Throughout history, the best way to silence a dissenter from “public” opinion has been to vilify and demonize the dissenter. One would think, given the mass explosion of access to information, this game would be in retreat. But, to the contrary, it is still alive and relatively well.
Daniel Pipes, like many others who have an “extreme” view are vilified rather than debated. It’s much easier to write-off someone who is in intellectual and legitimate opposition to your own position as a crank, racist or an “extremist”, than it is to go toe to toe with that person in a public forum.
“Extremism” in either defense or opposition, is not necessarily any kind of a vice.
Senator Barry Goldwater once said: “Extremism In The Defense Of Liberty Is No Vice. And Moderation In The Pursuit Of Justice Is No Virtue”.
Where is the vice in standing in the “extreme” against a racist movement? And where is the virtue in being “moderate” about the racist movement’s position?
Daniel Pipes is up front and unapologetic in his ceaseless attack on fundamental Islamism. It is his detractors who hide in the shadows while sniping at him and others like him from a safe distance.
Over the past few years, I’ve read a great deal of what Daniel Pipes has written, and not once did I ever perceive him to be singling out an enemy of freedom based upon that enemy’s religion.
Pipes is extremely accurate and succinct in his words used to describe the Islamic fundamentalist belief, history, organization, players, supporters, apologists and their ultimate goal(s).
What Pipes writes about is not a secret. Islamists are responsible for wars world-wide. They are equally culpable for mass murders and the degradation of whole societies.
They are the nemesis of modernity and the secular rule of law and freedom for all people. Especially women.
They also created havoc and mass murder on 9/11. And to many of the Islamist apologists, this “little fact” has seemed to slip their mind.
To suggest that Daniel Pipes is anti-Moslem or a racist simply because he writes about the truth of fundamentalist Islam is absurd.
The Islamists who espouse their beliefs in Islamic statehood and Shariah (rule by Islamic law) are the very foundation of what Pipes rights about. He doesn’t make it up. He simply explains what is publicly supported by the Islamists themselves.
To criticize Pipes in the manner that he is attacked by his detractors and apologists for Islamic fundamentalism is akin to demonizing someone who spoke out against National Socialism (the Nazi movement) in the 1930’s.
Both movements (Nazism and Islamism) were born out of a sense of superiority, hatred of all things unlike themselves, an extreme need to control, and a desire to kill Jews.
And in the 30’s, just like today, those who spoke out against this evil were first vilified, then demonized, then punished.
I would like to see the James Zogbys (Arab American Institute) of this world mount an effective HONEST rebuttal against Daniel Pipes. Instead of just vilifying the man.
I once saw Zogby debate someone the likes of Daniel Pipes on one of the American News Networks. When his “foe” brought up Whabbism, Zogby laughed dismissively and intimated: “let’s get real”.
As if the discussion of Whabbism was totally irrelevant, rather then being at the heart of Islamic fundamentalism.
In my very own personal experience as a once upon a time activist of some repute in Canada, I can state with absolute confidence; that when the opposition resorts to vilification and demonization, you have to know that what you are doing, writing and saying has hit the mark.
One of the serious problems with our newfound ability to mass project information, is that it allows the vilifiers as much access to propagandize a debate, as it allows the dissenters of political correctness and dishonesty to make their point.
THE GOOD NEWS: is that this newfound mass media allows people such as myself to enter the debate and disseminate my thoughts with as much access as anyone else.
And as history has repeatedly taught us, the truth eventually wins out. One way or the other.
The more that people like Daniel Pipes are vilified, the more on-track and effective they are. It is only in silence that the vilifiers will succeed.