The Witch Hunt
| by Hassan Baig There exists a foreboding murmur in the wind - young in age but formidable in intention. It was on May 12th that an article curiously titled "President Apostate?" (by Edward N. Luttwak) appeared in The New York Times. The writer, a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, vehemently argued that Sen. Barack Obama would further deteriorate America's relationship with the Muslim world since many on this side of the so-called fence view him as a Muslim-by-birth who shunned the religion of his father and apostized. |
|
On the surface of it, the article achieved little since it diverged rather blatantly from the methodology of sound argumentation via abusing the very fundamental principle of such discourse - the principle that the core of any argument must not be a difficult-to-take-seriously myth.
However Dr. Luttwak's article contained one seemingly objectively-stated subtlety. The subtlety that Sen. Obama is de facto a Muslim.
In the doctor's own words: "As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant."
These are significant words and Dr. Luttwak has let out a glimpse of the neoconservative plan of action for the upcoming election. His matter-of-factly stated take on Sen. Obama's religious affiliation is the more likely raison d’etre of his article, and it is not unimaginable that perhaps he himself finds his ill-considered conclusion of a Muslim world grieving over the American president's perceived apostasy as the reddest of red herrings. The neoconservative propaganda playbook espouses advancing a position through manipulating the politics of incertitude rather than directly arguing for that position; and so Dr. Luttwak’s commentary is as close to conflating Sen. Obama with terrorists as the neocons can get without jeopardizing the bounds of argumentative decency.
Dr. Luttwak and his reflections do not stand alone, but rather signal the onset of a full-blown neocon project. His battle-cry has been enthusiastically endorsed by his peers and the gears of their propaganda machine have started churning – Dr. Shireen K. Burki, professor of political science at the University of Mary Washington, offered a nearly identical echo of his assertions in her article "Barack Obama - Muslim Apostate?" (appearing in The Christian Science Monitor on the 19th of May).
On the whole, voices like those of Dr. Edward N. Luttwak cannot hope to have a far-reaching effect in the presidential campaign - for they mostly preach to the choir and are viewed sceptically by the rest given the inherent conflict of interest neoconservative commentators overtly have with framing a balanced discourse on opposing views. However this does not imply that the neocon doctrine of fear dissemination is ineffective - far from it. For every Dr. Luttwak in the neocon arsenal, there exists a Dr. Burki.
Dr. Burki, whom her article touts studied 'Islam at school' in her childhood in Islamabad (Pakistan), gives the argument a chillingly legitimate feel for the average non-hyphenated American voter due to the perception of neutrality her background undoubtedly accords her reasoning. And over the course of the coming months as more Dr. Burkis raise their voices, the US news media will in all probability resonate with their congregated effort and the witch hunt will achieve full swing.
After eight years of reeling under President George W. Bush and his neoconservative advisors, is America ready to exorcize her own demons? Or will it once again succumb to the spectre of an Islamic terrorism threat borne of a sole terrorism incident and perpetuated by torrential media bombardment? The path Americans choose will be crucial for our collective, inter-twined destiny.
Links:
