Posted on 01/30/2015 3:52:43 PM PST by NYer
I was once in Istanbul speaking at a conference on “The Coming Dialogue of Civilizations.” The Turks know (or knew before recent re-Islamization) that if Samuel Huntington’s “clash” of civilizations arrives, they’ll be caught in the middle.
Because I had to visit other Turkish cities, I missed participating in a call-in (actually FAX-in) show arranged for the non-Turkish speakers. The FAX machine spat out the first viewer comment: “You are all infidels and shall die tonight.”
A conference colleague, a Brit with much experience in the Middle East, related this to me later. None of the panelists were surprised. They knew it was just the kind of thing that often happened in the region, even in Ataturk’s semi-secular Turkey.
Now, following our president’s moral guidance, I don’t want to blame “all Muslims for what members of other faiths do as well.” And, full disclosure, I did once get a physical threat, presumably from a liberal Christian, after an appearance on Bill Moyers’ television show – a professional hazard of punditry.
But I often think of that Turkish episode when something happens like the recent massacre in Paris. Commentary quickly divides into familiar camps. One goes into “it’s a small minority” and “religion of peace” mode. The other rightly accuses the first of lying, but tends to side with vague general indictments of Islam.
The truth is that there are many Muslims who abhor this kind of violence. I’ve met lots of them: in Washington, Turkey, and elsewhere. Some are quite vocal – on this and other occasions. The press doesn’t give them nearly enough attention.
But it’s also true that the “tiny minority,” which we keep repeating, to calm our fears and proclaim our own tolerance, means tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of potential terrorists, around the world. Remember those Middle Eastern kids dancing in the street after 9/11? And there’s a steady series of Muslim threats and intimidation, like my Turkish experience, in several Western countries now, which are rarely reported.
The threats are not surprising, since surveys show large swaths of Muslims back radical Islam, young Muslims in particular: 42 percent in France, 35 percent in Britain, and – even in America – 26 percent believe suicide bombings are justified. Let’s hope they mellow with age.
Meanwhile, you can repeat “tiny minority” and “religion of peace” all you like. (“This has nothing to do with Islam,” a colossal lie, is beneath serious notice.) The reality, for the foreseeable future, is we’re dealing – or in the case of our leaders, not dealing – with a reality that will continue, globally, to inspire violence.
Of commentary about the Paris massacre, there seems no end. It, too, is not very enlightening. Charlie Hebdo was more than “satirical.” It was radically anarchist, with more than a whiff of its own kind of authoritarianism, which often pairs up with anarchy.
It has a special animus against religion. As the editor once put it, its goal was to make Islam “just as banal as Catholicism.” In the dark night of anarchism, all religion is equally black.
Except it isn’t. And radical Muslims don’t fear mockery. It’s a sign of Charlie’s unseriousness that it thought its tomfoolery made any difference to militant Islam. CH was not some bold voice of dissent. It’s basically – even to French politicians (who do fear mockery) – harmless, since it’s the kind of thing adolescents of all ages lap up. And adults swiftly ignore.
Among its many vices and stupidities, CH’s staff did have one large virtue: they weren’t intimidated by radical Islam, even after they were fire-bombed in 2011. Unlike our media, they didn’t flinch under Islamist pressures, or pretend that they’re doing so out of sensitivity towards religion.
France is particularly conflicted about how to deal with Islam. For years, it indoctrinated children against “racism,” as if following Mohammed gives you a special DNA. Why? The only real answer is that it was easier for politicians to use a term widely accepted as a no-no rather than take the harder path of dealing with a religious problem. They’re changing their tune now.
Here’s a telling example.
The apartment building of a close friend in Paris was engulfed a few years ago by a Muslim riot. (These are more common than we hear. French supermarkets are sometimes sacked, but press self-censorship suppresses such news so as not to feed “Islamophobia.”) My friend, an orthodox Catholic of liberal political views (he worked several decades for a Catholic charity in Paris), felt conflicted, but couldn’t help condemning the riot. The police allowed shops to be looted, property destroyed, streets to be blocked, etc. His own children, who had attended French Catholic schools, told him he couldn’t say such things. It was “racist.”
He is not alone. France’s National Front, usually described as a “far-right” party, won 25 percent of the votes (the largest French bloc) in the most recent European elections. Not, in my view, because its sometimes ignoble views have suddenly become more popular. Like Charlie Hebdo, the NF is a sometimes distasteful truth-teller, but says openly things that many have concluded from daily experiences. Suppressing “Islamophobia” has, unfortunately for the French, made Muslims even more feared and unpopular.
Other reactions are possible, if not much practiced. A former student, who has lived and worked in Muslim countries, writes from Paris that she feels more vulnerable living now in France than ever before. And also this: “The response to this attack was so interesting. . . .the French Catholic priesthood has been the object of much poisonous lampooning by [Charlie Hebdo]. Much of it has been personal, tasteless, and downright trashy. . . .Tonight [a group of priests she was with] prayed for the victims and their families. These prayers were for the persecutors by the very same men who had been persecuted. I wonder how many mosques around the world would have done the same thing.”
Ah, that banality of Catholicism.
Ping!
“....even in America – 26 percent believe suicide bombings are justified.”
.
Which means that one out of four muzzies cannot be trusted because they are a potential terrorist or will support terrorism and should therefore be monitored by the local police.
Very expensive proposition i.e. we can’t afford to keep ‘m in the country.
Folks, we’re in a dilemma.
“I wonder how many mosques around the world would have done the same thing.”
.
Do you seriously think that ONE muslim will pray for the wellbeing of a non-Muslim, EVER?
Where in the Koran is it stated to be charitable to a non-muzzie?
Sheesh.
Sorry, lampooning, no matter how personal, crude or trashy does not constitute persecution. What happens to non-Muslims in Muslim countries does.
It is time to put an end to the charade of “moderate Islam.” There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists – moderate, they are not.
Ali Sina
Faith Freedom International
He said “mosques”, not a single Muslim.
Well, that escalated quickly.
Oh goodie!! If the “tiny minority” of radical islamists is just 1% of muslims, we only have about 12 million or so of them to worry about. I’m feeling so relieved. /s
It’s interesting the way socialists approach theological concepts but when it comes to Islam they are not the only ones who refuse to approach the issue. That even includes leading Christian clergy including Pope Francis.
Followers of Mohammed not only claim, but truly believe that God has authorized them to kill those who refuse to submit to their version of God’s will. That is a basic tenet of that religion. A claim which goes unchallanged. While it’s understandable for atheists which most socialists are, not to approach that claim on a theological basis. Responding to the question raised by the link below. It’s bewildering why any Christian clergy refuse to admit it even exists and is a basic part of Islam creed and worse yet are unable to condem it.
The Koran and its enforcement of sharia law which draws heavily from the Talmud is a pseudo religious concoction using monotheistic selected texts, taken and misconstrued from the old (bible) and new testaments. Both of which cite the Almighty has granted free will to accept or obey his laws and is the final judge not man. Sodom and Gormora is a glaring example.
Yet followers of Mohammed under the severest of penalties are forbidden to read either which would refute that assertion in a creed which institutionalizes disgusting arab tribal views, mores, observances,and customs. Claiming adhearants are authorized by our Creator to demand submission to it or suffer an ignominious death administered by followers of Islam simply because they respond to the call for prayer 5 times a day.
http://www.theusmat.com/islamandfreewill.htm
What will happen to France? Well, according to St. John Bosco, this:
“War comes from the south, peace from the north. French laws no longer recognize the Creator, but the Creator will make himself recognized and will visit her thrice with the rod of his wrath. In the first visit he breaks her pride by conquest, plundering ruined harvest and butchery of men and beasts.
“In the second visit the great prostitute of Babylon, which makes decent people sigh and call the Brothel of Europe, will be left without a leader and will be a victim of disorder.
“Paris! Paris! Instead of arming yourself in the name of the Lord, you fortify with Houses of Immorality. They will be destroyed by you yourself. Your idol, the Pantheon, will be burnt to ashes in order that this may come true: “violence, uttereth lies against me.” Your enemies will reduce you to want, to hunger, to fear, and will make you the abomination of nations. Ah, woe to you, if you do not recognize the hand that strikes you! I want to punish immorality, the despising of, and the contempt for My Law, says the Lord.
“In the third visit you will fall into the hands of foreigners. Your enemies standing afar off will behold your palaces in flames. Your homes will become a heap of ruins with the blood of your heroes who are no more.”
After years of taking it from western civilizations what woke them up? What made them use terrorism? It seems to me that there was a rise of nationalism and as for terrorism, what else, they were demilitarized?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.