Just as dhimmitude is a consequence of jihad, so Dhimmi Watch is a subsidiary of Jihad Watch. Dhimmitude is everywhere in the treatment of Islam by Western academics and media analysts.
A recent example: The estimable Charles at Little Green Footballs is highlighting a PBS information site on Islam. Like so many of these professedly neutral information sheets, this one is shot through with distortions, whitewashes, and inaccuracies -- typical of the dhimmi mentality of saying nothing to offend the master.
"Jews and Christians are specifically protected in the Quran as Peoples of the Book . . ."
Nary a word here, of course, of the subservience and humiliation that is codified in all schools of Islamic law as the price of this "protection."
"Islam was a major reform for women and granted them new rights, including the right to agree to their marriage partner, the right to education, and a guaranteed share of family inheritance."
Nothing here about, say, Sura 4:34: ". . . good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them" -- or the fact the wife-beating is pandemic in the Muslim world.
"Muslim societies through history have tended to be more tolerant of religious minorities -- especially Jews and Christians -- than the West has."
This is a great historical myth. Yes, the West had great periods of intolerance, but the tolerance of dhimmis in Muslim societies was the tolerance of a superior for an inferior. If the dhimmi didn't stay in his subservient place, he would be liable to be killed. Skeptics may refer to the books of Bat Ye'or for abundant historical corroboration of this.
"Some groups in the Middle East today disagree with U.S. foreign policies, but this is a political rather than a purely religious issue."
Actually it has everything to do with religion -- with Islamic radicals who consider that no government is legitimate unless it obeys Islamic law.
"Most Muslims condemn violence as heartily as any non-Muslim and resent being presumed violent on the basis of a shared religion or the rhetoric of a particular group. Muslims often ask, 'Did Timothy McVeigh's bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City mean all Christians are terrorists?'"
This is specious on a variety of levels. One is that if McVeigh was a Christian at all, his Christianity played no part in his avowed motives for his mass murder. Islam is unique among world religions in having a developed doctrine, tradition, theology, and legal superstructure mandating warfare against non-Muslims. This does not mean that all Muslims are violent or terrorist, but it is a key justification used by radical Muslims to recruit and motivate terrorists. Until there is a large-scale renunciation of violent jihad and dhimmitude by Muslims, religious violence will continue. It is simply wishful thinking, or worse, to deny this.
"News stories about 'Islamic terrorism' often imply that Islam upholds the idea of jihad as a holy war fought against nonbelievers. For most Muslims, the most important meaning of 'jihad' is intensely personal; it is the internal struggle to be a moral person. 'Jihad' can also refer to the struggle for social justice or the defense of the Islamic community against outside attack. The Quran permits war to defend and expand the Islamic community, but it sets strict limits: No one should be forced to convert; and in battle, the lives and livelihood of noncombatants must be protected."
Look at that again. "The Quran permits war to defend and expand the Islamic community." There it is, friends, although so blandly stated and hedged that most readers will probably miss it. But that's it: no other religion permits war to expand its community!
"Since before the Crusades, European visitors to the Middle East have often exaggerated the differences between themselves and local Middle Eastern communities, concentrating on the 'exotic' rather than the similarities. The concept of 'Orient' that was invented by Europeans was based on these fanciful perceptions rather than on facts. The insistence on creating and upholding negative stereotypes worked to justify wars, colonial expansion, and the exploitation of native peoples and resources. This trend, called Orientalism, continues today."
Ah, the ghost of Edward Said is at work. I didn't realize it in 2001: what brought down the Twin Towers? Stereotyping.