May 20, 2006
Further to Ignorant Whanking: Agitprop and Iran, False reports on
Of late there has been a spate of fine Islamophobic whanking, about Ms Hirsi Ali and about the supposed perifidy of Islam qua Islam (about which I don't have the energy to devote at the moment, our friend Mr Schuler does a good enough job for all I would write something different). Also see Dean Esmay's note, again I would take exception to a number of things - as anyone following our long running discussion at 'Aqoul about what I call 'The Pious Middle' - but like I said, I lack the energy. Suffice it to say, even those on the right side of this issue - that is the anti-Islamophobes - are very, very poorly informed about in MENA intra-Islamic dynamics: in general mistaking the politics of percevied Western intervention with that of Islamic practice. Another time, however.
There is also a nice bit of agitprop falsely claiming non-Muslims in Iran will have to wear Nazi-esque clothing markings that has spread across the typically hysterical and fact-impaired blogosphere. The report is a bit of agitprop spin on the actual bill, which rather tediously and far less dramatically pretends to promote "Islamic dress." One has to say that given the timing, the situation, that it smells, but hey, that is the game and the nice little bit of "dhimmi" (dhimmitude) agitprop rap that the phobic axe-grinders have created out of historical half-truths is, if nothing else, well-spun.
(Sadly idiot measures on marking out minorities probably self-generate in tense situations, regardless when reading about such re MENA region, let me counsel approaching inflamatory reports with a sceptical eye, given the massive amount of axe grinding ongoing in these times.)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
I've been thinking about this very same thing. Of course the usual suspects in the blagosphere began their dhimmi rantings. But even people who I previously thought were reasonable swallowed it whole and thought 'it could happen, those crazy mullahs'. It is unbelievable how the image of MENA countries in American minds is so warped. And like you said, even those who are in no way islamophobic are no better informed than the rest. This, I would say, is where aquol comes in. The dhimmi ranters you seem to focus on L are already a lost cause.
Posted by: Ali K at May 21, 2006 12:28 AM
One thing to remember about iran is the vehemence with which some iranian expats will attack the regime at every opportunity. There is one iranian journalist (forgot her name) who sometimes gets invited on Dateline London on the BBC. Her whole schtik apparently is to blame iran on everything that is wrong with the world (iraq especially), even if the topic of conversation has nothing to do with iran or mena - one example that stuck in my mind was the french riots. It gets tiring listening to her after a while. Same goes for amir taheri who seems to comment in every newspaper in the world - including alsharq alawsat.
Posted by: Ali K at May 21, 2006 12:58 AM
Jim Henley's post on this story is very good.
Posted by: Jackmormon at May 21, 2006 07:22 PM
Amir Taheri is a nut and after his big hijab lie, has NO credibility whatsoever.
Posted by: ummali at May 23, 2006 10:16 AM
Could you clarify, "big hijab lie"?
Posted by: The Lounsbury at May 23, 2006 03:28 PM
Sure, a couple years back he published an article stating that modern hijab styles were an invention of Sayyid Musa Sadr in the 70's. I looked all over the web for the original, but it doesn't seem to be on the website anymore. I did find this though:
He also gives a completely ridiculous analysis of Muslim dress in Britain:
"Muslims could also help by stopping the use of their bodies as advertising space for al-Qaeda. Muslim women should cast aside the so-called hijab, which has nothing to do with Islam and everything to do with tribal wear on the Arabian peninsula. The hijab was reinvented in the 1970s as a symbol of militancy, and is now a visual prop of terrorism. If some women have been hoodwinked into believing that they cannot be Muslims without covering their hair, they could at least use headgears other than black (the colour of al-Qaeda) or white (the colour of the Taleban)."
Posted by: ummali at May 24, 2006 09:20 PM
here is the original article
Posted by: ummali at May 24, 2006 09:45 PM
More on Taheri's lies:
The funniest quote is this, by Eleana Benador, of Benador Associates:
"My major concern is the large picture. Is Taheri writing one or two details that are not accurate? This is a guy who is putting his life at stake." ... "the Iranian government has killed its opponents." [Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] "says he wants to destroy Israel. He says the Holocaust never happened.... As much as being accurate is important, in the end it's important to side with what's right. What's wrong is siding with the terrorists."
She manages to get all textbook pathetic excuses. Let's see what we've got here: The classic look over there retort; fearing for his life; fake but accurate; anti-semitism; and finally opposing us is siding with the terrorists. Yep, all there.
Posted by: Ali K at June 20, 2006 01:03 AM