Council on American-Islamic Relations Attempting to whitewash 9-11 in textbooks

CAIR Attempting to whitewash 9-11 in textbooks

By schraged

CAIR Attempting to whitewash 9-11 in textbooks
From the Sacramento Bee 

The events of Sept. 11, 2001, leapt with remarkable speed from dynamic daily news reports to the static pages of history books. By the following fall, millions of students across the country were reading about the terrorist attacks in social studies texts put out by the nation’s major publishers.

With every school year that passes, increasing numbers of students and parents come across the lessons on 9/11. Now, as the fifth anniversary approaches, reactions are mounting to the textbooks’ treatment of this high-profile act of terrorism.

Some Muslims say the texts unfairly paint all people of their faith as terrorists. They say frequent references to “Arab terrorists,” “Muslim terrorists,” “Muslim extremists,” or “Islamic fundamentalists” give schoolchildren a negative impression of their religion.

“Because these terms are repeated so many times, it’s very alarming,” said Maren Shawesh, of the Sacramento chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations. “We don’t want these younger students to grow up with that perception of Islam and Muslims.”

The Islamic community has an Identity problem. The only individuals defining what Islam is, happen to be the same people who advocate wiping a sovereign state off the map, detonating car bombs in crowded markets, or fly air planes into office buildings. For those Muslims who are not terrorists, and yes they are out there, it is well past time for you to step forward. Take a stand against the terrorists among you, and define Islam for what it is you believe it to be.  If the only ones defining Islam is the terrorists then all of Islam will be viewed as terrorists.

Chapter 8 of “World Geography,” published by McDougal Littell, opens with a large, iconic photograph of firefighters hoisting an American flag above the World Trade Center wreckage. The facing page describes what happened on Sept. 11, first from the perspective of a 15-year-old student who was evacuated from his high school four blocks from the twin towers.

Then the book says: “19 Arab terrorists hijacked four airliners.” Umbashi says the description is too broad; instead he thinks the book should be more specific about which countries the hijackers were from.

A few paragraphs down, the book says investigators began to identify who directed the attacks. “The evidence pointed to a global network, or worldwide interconnected group, of extremist Islamic terrorists led by Osama bin Laden, a Saudi Arabian millionaire,” the passage states.

Khaled Umbashi, who is originally from Libya and is a practicing Muslim, questions whether Muslims are really behind the plot and he doesn’t like the term “extremist Islamic terrorists.” Umbashi took his concerns to the local chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations, known as CAIR. The group is developing a national strategy to change the way Muslims are portrayed in American textbooks, said Shawesh, a board member of the Sacramento Valley chapter of CAIR.

“Right now there is communication between the Muslim community and the publishing companies,” Shawesh said. “They have to come to a complete understanding that a lot of the information that’s being printed is misconstrued.”

History cannot be sugar-coated in order to appease individual groups. Facts are facts and the facts about 9-11 are that 19 Islamic extremists executedan attack on this country that murdered nearly 3,000 innocent people. If CAIR or any other Islamic organization wants to change the perception of Muslims in this country they need to start by rooting out the terrorists among them, including those that on their board which have intimate links with Hamas.
Perhaps CAIR’s role in fundraising scams related to 9-11 charities should also be included in textbooks.  Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, CAIR’s website solicited donations for what it called the “NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund.” However, clicking on the donation link led to a website for donations to the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a charity whose assets were later frozen and confiscated by the United States Department of the Treasury because, according to United States Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill, HLF “masqueraded as a charity, while its primary purpose was to fund Hamas.”
I also want to point out that U.S. Representative John Murtha has 100% approval rating with the Council on American-Islamic Relations.


We see now what liberal interpretations of the sedition and treason sections of the Constitution and supplemental federal laws have gotten us: a class of elitist bureaucrats who feel they are entitled to do anything they please, even if it significantly hurts national security. This is the ultimate application of the 60s hippie saying, “If it feels good, do it.”

Enough is En… make that too much

Daniel Ellsberg, in the new issue of Harper’s coming out next week, calls on government officials to leak US war plans for the Middle East to the press. I will assume someone who thinks this is a decent idea would have no problem leaking Pentagon war plans for Europe, Asia and defending North America. We see now what liberal interpretations of the sedition and treason sections of the Constitution and supplemental federal laws have gotten us: a class of elitist bureaucrats who feel they are entitled to do anything they please, even if it significantly hurts national security. This is the ultimate application of the 60s hippie saying, “If it feels good, do it.”

Perhaps Daniel Ellsberg and his supporters would say that he wouldn’t leak the D-Day invasion plans, but if a liberal bureaucrat assumes all foreign powers attacks are the valid answer to past colonialism and imperialism and general white guilt, then nothing in the foreseeable future rises to the moral level of keeping the D-Day invasion plans secret. Thus, all “sophisticated and nuanced” government officials (presumably those who went to hear Khatami speak – with glee) can leak anything they want guilt-free. Starting from today, the Bush Administration – or any future administration – by not enforcing the sedition and treason laws, further hastens our decline and weakens our country.

Before the 9/11 docudrama was shown in New York on Sunday night, Democrat Andrew Cuomo, running in the primary for State Attorney General (he won), aired a commercial that summarized his work in the Clinton Administration and the liberal “intelligentsia” worldview. In a telling line, presumably written by the best liberal political advertising minds in New York, it had Cuomo saying “We spoke to their hopes, not their fears.” Cuomo was all but saying that Democrats believe that we are at a point in “postmodern history” where anyone who believes we have enemies (and therefore someone to fear) are being prejudiced, racist, or whatever.

I cannot think of no better description of the liberal intelligentsia: the people who think everyone is their friend – or can be quickly persuaded to be their friend. We should not even speak about things that may increase fear or awareness of threats – or defend against them with secret war plans, even if they are not used.

When actor Ron Silver was an ardent Democrat in 1993, he made famous a verbal exchange he had while being involved preparing for the first Clinton inauguration. Seeing a display of military fighters overhead, he complained to a Clinton aide who told him that “those are our jets now.” This reassured him and he repeated the now famous story to the press. You may also note that Ron Silver did not advocate in 1993 to release the flight plans of those military jets on Inauguration Day to the press. And he did not advocate that newspapers write articles on how to buy a shoulder launched Stinger-type missile on the black market. But, strongly affected by 9/11, Silver made a major political change and appeared in the anti-Michael Moore DVD Fahrenhype 911, speaking in favor of a strong national defense. He specifically mentioned being concerned about protecting his wife and children in that movie. He also he spoke at the 2004 Republican National Convention for President Bush.  There are those who would say, “Who are we to defend ourselves with prepared secret military plans – Nazis?” My reply is who are we not to defend ourselves? Traitors? These sound like two very extreme choices, but if someone is coming to kill you (have you boarded an airliner lately?), you are often left with two very extreme choices, i.e., kill or be killed. When the world was smaller, before the days of jet airplanes, atomic weapons, missiles, etc., it was commonly thought that two great oceans made such tough choices literally far, far away for most Americans. Many people, even after 9/11, find it easy to put such questions out of their mind and even argue we are wrong to even think about them. I don’t know if the following rises to the level of a prediction, but I say it will become harder and harder to avoid a lot of very tough choices involving the safety of all of us and our families.   Jack Kemp (not the politician)   9 14 06

House backs fence along border with Mexico


WASHINGTON – The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday authorized building a fence along portions of the border with Mexico in a vote critics said had more to do with election year politics than controlling illegal immigration.

The Republican-written bill, approved on a vote of 283-138, calls for construction of about 700 miles of fence along the 2,000-mile border with Mexico. Democratic opponents said the measure was a charade designed to help Republicans ahead of the November 7 elections.

“This is to score political points that are going to be demagogued in 30-second ads,” said Rep. Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat. He accused Republicans of trying to appeal to the “fears and passions” of people. He and other Democrats called for a broad immigration overhaul along the lines of the bill passed by the U.S. Senate that would create a guest worker program and legalize millions of illegal immigrants.

President George W. Bush backs comprehensive legislation and a guest worker program and spoke about the need for it during a meeting with House Republicans at the Capitol on Thursday. But the issue divides Republicans. Many feel the Senate bill would grant amnesty to people who broke U.S. law and it is unlikely a broad immigration bill will pass this year.

Instead, House Republican leaders plan to pass a series of border security measures before lawmakers break at the end of the month to campaign for the elections. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican, said the fence and other efforts would be added to a domestic security spending bill for next year that the House and Senate are hoping to finish by the end of the month.

Republican supporters of the fence said it was a step toward controlling the borders and would help stem the flow of illegal immigration while reducing drug smuggling and other crimes.

An estimated 1.2 million illegal immigrants were arrested in the last fiscal year trying to cross into the United States along the border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Sections of the fence will be built in each state.

“We have to know who is coming across our borders and what they are bringing with them,” said Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who heads the House Armed Services Committee.

“If we build it, they will no longer come illegally,” Hastert said after the vote.

But even some Republicans opposed the piecemeal approach.

“We’re really not debating anything of substance,” said Rep. Jim Kolbe, an Arizona Republican. “This is a feel good piece of legislation.”

Copyright 2006 Reuters News Service. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Copyright © 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures

Western-born Muslims seen as biggest threat

Western-born Muslims seen as biggest threat

September 14, 2006

YOUNG Western-born Muslims recruited in universities, mosques and on the internet are increasingly being turned to jihad by terrorist networks, which train them in Islamic countries to support and conduct attacks on their homelands.

The return of brainwashed sleeper agents trained in counter-intelligence and covert fundraising, as well as the use of explosives, was the “biggest threat to humanity in modern times”, said Boaz Ganor, founder of the Israeli-based Institute of Counter-Terrorism.

“They are looking for them in mosques … in the youth centres … on the web … relying on social acquaintances and also family ties and universities,” Dr Ganor told a conference hosted by the institute in the resort city of Herzliya yesterday.

He said terror organisations used psychological strategies to win the hearts of “specific” young Muslims through either indirect recruitment platforms such as the internet, and direct ones such as combing radical mosques and prayer halls.

Extremists looked for recruits who were not integrated into Western society and wanted to reinvent themselves.

“They are looking for people who are alienated from society, they’re looking for people that have religious devotion, they’re looking for those who believe that they are discriminated against,” Dr Ganor said.

Converts to Islam with a proclivity for violence and fanaticism were also considered good recruits. “They are using this idea of divine command, saying ‘we are just messengers and it is God that demands you to do this job … we have to save Islam’.

“(But) when you spread a network like that, sometimes you get fissures that you don’t expect to get because these alienated, frustrated youngsters are not just in the Muslim society, and therefore we see another phenomenon, which are converts.”

Last month, The Australian revealed that dozens of violent criminals in Sydney were being brainwashed by hardliners and converting to radical Islam in jail, creating a serious national security time bomb.

Dr Ganor said of the recruits: “They are usually being trained in other countries – it could be Pakistan or another place – and then they are infiltrated again into the old society as an indoctrinated, trained sleeper that are just sitting and waiting for the order.

“Some of them are being used for fundraising missions, some of them are being used for collection of intelligence and for recruiting others. But we have to understand … that some of them are being used for this mission of launching a terrorist attack on Western society.”

Another expert on Islamic terrorism who spoke at the conference, Steven Emerson, told The Australian that terrorist organisations were increasingly shifting towards training their recruits on how to become better intelligence agents and expose the weaknesses of their enemies.

“It’s in al-Qa’ida’s manual to do better counter-intelligence, to do observation, surveillance, reconnaissance,” he said. “That’s critical to any good terrorist apparatus. You always have to have a reconnaissance man.

“Hezbollah excels in reconnaissance – sending back to Tehran videos that they have witnessed in terms of the vulnerabilities.”

Dr Ganor said Muslim communities worldwide needed to take the initiative in exposing and thwarting the actions of radicals.

Pope’s speech stirs Muslim anger ===== Go for it Pope Benedict!!!!!

Pope’s speech stirs Muslim anger

Muslim religious leaders have accused Pope Benedict XVI of quoting anti-Islamic remarks during a speech at a German university this week. Questioning the concept of holy war, he quoted a 14th-Century Christian emperor who said Muhammad had brought the world only “evil and inhuman” things.

A senior Pakistani Islamic scholar, Javed Ahmed Gamdi, said jihad was not about spreading Islam with the sword.

Turkey’s top religious official asked for an apology for the “hostile” words.

In Indian-administered Kashmir, police seized copies of newspapers which reported the Pope’s comments to prevent any tension.

A Vatican spokesman, Father Frederico Lombardi, said he did not believe the Pope’s comments were meant as a harsh criticism of Islam.


In his speech at Regensburg University, the German-born pontiff explored the historical and philosophical differences between Islam and Christianity and the relationship between violence and faith.

Stressing that they were not his own words, he quoted Emperor Manual II Paleologos of Byzantine, the Orthodox Christian empire which had its capital in what is now the Turkish city of Istanbul.

The emperors words were, he said: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”

Benedict said “I quote” twice to stress the words were not his and added that violence was “incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul”.

The Pope is due to visit Turkey in November and the Turkish response was swift and strong, the BBC’s Sarah Rainsford reports from Istanbul.

Religious leader Ali Badda Kolu said the Pope’s comments represented what he called an “abhorrent, hostile and prejudiced point of view”.

Whilst Muslims might express their criticism of Islam and of Christianity, he argued, they would never defame the Holy Bible or Jesus Christ.

He said he hoped the Pope’s speech did not reflect “hatred in his heart” against Islam.

Many Turks see Benedict as a Turkophobe and commentators call his words just before the holy month of Ramadan “ill-timed and ill-conceived”, our correspondent adds.

Sahara seen as potential terrorist breeding ground

Sahara seen as potential terrorist breeding ground
Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:16 AM BST

By Nick Tattersall

DAKAR (Reuters) – The vast Sahara has long sheltered rebels and bandits but security experts fear its remote oases and mountain hideouts may also be an ideal recruitment and training ground for al Qaeda-linked militants.

Rebellious nomads, large Muslim communities and dire poverty in a largely unpoliced territory have made the U.S. intelligence community increasingly nervous that the Sahara’s southern fringe in West Africa could become a launch pad for terrorist attacks.

“We’re not talking about large numbers of terrorists, like Iraq or Afghanistan, or fixed training bases,” one U.S. counterterrorism official in Washington told Reuters.

“We’re talking about relatively small numbers of moving targets who are difficult to fix and destroy but who represent an increasing threat … It’s not the biggest threat in the world, but it’s a significant emerging one.”

One of Washington’s greatest concerns is the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), an Algerian rebel movement which has pledged allegiance to al Qaeda and publishes Osama bin Laden’s messages on its Web site.

French and Italian police arrested suspected GSPC members earlier this year thought to have been planning attacks, some of them in Algeria and in Iraq. The head of French police has said the group also poses a major threat to France.

Regional diplomats, security sources and U.S. officials believe the GSPC and its allies have been running mobile camps in the Sahara, teaching recruits guerrilla tactics before sending them home as “sleepers” to await further instructions.

“After training they are dormant. They become sworn members who know they are going to die,” said Mamour Fall, a reclusive Senegalese imam expelled from Italy in 2003 after being branded a national security threat.

“One day you receive your ticket telling you it is your turn to go, and you go,” he told Reuters in Dakar last year.


Fall said he met bin Laden in Sudan in the early 1990s, fought alongside him in Bosnia and was still preaching his message in West Africa.

He said three camps in the Sahel — the southern fringe of the Sahara — trained a total of 100 men every six months sent from around the region. Intelligence experts believe such activity is very much ad hoc.

“It’s two or three vehicles meeting somewhere in an oasis, bringing out a laptop computer and showing people how to construct bombs. Or it’s someone setting up a temporary firing range,” one senior U.S. intelligence official said.

U.S. Special Forces have been training local armies in 10 countries in the region to confront the threat as part of the U.S. government’s Trans-Sahara Counter Terrorism Initiative.

But radical voices such as Fall’s are the exception in West Africa, which has a strong tradition of moderate Sufi Islam whose brotherhoods are renowned for their tolerance.

Opposition to U.S. foreign policy may be common among many West Africans, largely due to the war in Iraq and U.S. support of Israel, but it is rarely fervent — the strongest resentment is often reserved for former European colonial powers.

But Washington fears the region’s poverty and weak governance leaves it prone to influence from movements like the Salafis, a purist group among Sunni Muslims whose extreme followers fought armed struggles in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Chechnya and in Algeria with the GSPC.

“Over the years, especially over the past 5 or 10, there has been an influx of Saudi and Pakistani, mostly Saudi, money and you’ve seen mosque building and proselytising across the whole belt of the Sahel,” the U.S. counterterrorism official said.

“They bring a new kind of Islam to the region that is inconsistent with the historic brotherhoods and the Sufi tradition that has been dominant.”

Fall said although violent jihad was largely alien to African Muslims, preachers such as himself portrayed Africans as victims of colonial powers in much the same way as some Arabs saw themselves as victims of U.S. imperialism.

“The context is linked. We have the same religion, the same economic situation, the same culture. Young men know they have to do something to be respected,” he said.


Militant Salafist groups in the Sahara, such as the GSPC, nonetheless appear so far to have had limited success in finding support for their ideology among local populations.

Tuareg nomads in northern Mali and northern Niger are seen as particularly ripe for recruitment because they come into contact with GSPC fighters on desert trading routes and themselves fought armed rebellions in the 1990s.

Yet they publicly reject the GSPC cause. Eglasse Ag Idar, a Tuareg leader who was part of a revolt in Mali’s desert town of Kidal in May, helped conduct hostage negotiations with the GSPC when they kidnapped 32 European tourists in 2003.

“We talked a lot about the fact we were all Muslims. We told them that Islam never demands such violent acts, that for us it was not legitimate,” Ag Idar told Reuters from Kidal, adding he believed the GSPC still had logistics bases north and west of Timbuktu near the Algerian border.

“They do not have a big presence … but we tell people in the region, particularly our youths, not to approach them.”

(Additional reporting by Caroline Drees and David Morgan in Washington)

Why is the first Muslim to ascend to elected national office in the U.S. being given a free pass by the media… particularly when his past includes racism, anti-Semitism, Islamic supremacy and an abundance of lies?

The wrong stuff

For the past three months, we have used the many faces of Minnesota’s Democratic Fifth District congressional candidate Keith Ellison as symbolic of the question, “Who is Keith Ellison?” In “Who is Keith Ellison? (2)” this past June, for example, we documented the fact that Keith Ellison had publicly appeared under assumed names including Keith Hakim, Keith X Ellison and Keith Ellison-Muhammad over the period 1989-1998. In each of these personas he was an advocate, leader, spokesman and/or self-identified member of the Nation of Islam. These personas were not a relic of the distant past or a byproduct of youthful indiscretion. Indeed, Ellison first ran for public office as a self-identified member of the Nation of Islam under the name Keith Ellison-Muhammad in 1998.

Ellison has repeatedly asserted that his involvement with the Nation of Islam was limited to an 18-month period around the time of the Million Man March in 1995. This assertion by Ellison has been a cornerstone of Ellison’s campaign; it is repeated in every Minneapolis Star Tribune article on Ellison in which the issue of Ellison’s connections to the Nation of Islam are mentioned. In today’s jointly bylined Star Tribune story by Rochelle Olson and Dane Smith, the statement is repeated and correctly attributed to Ellison:

In the past, Ellison has said his ties to Farrakhan included no more 18 months in the 1990s, primarily spent organizing for the Million Man March in Washington, D.C.

Given the fact that Ellison’s acknowledged involvement with the Nation of Islam began no later than 1995 and the indisputable fact that it extended at least to late 1998, Ellison’s limitation of his involement with the Nation of Islam to 18 months is a blatant, easily demonstrable lie which the Star Tribune nevertheless continues to repeat.Today for the first time the Star Tribune mentions Elllison’s shifting public personas, by quotation of Ellison’s Republican opponent Alan Fine. Yet the Star Tribune, like the Washinton Post earlier this week in Alan Cooperman’s story, asserts that these personas were names that Ellison went under as a student. Thus Olson and Smith write in today’s Star Tribune story:

“I’m extremely concerned about Keith Ellison, Keith Hakim, Keith X Ellison, Keith Ellison Muhammad,” Fine said, referring to names Ellison used when he wrote several editorials for the University of Minnesota Daily when he was a law student in the early 1990s.

How many errors is it possible to pack into a dependent clause commenting on a quotation? Ellison was a law student from 1987-1990, not in the early 1990s. He used the name Keith Hakim in two University of Minnesota Daily columns published in 1989 and 1990. He subsequently used the other names over a period that extended through 1998, on each occasion as an advocate of or spokesman for the Nation of Islam. One such occasion occurred at a public hearing in which Ellison used the name Muhammad, as reported by the Star Tribune itself in the Star Tribune’s 1997 story on the hearing.It is pathetic that the Star Tribune has not familiarized itself or its readers with Ellison’s various public identities at this late stage of the campaign, but it is inexcusable for it falsely to assert that these identities were used by Ellison “when he was a law student.” The fact that this error has occurred in two stories in the same week, first in the Washington Post and then in the Star Tribune, suggests one of two facts. Either the Star Tribune is relying on the Post for its information about Ellison or Ellison is peddling another canard about his Nation of Islam past that the Star Tribune is gullibly repeating. Now that the Ellison candidacy is a significant national story, would it be too much to ask the Star Tribune to get the facts straight?

By the same token, today’s AP story on Ellison by Martiga Lohn refers to Fine’s citation of Ellison’s various public personas as “emphasizing the black Democrat’s Muslim background with a series of pen names formerly used by Ellison.” It is a sentence that has the sole virtue by contrast with the Star Tribune story of introducing new errors into the discussion — with the suggestion that pointing Ellison’s Nation of Islam personas out is itself bigoted. Some kind of congratulations to the AP are surely in order.

Minnesota’s statewide candidates for governor (Mike Hatch) and Senator (Amy Klobuchar) have somehow managed to avoid commenting on Ellison. They have declined to endorse him or even to be photographed with him. Such reticence on their part has not deterred Minnesota DFL Chairman Brian Melendez from imputing bigotry to those who, like Alan Fine, have expressed qualms about Ellison’s involvement with the Nation of Islam. As the AP story reports:

Minnesota DFL Chairman Brian Melendez said Ellison won’t hurt the party’s other candidates. He condemned Fine’s attack, saying it was racist.”He’ll probably pick up the pigheaded fool vote but hopefully there aren’t too many of them,” Melendez said.

The Newsweek story on the Ellison campaign by Lee Hudson Teslik seems more concerned with adjusting attitudes than with getting facts straight. It not so subtly trades in imputations of bigotry to those of us who have sought to report the facts on Ellison’s past and present associations:

[S]ome Muslims, both locally and nationally, have reservations about Ellison. One concern is his prior associations with members of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam, which many Muslims do not consider mainstream. Ellison explicitly denies having been a part of the group, though he admits working with many of its members in helping to coordinate the Million Man March in 1995. Other Muslims worry that the negative attention Ellison has drawn more generally—from charges that he has disregarded parking tickets to criticisms for having once shared a stage with Khalid Abdul Muhammed, a man who called Jews “the bloodsuckers of the black nation”—will reflect poorly on their community.They already feel the heat. Conservative blogs have hounded Ellison with a tone some Muslims have interpreted as racist. A blog called PowerLine [sic], for instance, posted news of his August 25 fundraiser, lambasting the support Ellison has received from Nihad Awad. The ambiguously-sourced post portrayed Awad as an Islamist extremist linked to the Palestinian group Hamas and labeled him a voice of the “Wahhabi lobby.” Given the frequency of these sorts of attacks, there are concerns that xenophobia could affect the primary. “I’ve been alarmed by the amount of prejudice we’re seeing,” says Saeed. “It’s a great disappointment to the Muslim community.” In light of this, Mahmud says she has come to see Ellison’s candidacy as “bittersweet.” Ellison has worked to quell his critics. On May 28, he wrote a letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) “categorically and unequivocally reject[ing] anti-Semitism in any form.” But uneasiness has persisted, particularly among area Jewish groups. “The guy is campaigning on ‘I’ve changed, I’ve learned, I’ve changed my behavior,'” says Dan Rosen, a Minneapolis lawyer who sits on JCRC’s board. “But it strikes me that what we’re talking about is not a therapy session. It’s the United States Congress.”

It is striking how unconcerned with the facts Newsweek is. Has Nihad Awad had intimate links to Hamas? Has he publicly identified himself as a supporter of Hamas? Is Awad a voice of the “Wahhabi lobby”? What was Nihad Awad doing on stage with a flag of Hezbollah in the 1994 photo that we posted in our report on Ellison’s August 25 fundraiser? Newsweek apparently doesn’t care to know; perhaps the desire to know is itself symptomatic of “xenophobia.”Newsweek refers to our post as “ambiguously-sourced.” Among the sources we cited on Awad in the post were the Weekly Standard, C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, the CAIR Web site, the White House Web site and various of Awad’s speeches by place and date. Calling the post “ambiguosly-sourced” seems to me more ambiguous than the post itself. I think the references are clear. I’m a little unclear, however, on what “ambiguously-sourced” means in this context.

Newsweek carries on the tradition of the American press as the kind of censorious Victorian gentleman that Tom Wolfe used to describe the press of the late fifties and early sixties in The Right Stuff:

It was as if the press in America, for all its vaunted independence, were a great colonial animal, an animal made up of countless clustered organisms responding to a central nervous system. In the late 1950’s (as in the late 1970’s) the animal seemed determined that in all matters of national importance the proper emotion, the seemly sentiment, the fitting moral tone, should be established and should prevail; and all information that muddied the tone and weakened the feeling should simply be thrown down the memory hole. In a later period this impulse of the animal would take the form of blazing indignation about corruption, abuses of power, and even minor ethical lapses, among public officials; here, in April of 1959, it took the form of a blazing patriotic passion for the seven test pilots who had volunteered to go into space. In either case, the animal’s fundamental concern remained the same: the public, the populace, the citizenry, must be provided with the correct feelings! One might regard this animal as the consummate hypocritical Victorian gent. Sentiments that one scarcely gives a second thought to in one’s private life are nevertheless insisted upon in all public utterances. (And this grave gent lives on in excellent health.)

Indeed he does.