Author attributes misleading statements by Muslim apologists, as sloppy research. Perhaps it is intentional propaganda?
a recent panel titled "Anti-Muslim Sentiment in the US: Challenges and Perspectives." [. . .] was sponsored by Harvard University's Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Islamic Studies Program (AISP), whose eponymous founder is an influential member of the Wahhabi Saudi regime. As every panelist was either a current or future Harvard alumnus, the event provided evidence of some disturbing trends in elite higher education today.
The discussion was held on a cold, rainy Monday evening in the Tsai Auditorium, which serves Harvard's Center for Government and International Studies, before an audience of about eighty, including a representative from the university's Office of the President.
[. . .]
anti-Muslim sentiment is attributed to social polarization and religious illiteracy, which is then exploited by unscrupulous politicians and terrorist organizations. He described panelist Omar Khoshafa, a Harvard senior who, in 2015, invited Holocaust-denying extremist preacher and Rhodes College religious studies professor Yasir Qadhi to speak at the university as a "superhero."
[. . .]
Christopher Bail, a Duke University assistant professor of sociology and Harvard Ph.D., characterized his lengthy broadside against critics of radical Islam as social science, but his talk did not rate well in a simple fact-check.
[. . .]
According to Bail, Rubio called to close down "places where Muslims gather to be inspired." This was presumably a reference to Rubio's extemporaneous remarks on November 19, 2015, in which he spoke of "closing down any places where radicals are being inspired" (emphasis added), while expressly rejecting the equation of these places with mosques. Bail then lambasted Ben Carson for supposedly saying "that he would hesitate to appoint Muslims to his cabinet," when it was Herman Cain who stated in 2011 that he would not "be comfortable appointing a Muslim ... in [his] cabinet."
Repeatedly plugging his book, Terrified: How Anti-Muslim Fringe Organizations Became Mainstream, Bail argued that the "mainstreaming of anti-Muslim sentiment" in America is due not to terrorism, ISIS, or the attacks of September 11, 2001, but to:
... [a] very well-coordinated effort by a small network of anti-Muslim organizations who have succeeded not only in captivating the mass media but also, increasingly, in influencing our counter-terrorism policy and ... American public opinion about Islam.
[. . .]
MEMRI, for example, had allegedly engaged in "media manipulation" for translating a line in a Palestinian children's program as "I will shoot the Jews," when, according to Bail, it meant "the Jews are shooting at us." Does Bail not know that MEMRI addressed and rebutted the alternative translation, that the context of the statement undisputedly included directing children to shoot "for the sake of al-Aqsa," or that incitement to kill Jews in Palestinian Authority media is routine? If such sloppiness reflects the quality of his research, it's little wonder he draws such bizarre, conspiratorial conclusions.
April 30, 2016
Harvard 'Experts': Islamophobia Everywhere!
By Caleb Jephson