Talk:Zuhdi Jasser

Comments

No criticism section? Interesting.173.79.117.29 (talk) 07:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The article owners, members of the Wikipedia Zionist clique, won't allow one.186.212.244.194 (talk) 14:11, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Indeed it is interesting, since there appears to be no shortage of biased criticism of Jasser woven throughout the article already, and a complete absence of neutrality. Looks like substantial bully-editing. EyePhoenix (talk) 21:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zuhdi Jasser. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151122173032/https://www.toledoblade.com/Religion/2015/11/22/Clerics-challenge-ISIS-view-of-Islam.html to https://www.toledoblade.com/Religion/2015/11/22/Clerics-challenge-ISIS-view-of-Islam.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Controversial funding, UNDUE

Sourced entirely to a single MJ piece, which is highly biased againt Jasser and other opponents of political Islam. Controvesy seems to be limited to receiving funds from people/orgs MJ does not like. Orgs/people donating described in worst light possible, a possible BLP issue for some. Whole section is highly POV biased, and is built on guilt by association\donation on rather small donations.Icewhiz (talk) 19:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

I think it's probably worth looking at some of it. MJ is after all a generally reliable source, can we find others as well? I don't agree with your assessment of it by the way, I think that's too simplistic. Also, the latest version has other reliable sources, eg The Nation. The Nation article also says:

" Two years later Rosenwald pumped $10,000 into a similar but markedly more aggressive venture called the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.The group was founded by Zuhdi Jasser, an Arizona physician hailed by Glenn Beck as “the one Muslim we were all searching for after 9/11.” Despite his lack of academic or theological credentials, Jasser provided expert testimony last year before the Congressional hearing on Muslim American radicalization conducted by Representative Peter King of New York, widely criticized as a witch hunt. In early March, after the Associated Press exposed a secret NYPD unit monitoring Muslims throughout New York City and far beyond, Jasser issued a press release declaring, “We thank God every day for the NYPD.” That same day, he surfaced at a pro-NYPD rally in New York with King by his side. Then, only days later, over vehement objections from a coalition of Muslim groups, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell installed Jasser as a member of the Commission on International Religious Freedom".

By the way, where is the evidence that ""Clearly, the majority of the mosques in the United States are led by imams who are Islamists" which is what Jasser claims? Doug Weller talk 13:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

1. Evidence for the assertion itself? It might be possible (depends on how you view ISNA and CAIR for instance - which is a matter of controversy in and of itself (with some viewing them as Islamists and some disagreeing with this assertion)) to back this up - but that would be required if we were using this quote outside of Jasser's article - the quote itself - as Jasser's view - seems to be sourced (Is the Toloedo Blade a RS?).
2. Regarding funding - I think we could possibly work something in - but we should treat funding in a more balanced manner (not cherry picking particular donations and then coatracking against whomever donated).Icewhiz (talk) 13:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Just really wondering if he backed it up at all. It seems an unlikely claim. Doug Weller talk 13:35, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

It's not necessarily impossible to back up - but it depends on what you consider Islamist (which can be viewed very broadly) and how you view ISNA and CAIR - which is a longstanding controversy in and of itself. He's not the only one to make such a claim, for instance see this - [1] "An organ of ISNA, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) has physical control of most mosques in the United States. NAIT finances, owns, and otherwise subsidizes the construction of mosques and is reported to own between 50 and 79 percent of the mosques on the North American continent." (alleged connections to Islamism are also there and elsewhere). This is more of a question of underlying assumptions (that are debatable).Icewhiz (talk) 13:41, 21 November 2017 (UTC)