Commentary Magazine


Contentions

MPAC Reacts To The RNC

Apparently, speaking factually about the threats posed to America by Islamic terrorism is “false” and “bolster[s] the credibility of would-be terrorists,” according to a news release issued by the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) in response to speeches presented at the Republican National Convention by Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani:

The Muslim Public Affairs Council expressed disapproval today over repeated comments made at the Republican National Convention last night by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

Romney and Giuliani’s remarks on Islam served to equate Islam with terrorism. Making false statements only serves to increase the already high rates of violence and bigotry against Muslim Americans. Our nation faces a very real threat, but bolstering the credibility of would-be terrorists by associating them with any religion is counterproductive to our national security interests.

Riding the ebbing wave of post-9/11 fear mongering in an election season is nothing new. But our presidential candidates must ask themselves whether playing off the ignorance of a few voters worth jeopardizing the American values of pluralism and constitutional democracy?

Never mind that these two speakers aren’t still presidential candidates. Why is it that MPAC must take the extreme position of ignoring a very real threat to America and to the rest of the free world? In this same release, MPAC pulls the objectionable quotations:

“John McCain hit the nail on the head: radical violent Islam is evil, and he will defeat it!”–Mitt Romney

“For four days in Denver, the Democrats were afraid to use the words ‘Islamic terrorism.’ I imagine they believe it is politically incorrect to say it. I think they believe it will insult someone. Please, tell me, who are they insulting, if they say ‘Islamic terrorism?’ They are insulting terrorists.”–Rudy Giuliani

So, is MPAC suggesting that “radical violent Islam” is not evil? Or, to follow Giuliani’s thinking, is MPAC standing up for terrorists? If MPAC aims to be a serious organization which strives for the harmonious side-by-side living of persons with different religions, it must condemn in the strongest terms possible those who support terror by invoking Islam. Otherwise, it seems, one can only infer that MPAC supports the opposite–that terror in the name of Islam is permissible.


Join the discussion…

Are you a subscriber? Log in to comment »

Not a subscriber? Join the discussion today, subscribe to Commentary »





Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.