NOT about Increased Islamic Influence in European Nations

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I know it's not really only in Saudi Arabia that things like that take place. Hmm . . . I just spent some time searching google, and I did find articles about Saudi Arabia's hate teachings in schools. I haven't found anything yet about other countries, and am still withholding judgment. Still waiting for a more complete picture .

Here is one article from the Boston Globe.

Rousing Muslim bigotry
By Jeff Jacoby, 10/23/2003

FOR MONTHS following the atrocities of 9/11, US officials from President Bush on down repeatedly declared that Islam is a religion of peace and that no American should think ill of Muslims or their religion because of the terrorist attacks. In fact, Bush said, any Americans who would lash out at Muslims or attempt to intimidate them "represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior."

The president had occasion to return to the subject of religious bigotry this week, but it was Muslim hatred -- not hatred of Muslims -- that decency required him to condemn. At a gathering in Thailand, Bush made a point of telling Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad that he had been "wrong and divisive" when he uncorked a toxic rant against the world's Jews last week.

Bush's conversations with foreign leaders are not usually publicized, but this time the White House spokesman related the president's words: "It stands squarely against what I believe in."

Mahathir delivered his diatribe at an Islamic summit meeting on Oct. 16. His theme was the anti-Semite's timeless plaint: The Jews are few but crafty, and the world is in their grip.

"The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy," Mahathir told the leaders of 57 Muslim nations. "They get others to fight and die for them." He lamented that Jews are an enemy "who think. They survived 2,000 years of pogroms not by hitting back, but by thinking. They invented . . . socialism, communism, human rights, and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong -- so they may enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries."

And how should the world's Muslims deal with the Jews? Mahathir urged them to learn from Mohammed's example -- to buy time by making "strategic retreats" and signing peace accords, then building up their strength until they are ready to launch a "counterattack" that will lead to "final victory."

Mahathir's Judeophobia is an old story. More than 30 years ago he wrote: "The Jews . . . are not merely hook-nosed but understand money instinctively." He has blasted Jews as "monsters"; in 1994 his government banned the movie "Schindler's List" for being too pro-Jewish. When the Malaysian currency collapsed in 1997, Mahathir blamed it on George Soros, an American investor. "We do not want to say that this is a plot by the Jews," he thundered at a rally, "but in reality it is a Jew who triggered the currency plunge -- and coincidentally Soros is a Jew."

The Bush administration tried to cast Mahathir's latest screed as simply the invective of a lone bigot. "The comments were hateful," Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, told reporters, adding "I do not think they are emblematic of the Muslim world."

Would that were true. Unfortunately, while many in the West voiced outrage at Mahathir's poisonous remarks, the Muslim world's official reaction ranged from utter indifference to hearty approval.

The audience to whom Mahathir spoke -- the presidents, kings, and emirs of the nations that make up the Organization of the Islamic Conference -- rewarded him with a standing ovation. The applauders included not only the Muslim world's dictatorial fanatics but also its reputed moderates, including President Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia, General Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, and Jordan's King Abdullah.

Even America's Muslim allies and clients admired Mahathir's views. The foreign minister of Egypt -- a country that receives $2 billion a year in US aid -- pronounced the speech "a very, very wise assessment." Hamid Karzai, the US-installed president of Afghanistan, praised it as "an eye-opener to a lot of us and . . . what the Islamic world should do."

Mahathir's speech raised no storm of controversy among most Muslims because the Muslim world by and large has no problem with anti-Semitism. Even in the United States there was little shocked repudiation of Mahathir's venom by American Muslim leaders. A Nexis search turns up just one mild quibble: When CNN invited the head of CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, to comment, he said only that he doesn't believe Jews run the world, "so I see that statement as a misguided opinion."

On Tuesday I asked six American Muslim organizations -- CAIR, the American Muslim Association, the Islamic Circle of North America, the Islamic Institute, the Islamic Society of North America, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council -- whether they had any reaction to Mahathir's words. Three never replied; two replied by saying they had no comment. Only MPAC condemned Mahathir for his "extremely offensive, anti-Semitic comments."

The Muslim world suffers from many problems, but none is more crippling than its culture of intolerance. Rampant anti-semitism anywhere is always a sign of grave moral sickness. Until more Muslims are prepared to confront and conquer that sickness in their midst, the Muslim world will remain the benighted backwater that so many Muslims deplore.

Jeff Jacoby's e-mail address is jacoby@globe.com.
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.

The Discovery Times channel also did a thing on what muslims thought about the outside world and 9/11 in particular. Many accused the Jews of causing it.

Oh and before you or anyone else calims that I'm saying all muslims are like this - I'm not. I'm saying it is prevalent in the Arab world and other countries which have large Arab populations.

[Lief Erikson]

I will point out briefly that in this article Mr. Jacoby had nothing to say about Muslim policies (for example school teachings) or government actions in any countries except Malaysia (does it have a Muslim government? This is a genuine rather then rhetorical question). Mr. Jacoby's essential argument throughout the article is that lack of response indicates Anti-Semitic belief. I'd say that lack of response is completely logical in view of the fact that the Israeli/Palestinian issue is such a hot topic among Palestinians and Arabs in general. No one is going to be willing to express much support for Jews at a time like this. That some of the leaders of countries should express support for a speech that contains anti-semitism isn't too surprising, though it is sad.

In view of the Israeli/Palestinian issue, it seems logical to me that there is a rise of anti-semitism in the Muslim world. How great and extensive an increase I don't know, but I expect Jacoby is somewhat correct. However, in spite of the logic of Jacoby's remarks concerning the issue, I would be quicker to believe Condoleezza Rice's assessment of the situation regarding the Muslim nations then Jeff Jacoby's. Condoleezza Rice said that she believed the speech was not an emblem of the views of the Muslim World as a whole, and I believe her. I think the anti-semitism is there and it probably is increasing, but I don't know that it's possible to pass it off as "emblematic of the Muslim world."

You know, the Muslim book the Koran says that Jews and Christians are second best to Muslims. Jerusalem was also the place the Muslims initially turned toward in prayer, rather then Mecca. The Muslim religion in my opinion is certainly not at all anti-semitic. It's the Israeli/Palestinian situation that is causing an increase in anti-semitism. That anti-semitism should increase is logical, though very sad. I hope it hasn't gone as far as Jacoby believes it has. I don't think that the anti-Israel people are all anti-Jew, though. I'm not convinced.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

The Discovery Times channel also did a thing on what muslims thought about the outside world and 9/11 in particular. Many accused the Jews of causing it.

Oh and before you or anyone else calims that I'm saying all muslims are like this - I'm not. I'm saying it is prevalent in the Arab world and other countries which have large Arab populations.

I'll tell you what. I have a few knowledgeable people around me, and I'll talk to them and get back to you sometime tomorrow. Your arguments do make sense to me, and I'm seriously considering the matter. The intensity of Arab feeling over the Israeli/Palestinian issue is massive, so anti-semitism being widespread among Arab populations does make sense to me. I'll get back to you soon with my findings. Thanks for the thought provoking discussion .

~Lief

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I'll tell you what. I have a few knowledgeable people around me, and I'll talk to them and get back to you sometime tomorrow. Your arguments do make sense to me, and I'm seriously considering the matter. The intensity of Arab feeling over the Israeli/Palestinian issue is massive, so anti-semitism being widespread among Arab populations does make sense to me. I'll get back to you soon with my findings. Thanks for the thought provoking discussion .

The palestinian situation is a crutch they use to support their anit-semite feelings. It also allows them to blame their problems on an outside source - instead of dealing with the true problems in their own society. There have been many chances for peace and as Daniel Pipes said - while Palestinians have been able to live in peace in israel - the reverse is not true.

By the way - you need more than just knowledgeable people - you need people who actually read about what what the history of the middle east is and what has happened in the middle east - as well as what is happening there.

As for the article - the statements go far beyond what you claim as "anti-semitic". Did you not read the part where the person made the statement for the Muslim world to pretend to come to peace with israel - while building up a counter attack to destroy them? Now is that really the sign that they want peace? With that statement alone - there is evidence that they temselves do not believe that israel is out to destroy them - but honestly wishes for peace - otherwise peace accords and so forth would not matter and would not bide them time to build up a counterattack.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

The palestinian situation is a crutch they use to support their anit-semite feelings. It also allows them to blame their problems on an outside source - instead of dealing with the true problems in their own society.

Well, in my opinion the Palestinian situation is the cause of many of their anti-semite feelings, rather then the crutch. Remember that in modern Israel, before the Zionist movement Palestinians and Jews lived extremely peacefully together in the land. They lived as neighbors in harmony. I learned this from a Zionist, extremely pro-Israel Jew some time ago, by the way. And as I said before, anti-semitism certainly is not readily to be found in the Koran.

I don't think anti-semitism was involved in the thinking of the Arab nations that attacked Israel in 1948 either. They attacked for a number of reasons, some of them religious and some of them humanitarian. Their kinsmen in Palestine were being expelled from their homes by Jewish soldiers. The Arabs of course made a terrible mistake when they lied about Israeli atrocities, hoping to cause an uprising among Palestinians but instead instigating a massive panic that caused vast numbers of people to flee. Weizman described this to be "a miraculous simplification of Israel's tasks." Anyhow, I've already written about all this earlier. I read that many Palestinians were furious at the Arab nations for not coming more swiftly to help them.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

There have been many chances for peace and as Daniel Pipes said - while Palestinians have been able to live in peace in israel - the reverse is not true.

The Palestinians have at times endured second class citizenship in Israel. This was a terrible oppression. I can get out my sources and describe it to you, but I'd rather do it later. But I don't agree that Palestinians have always been able to live in peace in Israel. I don't know what their current situation within Israel is fully, but you cannot forget that the Gaza Strip and West Bank are areas legally owned by Israel. The people living in those refugee camps endure appalling living conditions. So the statement, "Palestinians have been able to live in peace in Israel," is rather weak to me. It's like saying, "the Jews in the 1940s and 50s could have lived in peace in Germany." They just had to endure, that's all. Forget about the expulsions, the destruction of villages, the splitting of families, the land grabs, the poverty and the hunger. They could have lived at peace with Israel if they just ignored all that.

As for the chances of peace, I'll research them a bit. I have watched tapes on the history of Israel from its origins to Clinton's administration, but they didn't cover everything to my satisfaction.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

By the way - you need more than just knowledgeable people - you need people who actually read about what what the history of the middle east is and what has happened in the middle east - as well as what is happening there.

They have and they do. I said they were knowledgeable .

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

As for the article - the statements go far beyond what you claim as "anti-semitic". Did you not read the part where the person made the statement for the Muslim world to pretend to come to peace with israel - while building up a counter attack to destroy them? Now is that really the sign that they want peace? With that statement alone - there is evidence that they temselves do not believe that israel is out to destroy them - but honestly wishes for peace - otherwise peace accords and so forth would not matter and would not bide them time to build up a counterattack.

The speaker did not represent the Palestinians. Obviously the leader of Malaysia had little reason to believe Israel was wanting to invade. I don't think the other Arab nations have been in much fear at all of that either, as regards their own safety. As you like to point out, it was the Arab nations that were the aggressors in those wars that have thus far occurred.

Jersey, I don't like how you use the word "they" and "them," most of the time. One speaker doesn't represent the whole Muslim world. Neither does he necessarily represent its majority. It's generalizations of people and issues that I've been fighting against most of the time, in our discussion up to this point.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

With that statement alone - there is evidence that they temselves do not believe that israel is out to destroy them - but honestly wishes for peace - otherwise peace accords and so forth would not matter and would not bide them time to build up a counterattack.

It's a sign that that speaker does not want peace. It's not an evidence that the Palestinians think Israel is not out to expel them. It might be viewed as an evidence that this speaker believes Israel wants peace with the Palestinians, though I'd hesitate on that point. That's all this speaker. He is not speaking for the Palestinians. He's not speaking for the Arab nations in general. Some applauded him, very likely because of the issue involving Israel and possibly because there was really good content in parts of his speech that we don't have access to. That doesn't mean that those leaders are all going to become anti-semitic in the policies of their countries, and I don't know that they are. Perhaps they are. The Israeli/Palestinian issue certainly might logically cause that. I know that there is a great deal of persecution of Christians in Muslim countries, and that this should extend to Jews as well makes sense to me. But I just want to emphasize again, this speaker does not speak for the Palestinians and his views cannot be reasonably attributed to them.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Jersey, I don't like how you use the word "they" and "them," most of the time. One speaker doesn't represent the whole Muslim world. Neither does he necessarily represent its majority. It's generalizations of people and issues that I've been fighting against most of the time, in our discussion up to this point.

Personally I don't really care whether you like it or not. That is ONE speaker in many.And I will continue to use "them" and "they" when i feel like it. I can say the same thing about your oversimplified ideass about the israeli-palestinian sistuation and you're constants defending of palestinian actions. I'm sorry - they are not as innocent as you like to believe. Some your statements a wholly laughable when you actually see some of the statesments and facts coming out of the palestinian region as well as muslim countries.

I find it interesting that you seem to have no problem in generalizing israelis. I also slove how you come up with every known excuse and reason for why the audience gave the speaker a standing ovation. maybe you choose to ignore the cheering in the streets when innocent people are killed in Israel. I'm wondering - how many israelis do you see going out and cheering the death of innocent palestinians?

[Millane]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Whether they wanted to or not - they couldn't do it. I'm sure there are many towns in Australia that are rather backward too.

thats my point they couldnt, hence ****ing idiots, "ohhh im gunna stop people who like blue passing through my house, ohhh i bet that **** over there likes blue lets get him" hmm maybe they could just where a yellow star on their coats, thatd fix it
Im quite sure many places in australia can be described as backward, hell some call us a backward NATION, but i would hope we had a little more intelligence than to think of something as incredibly stupid as that...

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

We don't have a national education system - therefore - they can teach whatever they like. States and school districts determine their own curriculum and standards. However - textbooks have been an issue - because a texas school district had wanted to limit the teaching of evolution - which can affect the other states in what our textbooks look like. But if our school districts or teachers don't like the books - they will use other methods of teaching.

yeah i wasnt meaning the whole of the USA just that one place.

Originally Posted by inked

Most amusing having an Irishman pontificate on tolerance! Be ye a religious, Irishman, now? Would reference to a splinter in thy neighbor's eye versus the plank in thine own be of any use?

hahahaha quite useless, Fenir is a born again aussie

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

I find it interesting that you seem to have no problem in generalizing israelis.

The public approval rating in Israel for Israeli leaders has consistently risen, the more of a hardliner the Prime Minister is. Polls have shown that most of the people are fully in support of their government's actions. I do realize that there are some Jews in there that do not support what has happened to the Palestinians. I've seen pictures from a recent article that showed both Arabs and Israelis fighting the government for the Bedhoines living in a region to be allowed to keep their native lands. So I do know there are people like that. The polls have shown the Israeli people to be overwhelmingly in support of their government, though. So when I refer to "the Israelis" when speaking of the Israeli government, I don't think I'm making a huge error. The people are with the government, on this matter.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

I also slove how you come up with every known excuse and reason for why the audience gave the speaker a standing ovation.

Every excuse? I thought I only mentioned one main one- the Israeli/Palestinian issue. But isn't it the wise thing to look at the possibility that the governments represented weren't just utterly anti-semitic?

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

maybe you choose to ignore the cheering in the streets when innocent people are killed in Israel.

This is not cheering in all the streets of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. This is cheering in some streets, by some people. Not even the majority of the people, I expect.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

I'm wondering - how many israelis do you see going out and cheering the death of innocent palestinians?

How many Israelis do you see supporting Operation Rainbow?

[Lief Erikson]

Jerseydevil, I think I'm actually done with this discussion. I am going to be so busy tomorrow and the other upcoming days preparing for Christmas, I don't think I'll have time for Entmoot. I need to straighten out my priorities, and I have a big problem with debates of this kind. I just get sucked in and can't leave them no matter what! My fate. Alack.

Talk to you more later .

~Lief

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Well thats a useful title. Does that mean we can talk about gardening and the weather?

Hmm - I was rather short on originality at that moment... but the name served to help people find it - and yet distinguished it from the thread from whence it came.

Shall I re-name it? Perhaps... 'The Pointless Argument Thread'?

[sun-star]

EDIT: Nevermind. It's Christmas after all.

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Oh, "edit", and all that my "brave" (??) mooter's.

Carry on for the new year, captians and generall among you...

The light shines least when its carried alone..

Useless.

Oh. but thump your chests and cry havoc... after all.

USELESS.

[inked]

Millane,
"Originally Posted by inked
Most amusing having an Irishman pontificate on tolerance! Be ye a religious, Irishman, now? Would reference to a splinter in thy neighbor's eye versus the plank in thine own be of any use?

hahahaha quite useless, Fenir is a born again aussie"


Ahhh, I see! or I don't? Was that born-again Irish or born-again Aussie?

See, one of Tolkien's complaint was that CSL couldn't get the Irish out of his system! LOL! Specifically, the Ulster component! So, Pardon me if I get kind of *twitchy* when one inaugarates the use of born-again Irish as a descriptor!

And, if I may make so trenchant an observation, whilst the Irish may have saved civilization (as a book title sould have it!), does that mean that on cannot bait them? Ever seen BLAZING SADDLES ? Not at all PC on the nationalities of Americans, I must confess, but uproariously funny (watch out though for the ethical/moral subtexting - all too Socratic of them, actually!)

Been my pleasure to know a number of Aussie's in my time. Delightful! I even considered relocation to "down under" but the Empire's adoption of inadequate renumeration for MD's put the kibosh on that! Not that I don't admire that Crocodile Dundee fellow and all....

Is Fenir like that? one can only wish, I suppose!

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by Valandil

Hmm - I was rather short on originality at that moment... but the name served to help people find it - and yet distinguished it from the thread from whence it came.

Shall I re-name it? Perhaps... 'The Pointless Argument Thread'?

You could probably rename half the threads here that...

What about "How We Perceive Arabs/Islam" or "Islam: Perception, Propaganda and Truth" or something along those lines.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

You could probably rename half the threads here that...

What about "How We Perceive Arabs/Islam" or "Islam: Perception, Propaganda and Truth" or something along those lines.

Why? What is the truth? Is truth only what Lief says - because he defends them? So who gets labeled with adhering to the propaganda label? It makes it very convient for attacks - doesn't it?

[Insidious Rex]

ok... how bout "Our Perception of Islam: My way or the Highway"

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Jerseydevil, I think I'm actually done with this discussion. I am going to be so busy tomorrow and the other upcoming days preparing for Christmas, I don't think I'll have time for Entmoot. I need to straighten out my priorities, and I have a big problem with debates of this kind. I just get sucked in and can't leave them no matter what! My fate. Alack.

Talk to you more later .

~Lief

great posts lief

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

great posts lief

yeah - too bad he's mostly wrong and looking at the entire situation as the palistinians being the injured party. Everytime israal has made steps to bring peace - there have been bombings. israel exists - whether they like it or not. They are not going to eliminate it no matter how much they try. They can continue to kill innocent people - that seems to be what the palestinians are good at. Israel has gone for more out of it's way to try bringing peace to the region - while palestinians have continued to attack. I have sympathy for the innocent palestinians - I have no sympathy for the people who wish to continue and brag that they hope their child becomes a suicide bomber. Which - sorry - is the majority.

[inked]

I thought this was the "America Bashing while discussing Islamic influences not in Europe" thread. Speaking of which, where is the miscreant who forced Valandil to split yet another thread? Do you think Val will double his sig line about how arduous is thread splitting?

[mithrand1r]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

So tell me - how many european nations have gay marriage? I see that Europe is having the same arguments as the US is. Also - as I have stated in the gay and lesbian thread - the US episicopal chruch was allowing openly gay ministers - while the european branch condemned it.So tell - me - who do your gay rights stand again?

Also - as I have said also too - this is a state issue and it is erroneous to talk about the US as one complete nation - since we are a federation.

I thought the US was a Republic? (ie a Constitution-based federal republic )