As covered here at the Spittoon, one of President Obama’s advisors on Muslim affairs, Dalia Mogahed, appeared on a Hizb ut-Tahrir TV show on the Islam Channel. She then sent a letter to the Telegraph which, in a singularly unconvincing manner, tried to justify her appearance on the ‘Muslimah Dilemma’ show.
Now she has written another defence of her appearance, this time for the Huffington Post.
At Gallup, where I direct the Center for Muslim Studies, we do precisely this every day–measure and report what the world is thinking. While what we discover is not what some expect–or want to hear, denying these findings may help some score points with their ideological base, but only weakens our ability to meet our goals as a nation.
[...]
I experienced this first hand a few weeks ago when I spoke by phone on a UK based TV program called Muslimah Dilema. To my unpleasant surprise, I found out on air that I was joined by a member of Hizbul Tahrir (HT), a marginal but controversial group which denounces Western Democracy and calls for the creation of a pan-Islamic state in the Muslim world. The reaction to my reporting of Gallup’s findings on Muslim views of democracy, gender and Shari’a (Islam’s ethical and legal code) by both the HT representative and later the bloggers who’ve parsed my interview showed just how little either side was willing to understand the very people they so prolifically discuss.
The HT representative on the program dismissed or “reinterpreted” findings I presented so as to not challenge the group’s simplistic utopian ideology which holds liberty in contempt as morally decadent. For example, as I regularly report, our research shows that far from denouncing democracy, Muslims around the world say it is among the things they most admire about the West, specifically mentioning “liberty” as a desirable attribute. Around the world, from Morocco to Malaysia, Muslim respondents described their respect for much of what the West holds dear: freedom of the press, the rule of law, and transparency and accountability of government.
As much as HT selectively ignored and exploited these findings to push their propaganda, many conservative pundits who diametrically oppose HT’s vision of the world, did much the same. To them, my crime was that I reported that many Muslim women wanted sharia as a source of legislation. I also explained that Muslim women surveyed by Gallup said they believed they should have access to equal legal rights, free employment, voting without family influence, and even leadership positions in government. This suggests that many Muslim women see Sharia differently from those who use it to deny women rights. For simply stating results of survey research, I stood accused of “endorsing” Taliban-like rule, and downplaying the abuses done in the name of sharia.
Measuring and reporting what people believe does not mean agreement or endorsement. What it does mean is seeing the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. Factoring in this reality makes leaders stronger–their decisions are better informed, their communication is better targeted, and their outcomes are better anticipated. While some may find the facts inconvenient, the rest of us can benefit from our ability to engage in authentic dialogue, even when we disagree.
Read this transcript (pdf) of her appearance or watch the video and judge for yourself whether she was the wronged party as she tries to portray herself. Or will you agree with me and al-Qanaas al-Masri that Dalia messed up by failing to contradict the HT members she appeared alongside when they used her research to support HT’s ideology?
Dalia Mogahed’s foolish appearance on Islam Channel handed Hizb ut-Tahrir a massive propaganda coup – time for a mea culpa, not excuses.
13 Comments
As noted on another thread, http://www.spittoon.org/archives/2968/comment-page-1#comment-13370, Dalia Mogahed has familial connections with the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies and so may be a tad reticent (to put it mildly) about being critical of Islamism.
Are we not going to have a thread about Douglas Murray’s insightful and revealing article??
Since he runs this site according to you why not? Or did you say that was Quilliam, you really need to make your mind up.
According to me?
I thought this place was a joint venture between the two. Have I been misinformed?
Anyway, I think the article should be discussed and who better than the people at Spittoon to analyse it….
Didn’t know you islamist dreamers rely on ‘being informed’. I thought wild guesses and conspiracies were the order of the day. Oh well you live and learn.
lol. What on earth makes you think that I’m an “Islamist” (Are you using the Quilliam Foundation definition or Mr Murray’s)???
Anyway, I suppose you neocon, faux-intellectuals with the collective morality of a medieval usurer don’t mind throwing labels at people without any knowledge or evidence….but hey, I suppose that’s the neocon way.
So, did you like Mr Murray’s article?
I thought it was very well-written. I know you already have comments about it, but please don’t go neocon on me and start making assumptions and wild claims about Mr. Murray or the Quilliam Foundation. Do read the article, I think you will find it most enjoyable.
Here’s the link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/23/quilliam-islamic-fundamentalists-terrorism
tobias
I’m not to sure what a “collective morality” is; but I am sure you are quite aware that in the popular imagination usury was usually associated with Jews in the Middle Ages. So your point in using this particular expression was, exactly?
Indeed, I’m not too sure why you appear to have developed this rather singular obsession with an article by Douglas Murray. I think I will hold back on expressing my views on that article until you care to explain why you are littering threads with references to it.
Spitton cant forgive Dalia Mogahed for defending Islam or for factually surveying and reporting what Muslims actiually belive ratehr than what Spitoon have deluded themselves into believing Muslims believe.
Hence their absurd campaign to demonise her based on the most flimsy of associations (while Spitoon have direct undeniable associations with Muslim haters). Funny they always “talk” of empowering Muslim women while trying to get one of the most prominent sacked and replaced by zionist lackeys and apostates such as themselves wholl read from whatever script the neo-cons give them
How did Dalia defend Islam? She spoke about her opinion survey not Islamic beliefs. She was criticised for not challenging HTs views and their attempts to use her findings for propaganda purposes. BTW Her findings didn’t actually support HTs worldview at all in reality since they found that the vast majority of Muslims believe in Democracy and have differing interpretations of Sharia. So I don’t know what an earth your going on about or are you just reading from the usual brain-dead script.
ursame/Munir/ etc., etc.
I’m sorry, chap; but you are completely off your trolley.
Abu Wanabe Arab
Because she produced an unprecentedly comprehensive survey showing that Muslims reject attacks on civilians as promoted by terrorist extremists like Al Qaida and also the complete seperation of religion and politics as promoted by secular extremists like Spitoon.
You lot probably support surveys from the Muslim haters at CSC !
How is using racist names like “Abu Wanabe Arab” defending Islam ?
I am sorry, have we read the same report as each other?
Your interpretation (especially the second part) entirely misreads the survey’s findings.
Incidentally, it was not her survey.
Just out of interest – what has anyone’s nickname on this site got to do with anything being discussed in this thread?
I don’t understand. How does finding “that Muslims reject attacks on civilians as promoted by terrorist extremists like Al Qaida” amount to “defending Islam” exactly? If anything it is defending Muslims from Fox News-style “All Muslims are terrorists” hysteria.