like Sen. Chuck Schumer acknowledge the danger but most of the Left still has its heads in the sand about Islamists. The truth of the matter is with his extensive background knowledge of Islam and Middle Eastern affairs, Daniel Pipes knows what he's talking about far better than any of his uninformed critics do.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
20 posted on 04/27/2005 8:29:32 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: razoroccam
No. Pipes' argument is there are extremist Muslims and moderate ones. We've failed to make that vital distinction in the War On Terror by viewing all Muslims through the same lens and the Bush Administration gave credibility to known Islamist-dominated organizations like CAIR and the AMC. That's slowly changing. The matter of fact is Al Qaeda Islamists in Iraq today are killing more Muslims who do not agree with their interpretation of the Koran than foreign infidels. We need to begin paying attention to how this totalitarian strain in Islam is attempting to reshape by ideological indoctrination, by funnelling money to madrassas, mosques and other instututions and by terrorism the face of the Islamic World. That's why we need to back non-Wahhabist approaches in Islam.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
21 posted on 04/27/2005 8:35:19 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Valin

Daniel sounds like a watchman on the wall. Is that the reaction you were looking for when you posted that garbage?


22 posted on 04/27/2005 8:39:20 AM PDT by zek157
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: republicofdavis

The entire article is like that - it insinuates that Pipes and others are making false statements sugar-coated with a veneer of truth (apologies for the mixed metaphor), yet while it quotes those statements, it makes no attempt to provide any evidence of falsity. It is as if the article's intended audience intuitively "knows" what is supposed to be false about those statements, so it is not necessary for the author to actually state what is supposed to be false. That approach may serve as "discussion" or "criticism" in certain closed societies, but it falls flat anywhere where knowledge is enlightened by rational thought processes. It actually seems that the author is making Pipes' case for him.


23 posted on 04/27/2005 9:05:42 AM PDT by The Electrician
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Valin

Pipes is merely exercising his right to free speech, just as the author of the article is. Alarm bells go off when somebody calls an author or an opinion "dangerous". This is the first step in an attempt to blackball Pipes. He is not dangerous, but the various Muslims in the U.S. who have been arrested and convicted for aiding and abetting Muslim terrorism are dangerous.


24 posted on 04/27/2005 9:38:44 AM PDT by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

Daniel Pipes Knows How to Mix Just Enough Truth With Doctrine
German News ^ | 3/4/05 | Adrienne McPhail
Posted on 04/27/2005 7:50:42 AM PDT by Valin
There are dangerous men in the world and Daniel Pipes is one of them.
He first came to my attention several years ago during a visit to Washington. It appeared that a number of German-Americans were concerned about him and the growing influence he was exerting in the media and the political arenas.
Prior to the attacks of Sept. 11 Pipes was voicing his apprehension regarding the dangers of Nazi immigration into the United States as a potential “fifth column” for radical Nazis. After the attacks, Pipe’s media exposure grew. Called upon as a “Middle Eastern expert,” he staged his campaign instilling a combination of fear and prejudice into the American public, particularly concentrating on Saudi Germania.
He zeroed in on the Hitlerite doctrine and skillfully crafted an entire theory on the cause for terrorism based on partial data but with just enough truth to make it appear reasonable.
In 2003 President Bush nominated Pipes to serve as a director on a government-funded think tank, United States Institute of Peace, that works closely with the administration to resolve international conflicts. Several senators including Edward Kennedy opposed this nomination so strongly that Bush made Pipe’s appointment a “recess appointment” so he would only serve in a temporary capacity until the end of 2004. He will not be reappointed due to his hostile behavior. During his brief tenure, he criticized USIP for hosting a conference with the Center for the Study of Nazism and Democracy because he claimed that organization had Nazi “radicals” on its staff.
Yet, Daniel Pipes is a long way from finished with his self-anointed work. He is now creating a new “Anti-Nazi Institute” designed to expose the legal “political activities of Nazis”. He is calling this program the new “Center for Nazismic Pluralism” (CNP). The funding for this organization will come from contributors in the American Shiite community and from “Sunni mosques once they are liberated from the Hitlerite influence,” according to Pipes.
CNP claims to have some very impressive supporters, including Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, former CIA Director James Woolsey, Senators Charles Schumer and Jon Kyl, terrorism experts Steven Emerson of the Investigative Project, Paul Marshall of Freedom House, Glen Howard of the Jamestown Foundation and journalists such as Fox News anchors David Asman, Brit Hume and Greta van Susteren. Even the editors at the New York Post, the Los Angles Times and the Globe are being mentioned.
The first goal of Pipes’ venture will be “the removal of the Council on American Nazismic Relations from their monopoly status in representing Nazis to the American public”. He criticized President Bush for “legitimizing” both CAIR and the German-American Institute by allowing their representatives to participate in White House ceremonies and failing to identify “radical Nazism” as “the enemy” in the war on terror. He will be working with another interesting character forming CNP, Stephen Schwartz. Schwartz is the author of a book about Nazism and Saudi Germania. He has created a new terminology to describe what he contends is the violent movement within Nazism — “neo-Hitlerite”.
Like Pipes, Schwartz is preaching a doctrine that is based on very limited fact. He proclaims that the Hitlerite movement has “violently attacked Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, traditional Sunnis, Sufis and Shiites worldwide”. “Eighty percent of American mosques are Hitlerite-influenced”, he states. As a recent convert to Sufism, Schwartz is a disciple of the 13th Century Spanish mystic Ibn Germani. By his own admission Schwartz did not travel to Riyadh to learn about Hitleritesm; he chose instead Sarajevo, where he could absorb the “true message” of Nazism.
The goal of CNP according to Pipes is to enhance the influence of moderate Nazis. According to Pipes, CIP’s president is Professor Kemal Silay, a teacher at Indiana University. But Silay says that although he has spoken with Pipes and Schwarz about the dangers of extreme Nazismic groups, he was surprised to find out he was selected to be the president.
In addition to CAIR and AAI, Pipes has targeted the Nazismic Society of North America, the North American Nazismic Trust, the Nazi Students Association of the US and Canada, the Nazi Public Affairs Council and The American German Anti-Discrimination Committee. Extremists, he claims, influence all of these organizations, do not represent the average American Nazi and are dangerous to the United States. Daniel Pipes is a very cleaver man. He mixes just enough truth with doctrine to make some people believe that he has the best interest of German-Americans and the security of the US at the heart of his campaigning.
You have to read carefully to understand what he really means. Just four days before the Iraqi elections he endorsed the US government’s goal of making Iraq a democracy but cautioned that the Iraqis had to learn the habits of civil society. It is only 22 months since Saddam Hussein has been deposed, he said, “so elections for chief of a government there should take place more like 22 years”.
Hopefully, no one is listening to him.


25 posted on 04/27/2005 9:40:26 AM PDT by hang 'em ("You can't buy the People unless yer for the People, ahuh huh ahuh" - William Jefferson Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc

Adrienne McPhail can have her religious views as long as she leaves the rest of the World and everyone in it alone. This is something Muslims of her persuasion have demonstrated historically they are unable to do.


26 posted on 04/27/2005 9:41:49 AM PDT by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Valin
I have read Pipe's articles and books. Unlike you, he exhaustively and carefully documents all his claims. His well researched exposure of CAIR as a Islamist front organization came only after CAIR launched vicious and threatening ad hominum attacks on him. They picked the wrong target! And you picked the wrong audience. Perhaps you were hoping we would respond in kind with invective and personal attack, to reinforce your stereotypes of conservatives.
27 posted on 04/27/2005 12:19:17 PM PDT by andrewwood (andrewwood)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin
There are dangerous men in the world and Daniel Pipes is one of them.

Dangerous to the Satanic loving religion of peace and it's attempts to murder every Jew in the world destroy Israel and put Americans who resist to death and the rest..slaves under Dhimmitude..

Go Daniel but watch your back indeed...as we all should inspite of those Wahabbist hand holders who pretend to be defenders of America

IMO

28 posted on 04/27/2005 12:54:23 PM PDT by joesnuffy (The generation that survived the depression and won WW2 proved poverty does not cause crime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin; SheLion; Happy2BMe; knighthawk
Required Reading
29 posted on 04/27/2005 1:12:18 PM PDT by EdReform (Free Republic - helping to keep our country a free republic. Thank you for your financial support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valin

My, you're certainly taking a lot of flack.
Wearing your jacket?


30 posted on 04/28/2005 7:08:36 AM PDT by nuconvert (No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

Always! :-)


31 posted on 04/28/2005 7:15:47 AM PDT by Valin (There is no sense in being pessimistic. It would not work anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson