Thursday, September 09, 2004
Apparently the "radical Islamic cleric" Yusuf al Qaradawi is in the Sudan right now trying to do something about the crisis in Darfur, yet none of the mainstream Western news sources have picked up on it yet. Abu Aardvark has an insightful post discussing this and the smear campaign being waged against Qaradawi. Concurring with the Aardvark, there are many things about Qaradawi that I really do not agree with, and I also find it quite unusual that I am now defending him. However I also disagree with the way in which the Western press has demonized Qaradawi. Says the Aardvark:
Qaradawi - along with his main platform, al Jazeera - has been the target of a concerted campaign of defamation which has established a conventional wisdom which just isn't true. When Swift Boat liars appear in the US, we all (or at least, most of us) understand the smear for what it is; when a smear happens in Arab politics, a lot of people think that someone like Abd al Rahman al Rashed or Mamoun Fandy is some kind of neutral truth teller rather than an active participant in the political operation. There's a million blogs to fact-check the Swift Boat Liars, but not many to correct the record on al Qaradawi or al Jazeera. So criticize Qaradawi for his views, by all means - lord knows there's plenty to criticize - but just try to recognize the political hatchet jobs for what they are....
Read the full post here.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, September 09, 2004 at 9/09/2004 01:00:00 am. Permalink
:
To view the trackbacks to this entry click here.
The URL to TrackBack this post is: http://haloscan.com/tb/chanad/109468085474407722
Chanad says:
Scorpio, okay maybe "smear" is the wrong word. They aren't actually telling untruths about him (well, Qaradawi is now denying reports that he said American civilians can be targets). But only one side of his story is being told. No one seems to care about the positive things he has to say, which have to do with reform, political freedoms, etc, etc. The problem is that sometime omissions turn into untruths. If one side of Qaradawi is not portrayed, I think it almost amounts to a smear.
The reason why this is significant is because he has a huge following throughout the Muslim world, and we can't just ignore the parts we don't want to believe. I dislike Qaradawi as much as you do, but that doesn't portray him as something he isn't.
Anyways, I'll have a follow up post soon.
says:
Chan'ad,
It's been raining here, and that always makes me grumpy even though I love the rain. "Maybe" I was too harsh with my previous comments, but there are several things about this post that strike me odd. First is of course that the crisis in the Sudan has been going on for 19 months, so I naturally have to be suspect when Qaradawi shows up a month before the second UN deadline for the government. Think of the people he might have saved if he sincerely was concerned sooner. So is it concern for the Sudanese, or is it concern the evil empire will step in via the UN to wage a war on Islam of course.
Second is that this has to be a smear campaign against him vs what it really is which is saying the guy says some really crazy things. He should be called on those things, and he should be consistent with his views as well, and then maybe the world could stop wondering what is going on with muslims.
Third thing that struck me was why the hell do people listen to clerics. I know morally bankrupt governments and cultural/religious thing. We have a couple of nuts making political statements in America, but by and large the west doesn't need to rely on clerics to tell them how to live their daily lives and whom they should or shouldn't kill today. Didn't they bring you guys up right that you don't need them for daily instructions? I don't get that part.
Lastly, I am glad you wrote this post and are thinking about things; and that you see the good and the bad about this guy, because I would expect no less of you. If the message is mixed, maybe it's not real; just a thought.
Scorpio and Anon, thanks alot for your comments. I wish I had the time to answer each of the points that you have both raised. But I'll just try and reiterate the main intention behind this post. I am totally in agreement with you with regards to your criticisms of Qaradawi. We must be critical of him (and everyone) when he says something that doesn't sound right.
My real problem is that the media is only presenting one side of what he says, and is making the world believe that he has only that one side. Sure, you can call him disingenious for having a mixed message. But people need to be aware that he has a mixed message in order for them to come to that conclusion.
When you have time could you please explain your last post about mixed message because you lost me there. Must have been a mixed message on your part-lol, just kidding Chan'ad. Thanks.
M
9/09/2004 02:02:00 am
I found you on opendiary today :)