Running chronology of the Roxbury mosque saga
By adamg - Sat, 07/22/2006 - 8:22am.
Daniel Pipes has been chronicling the Roxbury Mosque controversy for three years.
- Send to a friend |
| 
| 
Recent comments
Boston Blogs Network
- UConn football has arrived …
- Senate ad watch -- the latest from Coakley and Capuano
- Highlights from "Great Web Videos Made Easy" Video Workshop
- Saturday’s Linkage
- Sound Artists and DJ's
- Coincidence? I think not.
- Two hit-and-run drivers, two injured boys
- Free Agent Fiascos
- Friday Links Variety Show (November 20, 2009)
- ‘Merely revealed that scientists were human’
Pipes is not a good source
Daniel Pipes is NOT an objective source here, and his writing reflects it. Then there are the comments on the blog, which refer to the mosque as part of an effort to infiltrate and destroy Western society.
I have problems with statements by people linked to the mosque, like Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Some of these are patently anti-Semitic, which, as a Jew, I firmly condemn. But I also have problems with the efforts of those like the David Project to stop Boston's biggest Muslim congregation from building an adequate-sized house of worship. I hear Pipes expressing no concern over this.
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
That's pretty much my response to anyone when the subject of this mosque comes up.
On one side, you've got misguided folks like Daniel Pipes and the misnamed 'Citizens for Peace and Tolerance', throwing around a lot of guilt-by-association innuendo.
On the other, you have the Islamic Society acting like Scientologists, suing their opponents and the news media in an attempt to chill public discussion.
Hard to take a side when both parties are acting like jerks.
Chill public discussion?
I don't think that it's accurate to say that the ISB is trying to chill public discussion, Ron. They sued specific media outlets--the Herald and Fox News--for multiple distorted stories (the Herald and Fox distorting things--what a shocker!). When the discovery process showed that the David Project and their front group, Citizens for Peace and Tolerance, had fed many of these stories to Fox and the Herald, they expanded the lawsuit to them, too. Many other groups have raised questions about the ISB and haven't been sued, so I find it hard to accept that this is about silencing the ISB's critics.
And as even the PIpes chronology states, judges have found that thate case against the David Project is strong enough to go forward. Unless you believe that judges tend to be biased toward Muslims lately, that suggests that the case has some legal merit.
Libel suits have a chilling effect
I don't believe in suing news media because they publish inaccurate stories. Anyone who files such a lawsuit loses my respect.
Boston has two vigorously competing dailies, plus numerous weeklies and other TV stations. If one of them puts you in a bad light, then curry favor with one of their competitors and persuade them to produce a more favorable story.
Let's get a few facts
Let's get a few facts accurate here fist. It's a defamation suit, not a libel suit. A minor point, but different laws. The suit also alleges violations of civil rights and conspiracy to prevent the mosque from being built. And it's not just against media outlets.
If you truly oppose any libel suits against news media, have you spoken out against such cases on other occasions too? What were your thoughts on Judge Ernest Murphy's libel case against the Herald?
I'd also point out that the defendants in the case have already tried to get it thrown out under anti-SLAPPlaws (SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, and anti-SLAPP rules exist precisely to prevent baseless litigation from chilling public debate or criticism). The judge ruled against those petitions.
People who have been defamed or otherwise subjected to what they consider illegal behavior have the right to seek redress in the courts. I don't think that the ISB should be criticized for seeking that redress.
The tactics of the
The tactics of the anti-ISBCC brigade seems to be calling everyone affiliated with ISBCC "terrorists" and "anti-Semites," and then letting people run with that. The people slandered by these folks have seen their businesses dry up, have been threatened, and so forth. Arab Muslims can respond, to the Globe, or to anyone else, "I'm not a terrorist! I don't hate Jewish people!" as much as they want, but the bottom line is that once a Muslim has those accusations lobbed at him, it's very, very hard to wash off. The truth does not matter.
In the end, what the good people of Boston need to know is that this Muslim community is not going anywhere. We are Americans, we're Muslims, we're Bostonians, and we are going to worship God according to our understanding in this city, which is a right we're guaranteed by our Constitution. Even if ISBCC were shut down, which I don't think is going to happen, we will still gather to pray and simply exist as Muslims in storefronts, in our existing mosques, and in all of the buildings we'll be building and renting in the years to come as our community continues to grow and put down roots here. People need to get used to it. We're not going anywhere.