From the Dec 12 – Dec 18, 2002 issue

News

Islamophobes?

Leaked Seattle Times Protest Memo Sparks Overkill Allegations

by Sandeep Kaushik

For adherents of Islam, Friday, December 6, was Eid al-Fitr, an annual holiday celebrating the end of Ramadan, the holy month during which observing Muslims are enjoined from eating or drinking between sunrise and sunset. After a month of self-denial, Eid is a day of socializing and celebration--interspersed with prayer--when members of the community don "their finest clothes, call on friends, exchange gifts and feast," as Seattle Times reporter Janet Tu put it in her story on Thursday, December 5. Tu reported that as they did last year, this year several thousand area Muslims planned to come together for Eid at the Washington State Convention & Trade Center downtown.

But as Tu's story was still warm off the presses, her bosses were preparing for a very different sort of Friday gathering, albeit involving the same group of Muslims. On that Thursday, in a memo to staffers that raised eyebrows and provoked discussions around the newsroom, Times officials warned, "There may be a demonstration... by Muslims who wish to protest the running of a news article last Sunday." They added that the protest was likely to occur around midday Friday in front of the paper's John Street headquarters. The original version of the memo said that the unnamed article in question was critical of Islam; it was quickly retracted, replaced by a slightly modified version, which said the article "included statements critical of the Muslim religion."

The memo also stated, "There is no indication that any violence is planned for this event. However, Seattle Police Department personnel will also be in the area." It added, "We see no need for you to alter your daily routine but please note that all doors to the Fairview building on the north side... will remain shut," and advised staffers to contact security "if you need assistance."

There was no protest outside the Times building on Friday, and the memo, quickly leaked to local Muslim leaders, itself became the focus of controversy.

Asked about the memo, Times spokes-person Kerry Coughlin said it was issued because the Times had received angry phone calls from anonymous readers complaining about a story reprinted from the Washington Post that ran on the front page under the headline, "Bush too easy on Islam, some of his backers say." The callers said they thought the story was offensive and anti-Islamic, and they planned to make their displeasure known by protesting outside the Times on Friday.

The Post story, by White House correspondent Dana Milbank, explained how influential conservatives, many closely affiliated with the Bush administration, strongly disagreed with the president's public stance that Islam is a peaceful religion, instead describing it as intrinsically violent and conducive to terrorism. Their controversial statements were quoted extensively, as were those of the president, and Milbank made clear the concern of Muslim American leaders that these conservatives' views were spreading to the administration, despite a general trend toward greater tolerance on the part of ordinary Americans.

The calls, combined with the large Muslim gathering at the convention center, convinced the Times leadership that it was only prudent to warn staffers about the possible disruption that might ensue, Coughlin said, describing the memo as standard operating procedure. It was written by a member of the security staff, not the paper's senior leadership, she continued.

By Friday afternoon, however, some local Arab and Muslim leaders were castigating its tone and charging the paper with insensitivity and overreaction. Rita Zawaideh, head of the Arab American Community Coalition, said she was initially confused by the memo since she was unaware of any planned protest, but after confirming that none was in the works grew increasingly upset.

"To me, the memo sounded like the Times is very, very scared. They made it sound like they were going to be attacked by a violent group, not that there was going to be a peaceful demonstration. I mean, that's how it reads to me," Zawaideh said. "Since 9/11 they seem scared of a group of Muslims getting together." Moreover, she wondered why the Times did not contact community leaders to confirm the callers' claims before bracing for a nonexistent protest.

Amin Odeh of Voices of Palestine was also unhappy. "I was really shocked and surprised to see their reaction," he said. "Is this how they think of us?" He particularly objected to the references to "locked doors and bringing in the police." He also contended that the Times' actions indicated cultural ignorance; the idea that large numbers of Muslims would drop their Eid celebrations to protest was ludicrous, he asserted.

Coughlin said, and the Seattle Police Department confirms, that there were no officers on hand at the Times building on Friday; a call had been made to the West Precinct, but only to let them know of the possible protest, she said.

Not everyone in the Muslim community was as distressed. Lena Tuffaha, media director for the Seattle chapter of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, said she had not read the memo when contacted Friday, but had heard about the situation from a friend. She said that she regularly talks to the Seattle dailies, and both seem "eager and willing to hear our reactions to their work." She was most concerned that the angry calls that sparked the memo may damage her ability to continue that dialogue.

Meanwhile Milbank, the Post correspondent, expressed surprise at the brouhaha sparked by his story. "Son of a gun," he said, when the situation was explained to him. The author of a much-discussed October 22 story pointing out the president's penchant for repeatedly misstating facts, and known as a reporter who takes a pox-on-the-house-of-power approach in his high-profile job, he emphasized that his intention was not to say Islam was evil, but to say that some who walk unimpeded in the corridors of power feel that way. "It wouldn't surprise me that people would be bothered by what some of these conservatives are saying," he said.

Still, the story, run on an inside page of the Post, "hadn't raised a peep," nor did it cause controversy in Atlanta or even Singapore, where it ran as well, Milbank said.

sandeep@thestranger.com