Based on this “open-minded” op-ed, apparently “liberal” thinkers are no longer content with separating Islam from “radical” Islam: now, we are told, radical Islam itself is “not monolithic,” and that there are perhaps some nuanced forms of “radical Islam” that are infidel-friendly. More on this story. “Extremist Movie Influences Election,” by Tim Fernholz, for the American Prospect, September 24:
Obsession, a controversial movie about terrorism funded by a right-wing organization, is now being distributed in swing-states to perhaps millions of voters. Muslim groups are calling for an investigation to determine if this is being done to influence the election. Short answer: It probably is.[…]
The film, such that I’ve seen, combines slow-mo footage of terrorist attacks and chanting terrorists with terrible analysis.
For instance, it conflates every vaguely related radical Islamist terrorist attack into one unitary war — suggesting, for instance, the Beslan massacre in Russia was somehow connected to 9/11. And I thought we’d gotten past the idiotic monolithic theory of terrorism.[…]
Here’s what we need to know: Radical Islam is not monolithic. It is not a clear and existential threat to the future of the United States of America…