Skip to comments.Why It’s Islam vs Rest of the World (TROP™ says it's OUR fault.)
Posted on 01/31/2004 5:59:25 PM PST by quidnunc
In Davos this year there was much talk of Islam and its differences with the West. The emphasis was on trying to understand why rather than on dismissing the whole issue as that clash of civilisations Samuel Huntington wrote so prophetically about nearly ten years before 9/11. A whole gamut of Muslim intellectuals were invited to address sessions with subjects as diverse as religion and globalisation, modernity and Islam and the shared roots of Western and Islamic culture. Arab princes spoke, as did professors and scholars from the Islamic world and women in hijab who argued that the West try and understand that democracy and gender issues had different meanings in different cultures. The Grand Mufti of Bosnia was there alongside the former American Archbishop of Canterbury and representing the Indian subcontinent was, ironically, General Pervez Musharraf.
As I watched him expound on his theory that Islam was a peaceful religion that sought only friendship and peace with the world, I found myself wondering why then it had been necessary to break India up for reasons of Islam. But, that is the sort of politically incorrect question nobody asks these days just as we do not ask why the Kashmir Valleys struggle for autonomy has ended up becoming part of the international jehad against Americans, Jews and Hindus. Political correctness was very much the mood of the World Economic Forums annual meeting so many of those who spoke for Islam got away with blaming the West for their woes.
You must understand, they said, that terrorism was not Islamic or Christian but just terrorism. And, you must understand that at the root of what was going on lay unresolved political problems like Palestine and Kashmir. Our friendly, neighbourhood military dictator went so far as to say that because of these unresolved political issues young Muslims had developed a sense of persecution and had begun to believe that the world was against Islam. It was the duty of the West to not just help resolve these political issues fairly but also help solve some of the socio-economic problems of the Islamic world. Then, the world would be at peace once more and we could live without the threat of suicide bombers.
(Excerpt) Read more at indianexpress.com ...
And, whether Muslims are prepared to admit it or not modernity does mean questioning ancient religious beliefs and demanding answers. A religion that is based on the belief that the last word or ideology, faith, social mores and law was written fourteen hundred years ago will always find itself in conflict with change.
It's the Islam, stupid!
Does anyone else see this as to mean "keep sending money" and we will be better?
Tavleen Singh gets it but the "West" doesn't. There is not much we can do other than defend ourselves and our friends in the world (those whose relationship is reciprical).
Oh for Cripes' sake, what a dopey thing to say.
Where are the Lutheran suicide bombers; the Mormons setting improvised roadside bombs; the Methodist minister preaching that Jews should be killed because they are tje descendents of pigs and monkeys; the Baptists throwing hand grenades into schoolrooms full of Muslim children?
And for thjat matter where are the "Allah bless America" rallies by American Muslims?
By contrast Islam rejects the very thinking that led the West to all these things.
There is a reason that Spain with its 40 million people translates more books into Spanish in a year than have been translated into Arabic in the last 1000 years.
There is a reason that non-Muslims, when they are not being actively persecuted, have always been treated as second-class citizens in Muslim societies.
That reason is that Muslims believe that their religion is the perfect expression of how a person should live, and that it is the bounden duty of Muslims to bring all the peoples of the world into the ummah peacefully if possibly but by means of warfare if necessary.
Its events also occcured before the arrival of Christ, so I'm not sure I get your point. Historical accounts of violence are not the same as scriptural exhortations to violence.
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.