Let me get this straight
Reader comment on item: Rauf Lecture Reveals Radicalism

Submitted by Fact checking the fact checkers, Aug 23, 2010 21:47

I think the Cordoba Initiative project for a mosque near ground zero is in bad taste and I disgree with it, but I have to take on your "fact checking." I like a lot of your articles, but this one is weak.

Has al Qaeda killed more than 50,000 non-Muslims? (the death toll from the sanctions that you endorse) If not, then wasn't Rauf just making a factual statement?

On your second "fact-check" bullet: So the United States has not supported authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and elsewhere? I think we have. Rauf is not justifying anything here (in fact, he says the opposite). He just put his finger on a central problematic of getting Muslims around the world to "like us." This is a helpful observation. We have to accept it and try to find a work around. This is different from what many Islamists do. He is not inflaming any passions - merely making a factual and fairly astute observation that policymakers should consider.

Your third bullet: Yes, he gets the social science wrong on radicalization, but so does your "face check." Often it is the case that individuals are pulled and pushed into radicalism through various social and political factors (which may include career failure, as in the case of Khalid Kelkal, among many other factors - we are talking multiple sources of causaility here). Religion is a crucial factor, but it cannot be understood without the socio-political angle. Also, I do not see the equivalence between not getting tenure and terrorism. That is a stretch, guys.

On your fourth bullet: I agree that a "one-state solution" would be the end of a Jewish State, but there are many other non-Islamist groups and analysts that advocate a "one-state solution" (not much of a solution in my mind, I am more of a two-stater myself). This is a pretty clumsy "fact check": One State Solution = Rauf = PIJ? Come on. I have seen much better analysis on this site.

Fifth bullet: No, he is not making any justifications or proposing equivalency, just observing what every single terrorism scholar and analyst has said and written: that terrorism has political goals.

If you guys are willing to let this comment through, I'll be impressed. I don't see too much disagreement in the comments sections of your articles (many of which I do enjoy). Hoping to be impressed...

Note: IPT will moderate reader comments. We reserve the right to edit or remove any comment we determine to be inappropriate. This includes, but is not limited to, comments that include swearing, name calling, or offensive language involving race, religion or ethnicity. All comments must include an email address for verification.