September 30, 2004

Here's a tip from the creator of worlds to the many new bloggers Rathergate hath wrought. Lean in close because this is important:

Whenever you see the mainstream media referring to someone as "Sheikh", you're duty bound to do a search for that person on MEMRI and LGF.

I'll show you why. Tonight in Loseweek, Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball warn that the U.S. occupation of Iraq is radicalizing moderate Muslims. Moderate Muslims like "Sheik" Yusuf al-Qaradawi. To be sure, say M&M;, Qaradawi isn't a moderate on every issue. For instance, he doesn't have a big problem with blowing up Jews. He's also suspected of having ties to terrorist financing networks. And yes, sure, he happens to be the "spiritual leader" of Egypt's most prominent fundamentalist group, the Muslim Brotherhood. But that doesn't mean he's not a moderate at heart:

In the days after September 11, for example, Qaradawi denounced the murders of innocent civilians and encouraged Muslims to donate blood to the victims. "Our hearts bleed" for those who died in the attacks, Qaradawi said at the time.

But in recent months, Qaradawi has become one of a growing number of Muslim clerics outside Iraq who have sided ever more forcefully with resistance fighters the Bush administration has presented as indistinguishable from the terrorists of Al Qaeda. Just last month, Qaradawi was among more than 90 leading Islamic clerics who issued a proclamation—released by the offices of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood—calling on Muslims to opposed [sic] American forces in Iraq as well as the U.S.-appointed government of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.

James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, a Washington-based advocacy group, says he's not surprised by the radicalization of moderates such as Qaradawi.

See? The guy loves Americans. Or at least he did until fucking Bush went and scared him away.

Now let's see what turns up when we do our mandatory MEMRI/LGF search.

  • July 27, 2004: Muslim journalist Abdel Rahman al-Rashed: "When it comes to political matters, Al-Qaradhawi represents the utmost degree of extremism."
  • March 9, 2004: "We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America!"
  • June 27, 2003: Condemned the Al Qaeda bombings in Riyadh and Casablanca because "[n]ot everyone who was killed in Riyadh was American and not everyone who was killed in Casablanca was American or foreign."

Hmmm. Doesn't sound so moderate. On the other hand, these quotes all date from after the invasion of Iraq. Maybe, as Loseweek suggests, the occupation had him feeling grumpy.

Let's go back a bit further to those halcyon days before the crusade and see if his views of Americans were any rosier.

  • November 3, 2002: From a sermon at the Umar Bin-al-Khattab Mosque in Doha, Qatar. "O God, give us victory over your enemies, the enemies of Islam. O God, protect us from their evils, weaken them, wipe them out, destroy their power, and prevent them from committing aggression against your servants. O God, destroy the aggressor, treacherous Jews. O God, destroy the aggressor Americans. O God, destroy the fanatic pagans. O God, destroy the tyrannical Crusaders."
  • October 1, 2002: Again, from the Umar Bin-al-Khattab Mosque. "O God, support our brothers in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya, Afghanistan, and everywhere. O God, direct their shots, strengthen their power, unite them on what is right, guide them on the right course, give them final victory, watch over them, and protect them. O God, give them victory over your enemies, the enemies of religion. O God, give them victory over the aggressor, treacherous Jews. O God, give them victory over the rancorous, plotting Crusaders."
  • November 6, 2001: A description of his appearance on Al Jazeera two weeks earlier. "[H]e issued a call to Arab and Islamic countries not to assist the U.S. in its war in Afghanistan, and stated that should the Taliban declare a Jihad against the U.S., 'Muslims must help as best they can.' Al-Qaradhawi also said that although he condemns the attacks against civilians in the U.S., 'we must fight the American army if we can.'"

And so, young Jedis, you see now why you have to do your searches. In a few days, hundreds of thousands of people will have read that Loseweek column and concluded that this terrorist piece of shit, whose influence in the Muslim world is enormous, was a solid citizen until the Bushitler's folly in Iraq drove him batty. Which, of course, is precisely what Loseweek wants them to conclude.

For more on Qaradawi, see the Daily Ablution's post of July 9th and this short book review from 1999 by Daniel Pipes, who passes along a quote that proves the Sheikh's Jew-killing desires extend way beyond resistance to occupation. Above all, don't miss Iraqi expatriate blogger Baghdad Dweller discussing Qaradawi's fatwa on Pokemon and his recent nuptials to a very lucky girl in Qatar. And I do mean "girl": According to Baghdad Dweller, the bride was 13 years old at the time. Qaradawi is 78.

UPDATE: Needless to say, your searches on Islamic radicals should only begin with MEMRI and LGF. Daniel Pipes has more than a decade of material archived here. And Robert Spencer has been blogging at Jihad Watch for almost a full year now. Here's his report from March on Qaradawi's attempt to bring his special "moderate" brand of Islam to a city that should prove very receptive to it.

Posted by Allah at September 30, 2004 02:37 AM | TrackBack

Ah. Will the next issue of Newsweek be detailing how the Bushchimpler's war in Iraq "radicalized" nice fellows like Osama bin Laden, then?

Because it makes about as much fucking sense.

Right in the middle of the most embarrassing media scandal ever, not only are they not staying on their toes, they're in even more full-court press mode than ever. Allah's right: do NOT let them get away with this shit.

Posted by: Eric Spratling at September 30, 2004 03:26 AM

Okay, so maybe this guy is just a tad more radical than the authors want to admit. But the underlying point about Muslims getting madder and madder is still valid. Fake but accurate!

And it's all Bush's fault for invading Iraq. Why couldn't we have stuck with our old policies that had made us so beloved and popular in the Dar-al-Islam? Things were so nice, peaceful and stable before. The outlook for reform, democracy and human rights was so positive.

Posted by: John in Tokyo at September 30, 2004 03:39 AM

The issue at hand isn't about our stance on human rights. It's about the media trying to make us sympathize with men who want us dead. There are better ways to support Kerry than that.

Fake, IN-accurate, and just plain WRONG!

Posted by: Alex D. at September 30, 2004 05:07 AM

5 years ago black people used to watch the news and stress out every time a crime was reported as they waited with trepidation for the reporter to announce that the perp was black too. Whether the M&M; twins identify one "moderate" muslim correctly or incorrectly, it doesn't change the (frankly accurate) perception that most americans have about most arabs at this point - which is that in their hearts they are jew haters who root for the terrorists to murder and maim Americans, even if they don't have the means or will to support the terrorists in an active way.

Posted by: francaissontpede at September 30, 2004 06:50 AM

I used to try to read ALL the information I could about subjects that interested me in the world.I actually believed that the MORE I 'knew',the more I was likely to make reasonable judgments on occurences in this world.You know the whole 'liberal-democratic'appeal to reason.
Now I find myself becoming willfully ignorant in that I ONLY search for information from certain sources,and actively refuse to consult other sources.
I feel badly about this.I feel that I am not trying my hardest to find out what is closest to 'TRUE',but I hold the MSM fully responsible for this objective flaw.
EVER !!!
I refuse to read Loseweek simply because it is a DEFEATIST,EFFETE,SNIDE,propaganda outlet for the usual suspects.TIME is exactly the same but with a deeper veneer of 'non-bias'.
Of all the harm that the MSM has done and is doing to our culture,this seems to me to be the worst,namely forcing consumers to believe that all the news might well be,in fact, propaganda and cannot be trusted.If they had any shame they would be regretful,but instead they feel persecuted whenever someone points out their failures and biases.
Simply shameful.
MSM delenda est.

Posted by: dougf at September 30, 2004 10:24 AM


Are you fucking kidding me with this? This turd burglar urged them to donate blood? Our hearts bleed? Seriously. Ice him. Now. Any article written by the west that says "This formerly peaceful, pacifist, Chimpler-loving, goat-fucker is now ANTI-AMERICAN" fucking waste him. Thats the whole point of this war. Eventually they will run out of Red-shirts (Star Trek reference) to put in front of the camera. Worked on the Palis, didn't it?

Posted by: sentinel at September 30, 2004 10:40 AM

Here's the letter I sent Newsweek. I'm now holding my breath for a retratcion. Starting: NOW.

Your article called "Preaching Violence" by Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball is yet another example of terrible -- and either purposely or inadvertently misleading -- journalism.

In the article Isikoff and Hosenball call Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi a moderate voice in the Islamic world, turned radical by America's actions in Iraq. Nonsense. Anyone with a computer can very quickly and easily find many radical, anti-American statements from this 'moderate' cleric, dating back to long before the invasion of Iraq.
November 6, 2002. "(Qaradawi) issued a call to Arab and Islamic countries not to assist the U.S. in its war in Afghanistan, and stated that should the Taliban declare a Jihad against the U.S."
Yes, he 'condemned' the killing of innocent people on 9/11, but at the same time he was encouraging Muslims everywhere to fight against any U.S. efforts to retaliate militarily against the perpetrators and their hosts in Afghanistan -- let alone their potential weapons suppliers in Iraq &etc.; He would still have the Taliban in power, and would no doubt be publicly 'condemning' (read: crocodile tears) the next al Qaeda attack (and the next one after that) while inciting his followers to fight Americans at every opportunity. This is not a moderate view. And the proof is very easy to find with about 3 mouse clicks.
So your guys screwed up. The entire premise of the story is phony. The question is:
> Is this on purpose, in light of Evan Thomas's public cheerleading for the Kerry campaign?
> Or is it through laziness and incompetence?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. My guess is the latter.

But if you have learned nothing else in the last month I would think that you've learned not to publish things that aren't true, and not to check things first.

Google is the worst thing that has ever happened to you. You don't own the "truth" anymore. The truth is there for everyone to find. The more you deviate from the facts, the more we wonder why and what your true motivations are.

Posted by: chriss at September 30, 2004 11:56 AM

This Qaradawi scumbag is the same guy that 'Red' Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, invited to a conference. Jenny McCartney wrote a good op-ed piece in the Daily Telegraph about the affair. Note this piece of filth is A-OK with Paleostinian self-detonating munitions, thinks homosexuals should be murdered, and that beating your wife is just dandy as long as you don't put her in the hospital.

It's yet another exemplar of the way the hard Left is allying itself with Islamofascism. I hope when the time comes we can string a few Marxists up on the same lampposts from which the Islamists are dangling.

Posted by: David Gillies at September 30, 2004 12:03 PM

Thanks for the link, O Merciful One.

I've got more on Qaradawi and Ken Livingstone today:

Red Ken's Rhetoric Lesson, Far-Left Contortions, and More.

Posted by: Scott Burgess at September 30, 2004 12:07 PM

What does this story have in common with Dan Rather's use of fake documents, and CBS news' use of debunked emails about a possible military draft?

All these stories were exposed for what they really were thanks to the fact-checking of the pajama-clad blogging community - NOT because of the diligent work of "dedicated, professional journalists."

If I were a writer or producer at some MSM outlet, I'd be very nervous, knowing that legions of fact checkers - the great unwashed, pajama-wearing masses - were waiting for me to slip up.

If nothing else, blogging has removed the shiny, hand-rubbed luster these "professional journalists" have so lovingly applied to their professional identities.

Posted by: Dan-O at September 30, 2004 12:35 PM

Allah, you are so wonderful You light up my day, oh bright sun of the universe.

One day you'll have to explain to us why news magazines even continue to exist and horsedrawn carriages have gone by the wayside. And who in the world would bother to pay for this infopap.

Do you suppose they continue to exist because of a dentist-doctor cabal to keep us from noticing how long we are being ketp waiting in the reception area?
We could give an award to the first person who can find someone who has paid full price for a subscription to Time or Newsweek (and then sell his name to the Nigerian e-mail scamsters.

Posted by: clarice at September 30, 2004 01:34 PM

I wish I had kept a list of everything that was supposed to have inflamed the Arab Street. It becomes more difficult to not view Islam as anything other than a fascist ideology with an occasional bright spot (the Sufis, for example).

Posted by: Peter Boston at September 30, 2004 05:15 PM

It is very hard to believe that the MSM has not picked up on this. We can't let these guys get away with misleading the public this way. Don't they even do a casual check of the blogs? What can be done about this.

Posted by: Hyscience at September 30, 2004 06:29 PM