It’s in “How the ‘ground zero mosque’ fear mongering began,” by Justin Elliott in Salon, August 16 (thanks to all who sent this in):
To a remarkable extent, a Salon review of the origins of the story found, the controversy was kicked up and driven by Pamela Geller, a right-wing, viciously anti-Muslim, conspiracy-mongering blogger, whose sinister portrayal of the project was embraced by Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post.
While I agree that my FDI/SIOA colleague Pamela Geller has been ably leading the charge nationally on this issue (as Daisy Khan herself has noted), Justin Elliott is kidding himself, and Salon readers, if he thinks the 70% of the American people who oppose an lslamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero are doing so because they have been manipulated by Pamela Geller or anyone else. The American people know that this is not a matter of religious freedom, but an insult to the memories of those who were murdered at Ground Zero on 9/11, and an Islamic supremacist manifestation of the Islamic tendency to build triumphal mosques on the cherished sites of conquered peoples.
Pamela comprehensively rebuts Elliott’s smears here. And I’d just like to add one thing. Elliott says:
May 7, 2010: Geller’s group, Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), launches “Campaign Offensive: Stop the 911 Mosque!” (SIOA ‘s associate director is Robert Spencer, who makes his living writing and speaking about the evils of Islam.)
I write and speak about the Islamic jihad doctrine, which mandates that Muslims wage war against non-Muslims and subjugate them as inferiors under the rule of Islamic law. I write and speak about the institutionalized mistreatment of women as mandated by Islamic law. I write and speak about how Islamic law calls for the murder of apostates from Islam. I write and speak about all the ways in which Islamic law contradicts principles of human rights that are otherwise universally accepted.
Which of these evils does Justin Elliott support? Or is it all of them?