Should America blame itself for the Muslim world's hatred?

Jewish World Review ^ | Oct. 27, 2003 | Jonathan Tobin

[SJackson]

Even in a world where anti-Semitism is becoming increasingly accepted, occasionally someone can say something that shocks even the French. The speech of Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad at a meeting of a conference of Islamic countries last week contained so much blatant anti-Jewish bigotry that French President Jacques Chirac felt compelled to condemn it. To the applause of his fellow Muslim world leaders, Mahathir informed the world that it was being run "by the Jews." The Malaysian spiced this rather routine litany of anti-Semitic invective by going on to state that the Jews "invented … human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so that they can enjoy equal rights with others."

To his credit, President Bush made a point of personally refuting Mahathir's screed.

It would be nice to think that Mahathir's speech was just the ravings of a nutty Malaysian. That appeared to be the spin the administration wanted to put on the affair. Even as she condemned Mahathir's words, National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice tempered that by saying, "I don't think they are emblematic of the Muslim world."

WHAT 'MODERATES' THINK

Perhaps Rice missed the fact that Ahmed Maher, foreign minister of Egypt, supposedly a U.S. ally, praised Mahathir's speech as "a very, very wise assessment." And Hamid Karzai, recently installed by the United States as the leader of Afghanistan, called it "very correct."

And those were just the comments from the "moderates." Far from being unusual, this type of Jew-hatred has become typical in an Arab and Muslim world that has become the global producer of anti-Semitism. Jews and Americans have become the boogeymen of the Muslim imagination, filling heads with ready-made excuses for the failure of Muslim civilization to keep up with the West.

This drivel has been hammered into the minds of young Muslims around the world in schools paid for by America's Saudi "allies."

But, predictably, for some Americans the answer lies not in confronting the dementia that passes for wisdom in the Muslim world, but for America to change its policies. It didn't take long for such a suggestion to appear on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times. The author was Times columnist Paul Krugman, the Princeton economist who usually confines himself to rabidly partisan attacks on Bush's domestic policies.

But on Oct. 21, Krugman told his readers that the Malaysian leader isn't really such a bad guy.

In a piece titled "Listening to Mahathir," Krugman said that the bulk of the speech was an accurate depiction of Muslim problems. If he indulged in Jew-baiting, we should, Krugman said, understand he was just throwing his constituents "rhetorical red meat" as part of a "delicate balancing act aimed at domestic politics."

In other words, Mahathir was no different from, say, a politician in the American South in the 1950s who had "progressive" views, but who ranted about the threat to white America from blacks in order to stay in office. Except, of course, that Krugman and the rest of 2003 America no longer believes that such balancing acts are either justified or defensible.

BLAME IT ON US — AND ISRAEL

According to Krugman, it really isn't Mahathir's fault that he has to say such nasty things. "The rising tide of anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism" is, according to this sage of Princeton, due to Bush's war in Iraq and "unconditional support for Ariel Sharon."

Krugman's view is in line with the views of a State Department panel that recently toured the world trying to find out why Muslims don't like us. That panel — packed with anti-Israel academics — came back to tell us that America's bad image in the Muslim world was largely our own fault. They think that we should increase our efforts to make nice with Arabs and Muslims, and even rethink our foreign policy.

[browardchad]

Wouldn't Arabs everywhere, including here, rise up and condemn us even more? To me, it would be like putting a bulls-eye on our back.

You've obviously bought in to the media/academia characterization of the WOT as being an outgrowth of the Israeli/Palestinian issue. It is not. Bin Laden and the other terrorist organizations didn't start using the Pali angle until recently -- Binny's original gripe was the U.S. presence in the Muslim holyland of Saudi Arabia, but, like any good jihadist, he built on whatever unjustified resentment he could find in any corner of the globe -- and the Palis (never mind that they're despised by/barred from other Arab lands) are tailor-made expendable fodder for the "cause."

By your reasoning, if we could just hide all the Jews in some cellar, the Arabs won't be mad at us. I've got news for you, according to the Koran (the vehicle though which Arab psychosis -- described so well in Post #8 -- has been spread throughout non-Arab lands)athiests will be the first to be exterminated, then Jews and Christians, although the latter "People of the Book" will have a choice: dhimmitude (slavery) or death. No one is exempt from Jihad in the name of Allah. Americans already have a bullseye painted on their backs, because our Democratic Republic presents the biggest, and possibly last, obstacle to the spread of the religion of death.

[Donna Lee Nardo]

I wonder what this as_h_le assigns hitler's anti-Semitism to? I am certain he blames it all on the Jews. Perhaps because the Jews were taller than hitler, so hitler had to suffer with a terribly unfair height disadvantage?....Or perhaps because the Jews grew up relatively unpoor and hitler was dirt poor, so hitler had a terribly unfair class disadvantge? This crap spewed in the media really makes me sick.

[gcruse]

America is to blame for the ME crisis only to the extent that we have held Israel back from doing whatever they think is necessary to secure their safety. To me, that is quite a lot of American blame, but that's JMO.

[Matchett-PI]

Thanks for the link!

[Prime Choice]

Should America blame itself for the Muslim world's hatred?

Only if we live in some strange parallel universe in which blacks and Catholics must blame themselves for the KKK's hatred; women blame themselves for their rapists' hatred; and Jews blame themselves for the Nazis' hatred.

Until such time that we do live in such a singularly warped world, I suggest that proponents of such claptrap should seriously rethink their position.

[lobo59]

Close but no seegar. " The reason these Muslim countries have a low standard of living has far more to do with political repression and a lack of basic human rights than any Jewish conspiracy."


the real reason that Muslim (and other third world) countries have a low standard of living has far more to do with religious repression, tribalism, paganism and a lack of basic human rights and individual freedoms than because of any mythical Jewish conspiracy.

[SnarlinCubBear]

I'm NOT saying being a Jew disqualifies anyone from any office. I am saying that a Jew being our President could be a very bad move for our politics.

Sometimes, it's discrimination, sometimes it's common sense.

Being a Jew has to be a most difficult thing. I am not anti-Jewish. I am a gentile Christian.

I'm saying that having a Jewish President right now could be adding fuel to the fire that we have going on with the Arabs.

Why is that wrong? Could a Jewish President negotiate BETTER with the Arabs, or would he be hindered more by his Jewishness?

I think the answer is clear.

[MissAmericanPie]

Brilliant post.