More on the Dan Pipes nomination

United Press International ^ | April 24, 2003

[Frankie Fiveangels]

from UPI's Capital Comment on Apr. 24, 2003

Pipes of peace...

Muslims activists from across the United States will be on Capitol Hill Friday, lobbying legislators and their staff on items of interest to their community. The No. 1 item on the agenda, they say, is to stop the nomination of Daniel Pipes to the board of directors of the United States Institute of Peace.

Pipes, who runs the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum, is a vocal and longtime critic of what he calls Islamic extremism and has suggested on more than one occasion that mosques in the United States are dominated by extremists whose loyalty to the United States should be suspect.

His supporters, like former Reagan defense official Frank Gaffney, are strong in their praise. Gaffney called Pipes "a latter-day Paul Revere," citing his many books, essays and columns "relentlessly raising an alarm about the menace the Islamists pose -- both for the Muslim faith and for U.S. security."

His opponents accuse him of painting his criticisms with too broad a brush, lumping all Muslims together in a careless fashion, something the nominee denies, saying he is always careful to distinguish between moderate Islam and its militant adherents.

Others are not convinced, The Washington Post among them.

In a recent editorial, the paper called for Congress to reject the nomination, saying he appeared to be both "a 'brilliant' analyst of Muslim intellectual history and a man who seems to harbor a 'disturbing hostility to contemporary Muslims.'"

Pipes likely did not help his cause when, as widely reported, he criticized President George W. Bush's post-Sept. 11 description of Islam as "a religion of peace." While attending a seminar at the University of Maryland, Pipes was asked by reporters if the president should have made the statement, answering "no."

"Presidents shouldn't talk about religion," he reportedly said, adding that it was wrong to "make generalizations about Islam." There is some speculation that this remark could land him in hot water with the White House, where loyalty is considered a primary virtue.

[Steely Tom]

In a recent editorial, the paper called for Congress to reject the nomination, saying he appeared to be both "a 'brilliant' analyst of Muslim intellectual history and a man who seems to harbor a 'disturbing hostility to contemporary Muslims.'"

It's obvious to our mighty intelligencia that such a position is unreasonable and dangerous.

(steely)

[jazzyjen97]

I'm totally against Pipes nomination. He's an extremist and not in line with our President.

[konaice]

"I'm totally against Pipes nomination. He's an extremist and not in line with our President. "

---
Scuze me? Who was it that Nominated Pipes???

The time for putting your politically correct blinders on is long past and its now time to GROW UP.

Pipes tells it like it is, and burrying your head in the sand and pretending it is not so will only lead to more
Airplanes in Buildings.

Pipes is far from an extremist.

[Mister Baredog]

I'm totally against Pipes nomination. He's an extremist and not in line with our President.

That's BS. It's CAIR and the Wahabes that are against him. He is an expert on his subject. He spent an hour on C-SPAN this week and he was very reasoned. He is not a Muslim basher, and he clearly makes distinctions between various forms of Islam.

[Cicero]

This affair clearly reveals that CAIR and other other Muslim "rights" organizations are basically extremist. None of them have ever condemned Muslim extremism, suicide bombings, or 9/11. Instead, they do nothing but whine about discrimination whenever a guilty terrorist is arrested. They should be seen for what they are. If there are any truly moderate Muslims in America, they should get together and start working against the extremists who are damaging the reputations of all Muslims.

[sinkspur]

Who was it that Nominated Pipes???

Bush. Who just slammed Bush by saying he has no business talking about religion? That's a pretty idiotic thing to say about the man who nominated you.

BTW, stop telling people to GROW UP. That or come up with some other attack. That one's getting old.

[konaice]

Me:
Who was it that Nominated Pipes???

Sinkspur:
Bush. Who just slammed Bush by saying he has no business talking about religion? That's a pretty idiotic thing to say about the man who nominated you.

Me:
Has it ever occured to you that Bush nominated him PRECISELY because he knew Pipes would say what needs to be said and PRECISELY because pipes could say what Bush could not say for political reasons?

Far from being disrespectfull Pipes was fullfilling his Promise to Bush of saying and doing exactly what Bush wanted him to do, while giving tha appearnce of impartiality by appearing to "chastise" Bush.

Sinkspur:
BTW, stop telling people to GROW UP. That or come up with some other attack. That one's getting old

ME:
Ok, fair enough.
Its time for you to realize you do not have the big picture that Bush has, and you are not in the decision loop. You have to accept your lot in life, or run for President yourself. We elected Bush because we trust his judgement, and to this day he has not let us down. When you see Bush do something, or Bush's trusted apointees do something you OWE it to them to assume that they are acting in concert and have neglected to tell YOU the game plan in advance NOT out of some oversight of you importance to world affiars, but SIMPLY because telling you would be a security risk.

I know this does not sit well with your estimate of your importance and knowledge on the subject at hand, but in the present case, and untill you have achieved a position of prominance in our nations government, it would be best if you could find it in your heart to TRUST our proven leader and LET HIM do his job, even as he is willing to accept (and probably welcomes) some criticism from his own apointees and nominees for the greater good.

In other words: Grow Up.

[sinkspur]

Far from being disrespectfull Pipes was fullfilling his Promise to Bush of saying and doing exactly what Bush wanted him to do, while giving tha appearnce of impartiality by appearing to "chastise" Bush.

He didn't "appear" to chastise Bush; he chastised Bush.

That's quite a theory there: the President picks a man who's going to trash him AND Muslims in the same breath.

That's plain goofy.

When you see Bush do something, or Bush's trusted apointees do something you OWE it to them to assume that they are acting in concert

Your inane lecture aside, Bush hand-picked Bill Frist for Senate Majority Leader when Bush, shamelessly, joined in painting Trent Lott as a racist.

Bill Frist, after four months, has done absolutely nothing as Majority Leader, except allow controversial judicial nominees to get bottled up and allow two--TWO--GOP Senators to trash Bush's tax cut.

Are Frist and Bush in concert on that?

[Paleo Conservative]

I'm totally against Pipes nomination. He's an extremist and not in line with our President.

jazzyjen97
Since Feb 15, 2003

[konaice]

"That's quite a theory there: the President picks a man who's going to trash him AND Muslims in the same breath. "

That's plain goofy.
--
Well if fooled you didn't it.

By appearing to chastise Bush (wink whink nudge nudge) he gained the freedom to say equally damming things against muslim extremeists. You really have to admire the subtlety of the stratagy. Its working exactly per plan,


----
Your inane lecture aside, Bush hand-picked Bill Frist for Senate Majority Leader when Bush, shamelessly, joined in painting Trent Lott as a racist.

Trent Lott painted himself as a racist, and Bush saw the hand writing on the wall. Lott had caused MANY problems for the republicans in the past. He failed to stand by the Parth and the President in several key votes. It was a good excuse to move him out.

As for the choise of Frist, I will remind you of what you learned in 5th grade. Its a seniority based system. Bush does not get a vote, only sitting senators get a vote, and it has to be someone agreeable to a wide majority of the party. Bush neither picked him nor opposed him.

You have a lot more growing up to do than I imagined.

[sinkspur]

Bush neither picked him

To use your phrase "Well, he fooled you, didn't he?"

Once Bush said Frist would be agreeable, Frist was the choice.

I notice you had nothing to say about Frist's pitiful performance so far.

We agree on something.