Important observations from Samia Barakat, a Beirut-based Jihadism analyst:
In the September 2006 issue of the Atlantic Monthly, an article authored by ex New York Times Corespondent Amy Waldman, was published under the title “Islam on Trial.” In her “report” about several Terrorism trials in the United States, Waldman, a long time sympathizer of the Jihadists, claim Islam is on trial in American courts. She said she conducted interviews with experts and reviewed the proceedings of the trials thoroughly, and declared in her findings that the trials are about theology and religion by people who do not understand them. Her central allegation was that Salafism and Jihadism are just religious concepts and that the U.S Government and its prosecutors are after people (even if radicals and caught preparing for Terror) only because of the faith they believe in. Waldman’s dangerous and false stipulations not only are baseless but shows a hidden agenda of covering up for the Jihadists.
Indeed, Waldman, who spent a long time as a corespondent for the New York Times in India has, according to Indian analysts, cultivated a “hatred for Hindus and a strong sympathy for the Islamists.” According to readers and analysts, the now national corespondent for the Atlantic Monthly, has been “all over the place to promote the image of Jihadists, particularly in Great Britain.” It was learned recently that Waldman was granted a position at a New York based institution to write on Britain’s Islamists and criticize those who claim the latter are extremists.
In her Atlantic Monthly article, which she attempted to portray as balanced, fair and researched, Waldman aimed at achieving the following goals while discussing the Detroit Terror trial of 2002-2003:
1. Asserting that the US Government, intentionally is attempting to put the Islamic religion on trial through Terrorism trials.
2. Describing one of the experts of the US Government, Professor Khaled Abou el Fadl, as unfit to perform his duties and unaware of the facts and of the developments that followed the trial.
3. Criticizing another expert of the US Government, Professor Walid Phares, as “not knowledgeable” of Islam.
4. Promoting the expert of the defense (of the sentenced Terrorists afterward), Professor Bernard Haykel, as the “only” expert on Salafism in the courtroom. Haykel, according to sources who follow his research activities, is a leading apologist for the Jihadfi Salafists and a close ally of the Saudi embassy in Washington.
After reading the article, experts came to the conclusion that Amy Waldman wrote the article in the framework of a greater effort by Wahabi and Salafi propaganda to counter the rising awareness among Americans and others, about the threat posed by Jihadism, particularly in US and European Courts. Waldman’s record of Jihadi sympathizer around the world and particularly as a “Hinduphobe,” (hater of Hindus) being established, her article is now being reviewed by analysts to determine the deeper background. The Atlantic Monthly being a serious publication, concerns are that Jihadi sympathizers have been able to penetrate the publication as they have done with other media in the West.
A more comprehensive analysis of Waldman’s Jihad in the Atlantic Monthly will be released on December 10.