Look behind the curtain

Submitted by zane (United States), Sep 18, 2011 at 16:36

One of the things that most bother me about the "media" is the use of anonymous sources. If a source is willing to open their mouths, they should also be willing to put their name on their claims.

Geller's articles were hysterical. And way beyond all rational thinking. She has turned into a "If the Nazis were German, all Germans were Nazis" person, although we know that not ALL Germans were Nazis and more than a few, in fact, helped Jews escape Nazi Germany.

Had you bothered to really read Geller's article where she claims to be posting the curriculum, you should have realized that what she wrote was NOT the actual curriculum, but HER OPINION of what the curriculum contained. I can promise you, the actual curriculum did not link to Robert Spencer's column, but that is what she used.

Geller also made the baseless claim that the curriculum had been removed by Perry's "camp." She jumped the shark on that one since she has absolutely no proof of that. It is irresponsible to make claims you can neither prove nor back up. That is what Geller did. But being called down on her irresponsibility, Geller then went on to attack other bloggers that disagreed with her premise that Perry is pro-Sha'ria, or that not only the pro-Israel, pro-Jewish Commentary Magazine felt her accusations were over the top, but that the Center for Security Policy also disagreed with her. Since the Center for Security Policy wrote the book on Sha'ria in the U.S. (literally), I will take their opinion over a woman who sees Islamists hiding under her bed.

Geller has even gone so far as to accuse Dr. Zudhi Jasser, who understands that Islam must go through a reformation, much as Christianity did, in order to live peacefully in this world, as a "stealth" jihadist. She attacks anyone who does not agree with her, and Spencer ignored his own words, spoken just a year ago, to support her.

One salient point; when Geller first posted her article about Perry on her own website (prior to the AT entry) at the end of the entry, she urged Sarah Palin to get into the presidential race. Could it be that Geller's intent was not to shine light on Perry's support of Sha'ria (which is non-existant) but to slander the very candidate that would prove a real threat to Geller's chosen candidate should Palin decide to run? Perhaps it is not Perry's curtain we should be pulling aside, but Gellers.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".