Mogahed is problematic herself. Tarek Fatah, the Canadian Muslim reformer, identifies Mogahed as one of the problematic Obama appointees in the U.S. government. In 2009, Obama nominated Mogahed to sit on his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. According to DiscovertheNetworks.org, she co-authored the book “Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think” with the dhimmi apologist Esposito. Here, though, is where much of the controversy surrounding her stems from:
In early October 2009, Mogahed was interviewed on a British television program hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir party, which seeks to facilitate the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of a worldwide Islamic state governed by Sharia law. Bsis and another guest (also a member of Hizb ut Tahrir) stated that Sharia should be “the source of legislation” for all nations in the world; they also repeatedly condemned the “man-made law” and the “lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism” that existed in Western societies. Mogahed did not dispute any of their assertions.
Critics were upset over Mogahed’s refusal to take a stand against these claims. But, even more bizarre was her discussion during the interview of the West’s take on Sharia law (and her defense of it). DiscovertheNetworks.org notes:
Instead, Mogahed stated that the Western view of Sharia was “oversimplified,“ and that the majority of Muslim women around the world associate Islamic Law with ”gender justice.“ ”I think the reason so many women support Sharia is because they have a very different understanding of Sharia than the common perception in Western media,” she said.
Who Speaks for Islam—What Do a Billion Muslims Really Think?
Levantine Cultural Center and OneNation present an evening with Dalia Mogahed, co-author of the Gallup book "Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think," and Obama appointee on Muslim affairs. She is joined by "24" showrunner/writer Howard Gordon in a conversation moderated by KPFK radio host Dr. Nile El Wardani.
In early 2010, Tablet Magazine called Mogahed, “The most important person shaping the Obama Administration’s Middle East message.” In the article, concern over her potential inability to distinguish between radicals and moderates is cited. The Investigative Project on Journalism has documented Mogahed's comments as well, claiming that she has been a staunch defender of both the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).
She has claimed that it would not be fair be unfair to see these groups become “disenfranchised” because of “misinformation” that is perpetuated. She has been quoted claiming that “there is a concerted effort to silence, you know, institution building among Muslims. And the way to do it is [to] malign these groups. And it’s kind of a witch hunt.”
These individuals appear sympathetic to the causes and goals that Islamism embraces. Still, Fatah’s warning to Canadians and recent history do expose the potential for unsettling connections within the Obama regime. Earlier this year, Robert Spencer reiterated the Obama
administration’s connections with the Muslim Brotherhood:
Obama first reached out to the Brotherhood when he chose the leader of a Muslim Brotherhood-linked group that had been named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case to give a prayer during his inauguration ceremonies. Ingrid Mattson, then-president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), offered this prayer at the National Cathedral on Obama’s Inauguration Day—despite the fact that the ISNA has admitted its ties to the Brotherhood…
Obama didn’t ask Mattson to explain the ISNA’s links to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. On the contrary: He sent his senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, to be the keynote speaker at the ISNA’s national convention in 2009.
This appointee and the highly placed nature their appointments are troubling according to Fatah.
Mogahed's poll asked questions Muslims are sure to understand what they need to give as the answer to present the best front possible. But they don't get to the heart of the matter on whether they want Shariah in the United States ultimately. That's not to say they would get honest answers if they did ask those questions but its a start.
The motivation for most Muslims answering the call to Islamism is what they believe. They engage in jihad based on their ideology, their belief system. Because the center behind this poll can't face that ideology or belief system, they swallow this line that not only has it never been proven, but repeatedly disproven that poverty causes terrorism. The study trumpets the relative affluence of the Muslim community in America as if it tells us something about terrorism when it actually tells us exactly nothing. In any case, they're not asking the right questions to start with. They're asking questions that are tailored to give the picture of a Muslim community that is much more moderate than it really is.
Further, the "poll" tells the government of the U.S. it should "expand its report on anti-Semitism to include Islamophobia," and "track reports of discrimination against U.S. Muslims in a similar manner to reports of discrimination based on anti-Semitism."
The Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice also should "raise awareness, particularly within Muslim-American communities, of the procedures required to file a complaint," and "local and state police as well as the FBI should launch a national strategy to address the challenges in community-law enforcement relations."
The "recommendations" from the "poll" also note that the government should "engage and leverage Muslim Americans' expertise in the nation's foreign policy."
"As the most culturally diverse religious community in America, significant minorities of the Muslim-American community may not only speak multiple languages but may have also traveled, worked, and conducted research and business globally," the poll instructs. "Such experiences and expertise should be more widely drawn upon in forming global policy."
Counter-terrorism expert Robert Spencer has weighed in on the report:
Posts
