Talk:Daniel Pipes

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The following was removed from the main page of this article by CMD Staff for further review:

Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum, and a columnist for right-wing newspapers. His father is Richard Pipes. He has been called an Islamophobe and "one of the linchpins of the Islamophobia network." [1] He has made the false claim that President Obama is a former Muslim who "practiced Islam."

He is a frequent media commentator on the main network comment news progams, where he mostly comments on the Middle East and "terrorism". His columns have appeared in the Atlantic Monthly, Commentary Magazine, Foreign Affairs, Harper's, National Review, New Republic, Policy Review, FrontPage, Jerusalem Post and The Weekly Standard. His columns have also appeared in several mainstream newspapers.

Anders Breivek

Anders Breivik, the confessed Norway right-wing terrorist who planted a bomb in Oslo that killed eight people and shot and killed 68 people (mostly teenagers) at a youth camp in July 2011, cited Pipes and the Middle East Forum eighteen times in his 1,500 page anti-Islam manifesto. [1]

Pipes' Islamophobic Projects

Center for American Progress writes in their report on the "Roots of the Islamohobia Network in America:"

"In 2002, Pipes launched Campus Watch to monitor professors and academics that deviate from Pipes’ political ideologies.

This website inspired the creation of David Horowitz’s Discover the Networks, established in 2003 to track the political left, and both sites have subsequently shared content. Pipes’ 2003 book, Militant Islam Reaches America, was one of the earliest to hype the threat of “militant Islam” infiltrating America. He observed that “all immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”

A 2007 Pew Research Center report found just the opposite, concluding that “a comprehensive nationwide survey of American Muslims finds them to be largely assimilated, happy with their lives, and moderate with respect to many of the issues that have divided Muslims and Westerners around the world.”

In 2006, Pipes launched Islamist Watch, which “combats the ideas and institutions of lawful Islamism in the United States and throughout the West.” It then attempted to document the threats. His Middle East Forum published CAIR: Islamist Fooling the Establishment, in which he argues that a stealth movement of “the Wahhabi Lobby” will take over our nation. Without corroborating evidence, Pipes smeared the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, whose sole purpose as an organization is to “challenge the stereotypes of Islam and Muslims” and to “provide an Islamic perspective on issues of importance to the American public.”

Then, in 2007, he created the Legal Project as a subsidiary of the Middle East Forum, in response to a “suit brought by the Islamic Society of Boston against defendants, including Steven Emerson” (the founder and executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, whom we profile later in this chapter), and it now functions as a resource to limit defamation lawsuits brought by other aggrieved Muslim organizations.

Pipes refers to these Muslim American advocacy organizations, such as the Muslim Public Affairs Council—which is “a public service agency that has built a reputation as a consistent and reliable resource for government and media and is trusted by American Muslims as an authentic, experienced voice”—as “Islamists,” and describes their constitutionally protected right of using the legal system for redress as a “threat.”

His Islamophobia took a further turn when in 2008 he recommended increased racial profiling of Muslims and Arabs to cope with this impending exaggerated threat.

Then, in 2009, he relaunched the Legal Project website to function as “a source of information on ‘Islamist lawfare’—that is, attempts by supporters of radical Islam to suppress free discourse on Islam and terrorism by (1) exploiting Western legal systems and traditions and (2) recruiting state actors and international organizations such as the United Nations.”" [1]

Statements by Pipes

Pipes' approach to Middle East policy has been criticized as neo-conservative, orientalist, right-wing Zionist, and Islamophobic.

Favors profiling and internment of Muslims in the United States

For years, it has been my position that the threat of radical Islam implies an imperative to focus security measures on Muslims. If searching for rapists, one looks only at the male population. Similarly, if searching for Islamists (adherents of radical Islam), one looks at the Muslim population. And so, I was encouraged by a just-released Cornell University opinion survey that finds nearly half the U.S. population agreeing with this proposition. Specifically, 44 percent of Americans believe that government authorities should direct special attention toward Muslims living in the United States, either by registering their whereabouts, profiling them, monitoring their mosques or infiltrating their organizations. That's the good news; the bad news is the near-universal disapproval of this realism. Leftist and Islamist organizations have so successfully influenced public opinion that polite society shies away from endorsing a focus on Muslims. In the United States, this intimidation results in large part from a revisionist interpretation of the evacuation, relocation and internment of ethnic Japanese during World War II.
— Daniel Pipes, Why the Japanese internment still matters, Star Telegram, December 30, 2004. Comments on these statements by Juan Cole here

Mutually exclusive outcome of Arab-Israeli conflict

He wrote in Commentary in April 1990:

"There can be either an Israel or a Palestine, but not both. To think that two states can stably and peacefully coexist in the small territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is to be either naïve or duplicitous. If the last seventy years teach anything, it is that there can be only one state west of the Jordan River. Therefore, to those who ask why the Palestinians must be deprived of a state, the answer is simple: grant them one and you set in motion a chain of events that will lead either to its extinction or the extinction of Israel."[2]

War on terrorism

Pipes has called for a war on Islamic extremism, declaring in one post-September 11, 2001 interview, "What we need to do is inspire fear, not affection." Pipes also promotes the support of moderate Muslims against militant islamists. He criticizes organizations such as Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) for failing to distinguish between moderate Muslims and islamists when labelling him as 'islamophobic'.

Pipe's Nomination to the USIP's board

During the August 2003 Congressional recess 2003, President Bush bypassed the Senate and appointed Pipes, over the objections of Democrats and others, to the board of the United States Institute of Peace. The appointment would not be valid until the next Congress was sworn in, in January 2005. [2]

In 2004 Pipes was temporarily appointed by George W. Bush to the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace, but Bush had "failed to take any action to renominate…". The "nomination of Pipes, who has made a career out of identifying and denouncing what he sees as radical Muslim penetration of American institutions, was opposed by senators Edward Kennedy, Tom Harkin and Christopher Dodd, all Democrats; Arab and Muslim groups, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee; and Middle East analysts Judith Kipper of the Center for Strategic and International Studies and William Quandt of the University of Virginia." [3]

Fulbright Scholarship Committee Reserved Funds for Israel Study

Pipes sat on the board of the Fulbright Scholarship committee determining who would obtain scholarships and where. NB: Congress has recently decreed that a portion of the funds would be available for Fulbright scholars to go to Israel and this portion of the funding can't be subsequently be reduced. That is, if Congress decides to reduce the overall level of Fulbright funding, then this will not affect the level of available funding for scholars going to Israel. This portion of the program has been determined to be "non-decreasing".

Education and Career

Pipes' academic background in Islam makes him unique among Islamophobes, many of whom claim expertise in Islam but have no training.

Pipes received his A.B. from Harvard University in history, and his senior thesis was titled A Medieval Islamic Debate: The World Created in Eternity, a study of Al-Ghazali.. He spent nearly two years in Cairo after graduating learning Arabic and studying the Quran. He returned to Harvard in 1973 and graduated with a PHD in medieval Islamic history in 1978. Pipes speaks French, and reads Arabic and German. He spent six years studying abroad, including three years in Egypt, where his activities included writing a book on colloquial Egyptian Arabic published in 1983. He has been awarded honorary doctorates from universities in Switzerland and the United States.

He has taught at the University of Chicago, Harvard University, and the U.S. Naval War College. He has served in various capacities at the US Department of State and US Department of Defense, sits on five editorial boards, has testified before many congressional committees, and has worked on four presidential campaigns.


What others say

Here is some information/comment about Daniel Pipes

1 Daniel Pipes was one of those reviewers who favorably received From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab–Jewish Conflict Over Palestine, a book which was so egregiously wrong that even the Zionist historian Yehoshua Porath had this to say about it:
"I am reluctant to bore the reader and myself with further examples of Mrs. Peters's highly tendentious use—or neglect—of the available source material. ... Everyone familiar with the writing of the extreme nationalists ... would immediately recognize the tired and discredited arguments in Mrs. Peters's book. I had mistakenly thought them long forgotten. It is a pity that they have been given new life.
("Mrs. Peters's Palestine", New York Review of Books, January 16, 1986).
See Porath's review in the New York Review of Books and the subsequent correspondence between Porath and Pipes which appeared in the same journal.
2 Here is an extract from an article by Joel Beinin on attempts to silence criticism of Israel in US universities:
"Another effort to police dissent is focused on those who teach Middle East studies on college campuses. Middle East Forum, a think tank run by Daniel Pipes and supportive of the Israeli right wing, has established a Campus Watch website. After failing in his own pursuit of an academic career, Pipes has evidently decided to take revenge on the scholarly community that rejected him. ... Campus Watch notes that "Middle East studies in the United States has become the preserve of Middle Eastern Arabs, who have brought their views with them. Membership in the Middle East Studies Association (MESA), the main scholarly association, is now 50 percent of Middle Eastern origin." Some Americans have foolishly believed that all U.S. citizens have equal rights regardless of their country of origin and that pointing to peoples' country of origin to discredit them is a form of racism. This too, is outmoded thinking according to Campus Watch. But imagine the uproar that would be created by the suggestion that because Daniel Pipes is Jewish he may be more loyal to Israel than to the United States."
(Joel Beinin, "Who's watching the watchers?", History News Network, September 30, 2002).
3 Here is an extract from another article by Joel Beinin on attempts by those behind the magazine to incite hatred of Arabs and Muslims:
Martin Kramer also edits Middle East Quarterly, the house organ of the Middle East Forum, the neo-conservative think tank directed by Daniel Pipes. Pipes has a long record of attempting to incite Americans against Arabs and Muslims. In 1990 he wrote:
'Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene. All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most'.
One recent project of the Middle East Forum is Campus-Watch, a website designed to police dissent on university campuses. Its aim was to 'monitor and gather information on professors who fan the flames of disinformation, incitement, and ignorance.'
(Le Monde Diplomatique, July 2003, page 7 of English edition)
4 Here is what Robert Fisk had to say:
Daniel Pipes and Martin Kramer of the Middle East Forum now run a website in the United States to denounce academics who are deemed to have shown "hatred of Israel". One of the eight professors already on this contemptible McCarthyite list -- it is grotesquely called "Campus Watch" -- committed the unpardonable sin of signing a petition in support of the Palestinian scholar Edward Said. Pipes wants students to inform on professors who are guilty of "campus anti-Semitism".
(Robert Fisk, "How to shut up your critics", The Independent, October 21, 2002).
5 Suzanne Goldenberg writes:
As a frequent commentator, he (Daniel Pipes) has warned that America's Muslims are the enemy within and called for unrestricted racial profiling and monitoring of Muslims in the military.
From his own think tank in Philadelphia, he has also clashed with fellow scholars, who say his Campus Watch website has initiated a witch-hunt against those he views as critics of Israel or lacking in patriotic zeal.
Within the community of Middle East scholars, he is regarded as extreme. He opposes the "road map" for the Middle East, as he opposed the Oslo peace accords, and objected to efforts to reform the Palestinian Authority.[4]
6 Juan Cole comments:
"Yes, I'm aware that Daniel Pipes of the so-called Middle East Forum sent some puppy out to slime me over at David Horowitz's Frontpagerag. So this is the way it goes with the Likudniks. First they harass you and try to have you spied on. Then they threaten, bully and try to intimidate you. And if that fails and you show some spine, then they simply lie about you. (In this case the lies are produced by quoting half a passage, or denuding it of its context, or adopting a tone of pained indignation when quoting a perfectly obvious observation).
The thing that most pains me in all this is the use of the word "antisemite." Pipes already had to settle one lawsuit, by Douglas Card, for throwing the word around about him irresponsibly.
Israel is not being helped by extremists like Pipes and his associates. It is being harmed, and its very survival is being placed in doubt by aggressive annexationist policies, and by brutal murders and repression, which Pipes and his associates support to the hilt." [5]
7 Paul Campos comments on Pipes' evaluation of the "internment option":
Now Daniel Pipes, who has claimed that American Muslims are uniquely dangerous because of their potential for disloyalty (a typical quote: "The Muslim population in this country is not like any other group, for it includes within it a substantial body of people… who share with the suicide hijackers a hatred of the United States.") is taking advantage of this climate to suggest that "bothersome or offensive measures" such as internment camps may be the price "we" have to pay for security.
This is a dangerous argument. After all, none of the 9/11 hijackers were American - unlike, for example, Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols. It would be far more efficient to engage in what Malkin calls "threat profiling" by setting up internment camps for members of far-right political groups than for American Muslims. We can only hope that Malkin and Pipes would at least object to the former proposal.
— Paul Campos, A dangerous argument, Rocky Mountain News, January 4, 2005.

Daniel Pipes's publications

Books concerning Islam

  • Militant Islam Reaches America (2002),
  • The Rushdie Affair (1990)
  • In the Path of God (1983),
  • Slave Soldiers and Islam (1981)

Books concerning Syria

  • Syria Beyond the Peace Process (1996)
  • Damascus Courts the West (1991)
  • Greater Syria (1990)

Books concerning other topics

  • The Hidden Hand (1996)
  • The Long Shadow (1989)
  • Miniatures (2003)
  • An Arabist's Guide to Colloquial Egyptian (1983) systematizes the grammar of Arabic as spoken in Egypt.
  • Conspiracy (1997) discusses conspiracy theories in modern European and American politics.
  • Pipes has also edited two collections of essays, Sandstorm (1993) and Friendly Tyrants (1991). He is the joint author of eleven books.


SourceWatch resources

External links

Articles (alpha order)

NOTE: Portions of this article are taken from a corresponding article on Wikipedia.


  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 Wajahat Ali, Eli Clifton, Matthew Duss, Lee Fang, Scott Keyes, and Faiz Shakir, "Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America, Center for American Progress, August 2011.
  2. [1]
  3. Trustees, Global Dialogue Institute, accessed July 29, 2008.
  4. Jerusalem Summit Presidium, Jerusalem Summit, accessed August 4, 2008.
  5. Directors, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, accessed May 14, 2009.
  6. International Advisory Board, Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace, accessed May 13, 2010.
  7. About, Clarion Fund, accessed October 28, 2010.

End Page Excerpt

I have reverted edits by 2007patriot to an earlier version by Sheldon Rampton. There was no basis for the edits and watered down Pipes' Zionism and dismissed criticisms from the left. --Judith Siers-Poisson 21:58, 5 February 2008 (EST)

The recent mass revision was basically for all purposes, a puff piece for Pipes, glossing over his more incediary remarks, as well as basically glossing over his various connections. As such I reverted the article back to PaulR's version. --SiberioS

I have also determined to revert the mass overhaul by Seeing that SiberioS has already reverted, I'll add my reasons in support. Briefly and simply stated, at this stage of article development, individual edits of fact would be welcome. Deleting of content which is obviously partisan or extremely subjective is usually a good thing. Substitution with equally partisan content is not productive. Deletion of factual content is unacceptable. --Maynard 21:08, 4 Jan 2005 (EST)

Again, the material is exactly the same as before, and is again, another puff piece for Pipes. Some of the material COULD be included, though minus certain subjective statements and positions. The person whose doing the updates should DISCUSS what changes are wanted, and after a consensus is reached, they can be added.


His position at the "Peace Institute" wasn't renewed by Bush this year. Links?