charles johnson "flipflop watch"

back in late 2007, after charles' vaunted falling out with some specific figures within the anti-muslim blog-o-sphere he cultivated, charles was still raising alarm about the "creeping threat of sharia law" in general and with the organization CAIR in particular. his preferred line of attack was to refer to cair as "unindicted co-conspirators" in a DOJ terror-funding investigation (which, in fairness, they were). CAIR, which bills itself as a "civil rights advocacy" group, understandably would have preferred to have shed that stigma, but charles would have none of it. charles was apparently galled at CAIR's hypocrisy in citing the same article in their defense which they had once attacked as unfair:

CAIR Flip-Flop Watch

In the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas, CAIR is trying to be removed from the list of unindicted co-conspirators by arguing that the “stigma” has caused their membership to decline—and to support their case they cite the very same Washington Times article they originally denounced as “biased” and “false.”

...which makes CAIR not very much unlike charles.

you see, charles has recently featured an item promoting a report written by a guardian journalist which is essentially a categorized listing of the american islamophobic movement.

Exposed: 'Fear Inc.' - The Anti-Muslim Hate Industry

I’m proud to share with you today a report that my friend Wajahat Ali has been working on for more than 6 months... on how just 7 groups have given $43 million over 10 years to a small, inter-connected group of people and organizations responsible for mainstreaming fear, bigotry and hate against Muslims and Islam in America.

...

The Network can be broken into 5 categories:

• The Money Trail – Funders
• Islamophobia Scholars and Experts
• Grassroots Organizations and Religious Right
• The Media Megaphone
• The Political Players

the odd thing about this is that this report appears to be derived from a similar posting at MPACUK from 2008 which listed charles among the lot as one of "The Fringe" who's primary motivation was "racism":

Category 1: The Seed Planters

Examples: Steve Emerson, Daniel Pipes, Bernard Lewis
Usual Profession: Academics
Main Motivation: Zionism

Category 2: The Theological Warriors

Examples: Robert Spencer, Craig Winn, Pat Robertson
Usual Profession: Christian preachers
Main Motivation: Religious bigotry

Category 3: The Media Voices

Examples: Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Fox News, Ann Coulter
Usual Profession: Radio and TV personalities
Main Motivation: Money

Category 4: The Fringe

Examples: LGF, Joe Kaufman, Jewish Task Force
Main Motivation: Racism

Category 5: The Politicians

Examples: George W Bush, John McCain, miscellaneous Republican politicians
Usual Profession: Politicians
Main Motivation: Need to court the anti-Islam vote

charles was aware of the listing, the first such effort by an outsider to quantify the "counter-jihad" movement, and at the time, he had only dismissive and disdainful things to say of it:

UK Muslim Public Affairs Council Making Lists

If you ever find yourself spending valuable time to compile lists of your Zionist enemies and their secret motivations, it’s a sign that you may need a shrink...

the bloggers involved, umar lee, the writer of the original list charles mocked, aziz poonwalla, the featured blogger who's post charles promoted, and wajahat ali, the guardian columnist who compiled the report poonwalla wrote of, each post of one another and comment on one another's blogs, which is not surprising considering that they are each influential within the american muslim blog-o-sphere. but the derivation from the umar lee post to the wajahat ali report is most clear in a comparison of form. the lists again, side-by-side:

• The Seed Planters
• The Theological Warriors
• The Media Voices
  
• The Fringe
• The Politicians

• The Money Trail – Funders
• Islamophobia Scholars and Experts
• Grassroots Organizations and Religious Right
• The Media Megaphone
• The Political Players

my point in noting all of this, of course, is not to portray lee, poonwalla and ali as "conspiring" toward nefarious ends. the point is to discuss charles in light of his, well, his way, and this brings us back to the part where he attacked CAIR for using the same washington post article toward conflicting ends at different times as it suited their narrative about themselves.

you see, charles also would like to be redacted from a list; the one in which he is listed as a "fringe" "racist" - a reputation he worked hard to earn, and has done nothing of worth to dispel.