Why would Muslims now, in the year 2010, decide that Tarek Fatah, who lives in Canada, and wishes to express or represent what appears to be his own idiosyncratic interpretation of Islam, one which appears far less objectionable, and far more benign, than the one that all the Western scholars of Islam (not the espositos and armstrongs, but the real scholars,the ones who wrote before the Age of Inhibition set in), should be listened to by them? Is Tarek Fatah more to be listened to than the Ayatollah Khomeini, than the Sheikh Al-Azhar, then all the Muslim scholars of Islam?
And why should we, in the Western world, despite that trustworthy outward mien of his, not begin to be suspicious of Tarek Fatah when he writes as hysterically as he did write -- see Joanne Hill's rebuttal above -- about Wafa Sultan, a no-holds-barred anguished and noble woman, and a truth-teller -- and when now he is trying to convince us all that Aisha was "at least 14" and perhaps as old as "19 or 21." We are not fools...Well, some of us are not fools. Alas, that designation may not include Daniel Pipes and (Canadian Friends of Simon Wiesenthal chief) Avi Benlolo.