An article in the New Republic highlights the sentiments of one Martin Peretz an American publisher and Harvard University lecturer described by Source Watch as a "long-time advocate for Israel and Zionism" who discusses a poll in the Times asking opinions regarding Muslims in America describing them as 'shrewdly and sensitively knowing'
The newspaper has done a poll of New York City residents which found that 33% of them thought Muslim-American "more sympathetic to terrorists" than other citizens. Frankly, I don't trust opinion surveys on matters like this. But I'd guess that if respondents were truly honest with the pollsters and with themselves the percentage would be considerably higher. Which, of course, means that the Times could go into even higher dudgeon than it actually has.
Peretz goes ahead questioning the Times accuracy regarding the report and data concerning the Americans opinion on American Muslims
Where does the Times get reliable data on the feelings of American Muslims (or, for that matter, Arab Americans) about terrorists and terrorism? Forgive me: I don't think such data even exists...and just maybe that's a consequence of the pollsters' fear that gauging these sentiments would be very desolating, indeed.
He continues stressing that such a poll is marginalized in a city which somewhat demonstrates tolerance referring with some hint of lament that the country's residents do not participate in anti-Muslim Rallies like people do in Europe
In fact, there has not been a single rally or demonstration in America aimed at Muslim or Arab interests or their commitments to foreign governments and, more likely, to foreign insurgencies and, yes, quite alien philosophies. I suggest that this is largely the case because Americans are so fearful of being accused of bias; however the injustice of the charge might be.
This is certainly not the situation in Britain and France, Germany and Denmark, Holland and Spain where a demo against the Arabs or the Pakis or the Algerians or the Moroccans or the Turks and Muslims more generally is a regular feature of the political landscape and where parties win parliamentary seats precisely because they campaign with Islamists and Islam as the targets.
The article continues making assumptions and judging Muslims stressing:
Muslims and Arabs do not act in America as they do in the increasingly Islamicized but non-practicing Christian and democratic sovereignties of Europe. Still, I wouldn't close my eyes or our eyes to the increasing number of both naturalized and native-born citizens who enlist in the Islamic terror networks of our time, here and abroad.
Peretz doubts the Muslims loyalty to each other claiming that although he wants to believe that Muslims are traumatized by the unrelieved murders in Islamic lands he sees very little effort comparing the recent bombings in Pakistan by Muslims against Muslims to the Mossad assassination of Hamas' leader Mabhouh
This intense epidemic of slaughter has been going on for nearly a decade and a half...without protest, without anything. And it has been going for decades and centuries before that.
Why do not Muslims raise their voices against these at once planned and random killings all over the Islamic world? This world went into hysteria some months ago when the Mossad took out the Hamas head of its own Murder Inc.
The statement is concluded with a disturbing accusation and doubt of worthiness where he cites
Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims. And among those Muslims led by the Imam Rauf there is hardly one who has raised a fuss about the routine and random bloodshed that defines their brotherhood. So, yes, I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse.