So.... Yeah... The New Smear Is That Rick Perry Is a Dhimmi, Huh?

Pam Gellar, relying on a hot tip from, um, Salon, thinks Rick Perry's a dhimmi.

Salon wrote:

Perry is a friend of the Aga Khan, the religious leader of the Ismailis, a sect of Shia Islam that claims a reported 15 to 20 million adherents worldwide. Sprouting from that friendship are at least two cooperation agreements between the state of Texas and Ismaili institutions, including a far-reaching program to educate Texas schoolchildren about Islam. That’s a partnership that has already prompted a bit of grumbling in far-right corners of the blogosphere and could conceivably become a primary issue if, as expected, Perry enters the presidential race.

Gellar echoes:

Perry has been sucked into the propaganda vortex, and is now wielding his enormous power to influence changes in the schoolrooms and in the curricula to reflect a sharia compliant version of Islam. He is a friend of the Aga Khan, the multimillionaire head of the Ismailis, a Shi’ite sect of Islam that today proclaims its nonviolence but in ages past was the sect that gave rise to the Assassins.

Oh I like that just fine. In the 1100's, this sect gave rise to the Assassins, so... yeah. Watch out. They've had 900 years to get even more bad-ass.

Perry has concluded at least two cooperation agreements between the state of Texas and the Ismailis, including a comprehensive program to feed children in Texas public schools and taqiyya nonsense about how Islam is a religion of peace.

So... what of it?

I am about to direct you to what I think might just be the greatest rejoinder in the history of blogdom.

Now, because I have an ego, and don't want to fully admit how good this is, better than I've ever managed, I will console myself with the notion that he has the facts on his side, and ergo, is almost cheating.

I strongly, strongly urge you to read this. Now, if it seems long, skip to the part of it -- the last half -- wherein the actual curriculum used to teach Texas students about Islam is presented.

I know what you're thinking. Shit, I thought so too. Religion of Peace. We must stop attacking them. Israel is mean.

Oh no. Oh no no no.

The "dhimmi" curriculum that was actually produced by Texas teachers consulting with Aga Khan is...

...Well, I don't want to get your expectations up, because once expectations are raised, they can never be met, can they?

But actually reading this curriculum (which I trust Ms. Geller did not), my honest reaction? My real reaction reading it?

This is going to hurt Perry, because this is so biased against Muslims it will reinforce perceptions he is some kind of rootin'-tootin' six-gun shooting cowboy yahoo.

Okay, I've raised your expectations. But you read it yourself. Read what the Aga Khan (and his apparently really non-violent fellow Muslim moderates) worked out with Texas teachers to inform kids about Islam.

And then you tell me Perry's a "dhimmi."

(START OF EXCERPTS)

Because Islamic society is in a different state of development than Western society, conflicts naturally arise.

1. Countries of Western Civilization have secular governments, which means great toleration of cultural and religious differences.

What? Did he just praise the West?

2. Countries of Islamic Civilization for the most part either have religiously dominated governments or demands to make them more religious, which mean less toleration of cultural and religious differences.

Wait, didn't he just knock Islam?

3. Muslims often lack respect for Western traditions and points of view. The Muslim relationship to the West is colored by the belief that Western beliefs [whether Christian or atheist] are defective and therefore inferior to Islam.

Did he just say Muslims lack respect for Western traditions?

From its early days, Islam reacted aggressively toward its civilized neighbors the Byzantines and the West. Muslim attacks against the West can be viewed as occurring in three waves...

Wait, what?

Modernity developed in the West and made the West so powerful that any civilization that did not imitate the West in this regard was at a extreme disadvantage. Modernism featured three characteristics:

1. High levels of technology, integrated into society, along with modern science.

2. The creation of much wealth, which, with technology, makes the state more powerful militarily.

3. An openness (in its most developed form called the Open Society by Karl Popper), which features tolerance, pluralism, and has a secular governance.
The failure of Islam to adopt modern ways and adapt them to Islamic values, put Islam at a great disadvantage when dealing with the West.

Anyone feeling the attitude of dhimmitude yet?

While Westerners studied Islamic culture, Muslims showed almost no interest in Western culture, remaining ignorant of modernity and its impact.

Obviously pro-Islam propaganda.

Now here comes something that is to my mind way too politically biased... against Islam and in favor of the West, again. I would not include this.

Wiltse approvingly quotes from a Wall Street Journal op-ed, “Speaking Truth to Muslim Power,” by former CIA officer Reuel Marc Gerecht: “The Egyptian press has never been as free as when the British ruled over the Nile valley.”

See what I mean? Is this how they do "dhimmitude" in Texas? Because if this is dhimmitude Texas-style, sign me up.

(WILTSE’S ENTIRE SEGMENT ON ISRAEL):

The conflict continues because the West, and the United States specifically, support Israel (an outpost of Western Civilization surrounded by Islamic Civilization), which Muslims generally dislike or hate.

Islamic enmity toward Israel is complicated, but hatred of Jews and Israel can be traced at least to the success of Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda starting in 1933.

Are you shitting me?

Gellar's attacking this?

This reads like her fucking blog for fuck's sake.

In Texas, they're fucking reading "Atlas Shrugs" to the kids, and Geller's complaining. Maybe it's because she thinks she's owed royalties.

A small 1800s movement, Zionism, began seeking a Jewish-controlled state. After rejecting the island of Madagascar, Zionists settled on Palestine, the historic homeland of Jews until they were chased away by the Roman government in AD 70. At the time, Palestine was in the (Turkish Islamic) Ottoman Empire. The movement was not popular among European Jews, who had in the 1800s became increasingly accepted by fellow Europeans.

Since the end of World War One Palestine had been under the control of Great Britain, who at first welcomed the hardworking Jewish settlers. They made the most of the harsh conditions, bringing economic success to an area that had for a very long time been poor. Arab natives also welcomed the newcomers. But as the number of Jewish settlers increased and their economic success contrasted sharply with the economic backwardness of the Palestinian Arabs, the Arab attitude began to change.

That's enough excerpting. Read the thing.

"Backwardness."

What does it take, exactly, to avoid being called a dhimmi? This curriculum seems pretty tough and even-handed to me. Maybe even a little too tough on our friends in the Religion of Peace.

"Anti-Jihadism" cannot simply degenerate into a guilt by association lunacy where the only real "goods" you have on someone is that they seem to know Muslims.

By the way, this Aga Khan? At the link you'll see Robert Spencer of JihadWatch saying, in a discussion about whether moderate Muslims exist, that yes, indeed, his sect is actually moderate and non-violent. See, their sect actually tends to get persecuted by bigger sects, so they're not so big on violence. And he also says there that Aga Khan is in fact a philanthropist.

Update: I'm very late to this particular dispute.

Robert Spencer actually already responded to the blogpost I quote, arguing against it. You can read that reponse here, as well as Counter-Contempt's response to his response.

I think Counter-Contempt continues filleting them, but you be the judge.

Further Damage: Well, suffice to say I won't be reading this crap any more.

Gellar desperately tries to connect Rick Perry to Radical Islam via Perry's... association with American non-Muslim anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist.

Yes, all Perry did was give a speech in partnership with Grover Norquist, and promote it on his website. Norquist heads up Americans for Tax Reform, and Perry’s tax-cutting message is redolent of Norquist’s influence. But Norquist also has deep and extensive ties to Islamic supremacists and jihadists, as I showed in the first commentary. That raises legitimate questions about whether or not Perry knows about, or cares about, or even endorses, that activity by Norquist. I certainly would refuse to speak at the same event in partnership with Grover Norquist – let alone promote it on my website. Shouldn’t Rick Perry have, too?

Now, Norquist is widely known himself to be pro-Muslim; he believes they're a natural Republican constituency, and urges we make a move for them like Bush and Rove urge with Hispanics.

But Geller is trying to shore up her pathetic "Rick Perry's a Pro-Sharia Islamist Enabler" bullshit by linking him to the guy that everyone in DC is linked to in some way (fuck, even I was at his house five years ago).

Ummm... we're not allowed to talk with Grover Norquist anymore, Pam? Can't sign his anti-tax pledges? I guess all those conservative pols and wonks going to the Blankday Morning Meetings are, what? Jihadis, now?

Yeah. I'd say that just about takes care of all that.

I think Geller and Charles Johnson deserved each other. While Johnson called everyone a "fascist," Geller just calls everyone a "jihadist" or "dhimmi."

Look, it's the exact same goddamn thing. Sometimes relationships must end not because people are too different but because they are too alike.

Thanks very much to Jarid Foster for tipping me to that.

Plus: Let me say this. This is a general philosophical point. I thought this before I even knew the facts here.

There is a real danger of people coddling up to "moderate Muslims" who are nothing of the sort. We saw this repeatedly with Bush; we will see more of it.

There are good points to be made about such "moderate" Muslims, and our leaders' stupidity in elevating them.

However. However.

If the claim is now being made that to be properly "Anti-Jihadist" you really now do simply have to be anti-Muslim, period, and cannot attempt any overtures or any sort of goodwill gestures towards Muslims you actually believe are moderate (and seem to be so), then sign me down because I'm not part of that.

I think that is where people are driving this bus. It's easier to just dismiss them all than try to make distinctions.

Robert Spencer gets nailed with this here, as in a previous statement, having nothing to do with any of this, he confessed the moderation of Aga Khan and his sect generally.

Now, Geller digs up some weak guilt-by-association stuff on him. Could actually mean something -- honestly, I have learned to strongly distrust "moderate Muslims" myself. But my point is, the evidence is tenuous and weak.

Anyway, Stein at Counter-Contempt makes the point that if even Robert Spencer, gold-star anti-Jihadist, gave Aga Khan a clean bill of health and vouched for him, why should Rick Perry be blamed for similarly thinking he checked out?

Now, Aga Khan might actually still check out. There's no actual proof he doesn't. But let's say he does turn out to be just as Geller now alleges.

Stein asks Spencer, "How can you blame Perry for making the same error you did?" To which Spencer just says something like "He's the governor, he should have known."

Why? How? Should he just have assumed he was a bad actor? Even if he were a reader of Robert Spencer and could see Robert Spencer giving him a clean bill of health and endorsing him as a genuine, peaceful moderate Muslim philanthropist?

This is what is driving me crazy. If there was an error here (and I don't know that there is), Geller and Spencer both want to hang Perry for making an error they themselves did.

Because now Perry has that taint of association.

This will not do. This will not do.

This is anti-Jihadism quickly shading into anti-Americanism.

posted by Ace at 02:27 AM

| Access Comments