Rambling Tirade

Submitted by Sheldon Tyber (United States), Feb 25, 2009 at 12:30

Dear Mr. Pipes,

I am a long-time reader and fan. This despite some clear differences of opinion, so kudos to you.

However, this article is absent your usual sharp focus. E.G. Are you attacking Bridges TV, or the "canard that Muslims in the US suffer from bias and are victimized", or Muzzamil Hassan himself? After that saber rattling, you begin the only interesting portion of the article when you discuss the disctinctions between honour killing vs. domestic violence, and in particular, whether Aasiya Hassan's killing is an example of honour killing.

Aasiya Hassan's killing is truly tragic. But I do not want it to be exploited for political advantage. If you question Bridges TV, please go ahead. But do so on ITS merits (or lack). If all you can say is that it is endorsed by Islamists (guilt by association) or that it is commercially unviable (totally irrelevant to all but its investors), then you haven't made much of an argument. Either way, it has no connection to the murder.

The article would have been much stronger if you had restricted its scope to the issue of honour killings.

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".

Daniel Pipes replies:

I think it pretty clear that my subject is neither Muzzammil Hassan nor honor killing nor the status of Muslims in the United States but the four lies on which Bridges TV was founded. That is the title of the piece and its structure.

It surprises me that I should need to explain this.