Apr 14, 2006 9:24 am


I am posting this because the subject refuses to die and the ugly debate continues on other HNN blogs focusing on the disingenuous claim that the old dual loyalty charge is anything but pure, unadulterated old fashioned anti-Semitism.

If you do not believe me ask yourselves whether you have read a parallel debate charging Irish Americans with dual loyalty for supporting not only Ireland but the IRA. Do note that IRA members trained terror groups like the FARC and Hizbullah.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Irfan Khawaja - 8/4/2006

Actually, there are parallel debates about both Irish American contributions to the IRA and Indian American contributions to the BJP. But more obviously than either of those, there is an ongoing debate about Muslim American dual loyalties with respect to to terrorism!

Is Daniel Pipes an anti-Muslim bigot for raising the possibility that Muslims might have dual loyalties? A good part of his career has been based on asking that question.

The topic of Muslim Americans' dual loyalties has been a constant since 9/11. One would have to have been willfully blind to have missed it, and in light of it, one would have to espouse an obvious double standard to think that dual loyalty is a topic that is only discussed with respect to Jews. (Has there been a recent debate about whether Jews should be put in internment camps--as there has in the case of Muslims?)

Muslims aside, one look at the recent debate on Hispanic immigration should be enough to prove the preceding point: the "dual loyalty" issue arises with respect to groups besides the Jews.

Irfan Khawaja - 4/14/2006

I didn't say that Pipes advocates internment. I said there was a debate on that subject. What I asked was whether Pipes was a bigot for raising questions about Muslim dual loyalties. I don't dispute that there is an attempt to block this discussion. What I pointed out is that there is such a discussion--which contradicts your claim that there are no such discussions except when it comes to Jews.

I wonder if it occurs to you that you are in the same position as those elites trying to block discussion in the Muslim case. When they are criticized, they reach for the "Islamophobia" card. In the W-M case, their critics have reached for the anti-Semitism card. It's the same bluff.

- 4/14/2006

"After all, no Jewish religious authority has ever declared the US, [sic] the enemy of Judaism."
There's probably a good reason for that. Now, let's see. What could it be?

Judith Apter Klinghoffer - 4/13/2006

Dan Pipes does not advocate internment for Muslims and since 9/11 there has been a concerted effort by the government and the American elites to block any discussion or debate which may raise the issue of Muslim dual loyalty. It should be noted that since Islamist insist that true Muslims must view the US as their enemy, the question has an immediacy which Jewish dual loyalty does not posses. After all, no Jewish religious authority has ever declared the US, the enemy of Judaism.
Actually, the place where the issue of Muslim dual loyalty, in this case Shia dual loyalty is getting raised is in the Gulf region. It is raised about the Shia population first by Mubarak and since by others.
Yes. I believe that is an extremely dangerous development and I believe you'd agree with me.
W-M raised the issue under the auspices of one of America's premier universities and just today I heard it raised by Collin Powell's former chief of staff. More on this on my blog. It should be noted that the charge of dual loyalty is a classic antisemitic charge which predated the founding of Israel, Likud or the Dreaded Neo-Cons. It led directly not to internment camps but to death camps. No one in their right mind contemplates murdering over a million muslims but many have contemplated murdering a mere 15 million and it has become quite acceptable to advocate the annihilation of the single Jewish state, the place where the children of the death camp survivors show their defiance by making the dessert bloom and inventing instant messaging.