Posted on 03/08/2006 4:46:43 PM PST by Daralundy
Picking a fight with a faith 1.3 billion strong
If you wish to get along with a man, you do not insult his faith. And if you seek to persuade devout Muslims that al-Qaeda is our enemy, not Islam, you do not condone with silence insults to the faith of a billion people.
Understanding this, President Bush ceased to call the war on terror a “crusade.” Visiting a mosque, he removed his shoes. He has hosted White House gatherings for the breaking of the fast at the end of Ramadan. He sent Karen Hughes to the State Department to improve our dismal image in the Islamic world. He has declared more times than many of us care to recall, “Islam is a religion of peace.”
President Bush knows we are in a struggle for the hearts and minds of Islamic peoples, and if we are to win this struggle we must separate the Muslim monsters from the masses. For as that great American military mind Col. John Boyd defined it, strategy is the appending to oneself of as many centers of power as possible and isolating your enemy from as many centers of power as possible.
This is what makes the Mohammed cartoons so stupid and self-destructive. They have given Islamic extremists visible proof to show pious Muslims that the West relishes mocking what they hold most sacred: the prophet. They have united Muslim moderates with militants in common rage against us. They have added to the hatred of the West in the Islamic world as friends like King Abdullah of Jordan, Presidents Mubarak of Egypt and Karzai of Afghanistan, and Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey warned us they would.
One wonders. Did the cynical Europeans learn nothing from the Salman Rushdie episode? Did they learn nothing from the firestorm that erupted in the Islamic world when Christian ministers in the United States, post-9/11, called Mohammed a “terrorist”?
Why then did they do this? Why did the Danish paper Jyllands-Posten publish cartoons it knew to be so blasphemous to Muslims? Why did Le Monde, France Soir, Die Welt, El Pais, Il Stampa republish them—on their front pages? If a European newsman was oblivious to the probable effect among Muslims of plastering a cartoon of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban on page one, he is too stupid to be an editor. But if he did know the near-certain effect of such an in-your-face provocation, why would he do it? Is this the reflexive secularist hostility of the Europress to all religious faiths on display here or something else?
And so we come to the heart of the matter. Why? What was the motive here? What is the game that is afoot? The rationale of the imams who ensured that all Muslims knew of the cartoons and their contents and called for demonstrations and assaults on Western consulates and embassies is evident. They hate us, and they wish to drive us out of the Middle East. But what propelled our own ideologues to prod U.S. editors to republish the cartoons in “solidarity” with the Europeans? Who pushed George W. Bush and Condi Rice not to condemn the cartoons but to “stand up” for the freedom to publish and defy any “intimidation” by the Islamic world?
Answer: our cultural warmongers, who seek the same goal as their cultural warmongers—to ignite a war of civilizations. Both want the “long war” of which the Pentagon speaks, the “World War IV” against “Islamofascism” that is the dream of neoconservatives and the nightmare of their countrymen.
As has been evident for some time, bin Laden and the neocons both seek the same thing: a fight to the finish, no matter how long, no matter how many invasions it takes, no matter how many lives are lost. For if peace were reached between the Islamic world and the West, even a cold peace with Iran and Syria, what would they do then?
As the provocations of Ahmadinejad are music to the ears of neocons, for they rule out dialogue and diplomacy, the escalation of the cartoon wars into an all-out culture war between Islam and the West has made their day. But it has also wiped out much of the goodwill that George W. Bush has sought to rebuild in the region.
As one explores the arguments of the provocateurs in the West for what they are doing, on inspection all appear hollow. “We believe in the First Amendment!” comes the blustery reply of journalists when asked why they published the cartoons. The First Amendment protected the right of Trent Lott to toast Strom Thurmond. But that did not save Lott from the savagery of the neocons who demanded and got his ouster as Senate majority leader. Yet which is the more egregious offense? To pay a birthday tribute to a century-old man who was once a segregationist or to insult deliberately the most revered figure in the faith of a billion people?
Daily, U.S. editors decline to publish ethnic slurs and obscene remarks and cartoons that might offend a race or religion. This is not censorship. It is editorial judgment. The motto of the New York Times, which declined to publish the offending cartoons, is “All the News That’s Fit to Print.”
Conservatives contend that Islamic nations tolerate cartoons and TV shows far more viciously anti-Semitic than these cartoons were anti-Islamic. They are right. But Western newspapers never publish such cartoons, first, because they are outrageous, second, because publication would cost them advertisers, readers, and maybe their jobs. Insulting Muslims and Mohammed is a less risky and less expensive hobby than insulting Judaism or Jews. Indeed, if you insult Islam, you can make out credentials as a moral hero.
Though State initially condemned the cartoons—“Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is unacceptable”—the neocons rapidly re-seized control of the message. In hours, State was in retreat: “While we share the offense that Muslims have taken at these images, we at the same time vigorously defend the right of individuals to express points of view.” Of course we do. But do we believe freedom of the press was responsibly exercised when these idiot editors used it to incite a religious war?
And when it comes to press freedom, Europeans are world-class hypocrites. British historian David Irving has spent months in a prison in Vienna awaiting trial for two speeches he made 15 years ago. In Europe, skeptics and deniers of the Holocaust are fined and imprisoned with the enthusiastic endorsement of the press.
Unfortunately, Bush let slip an opportunity to show respect for the Islamic world and faith and, instead, let himself be intimidated into silently condoning an insult to both. Standing beside the King of Jordan, Bush denounced the violence the cartoons had ignited but declined to condemn the cartoons. Condi Rice denounced Iran and Syria for exploiting the rage over the cartoons but did not condemn the cause of that rage. If there is a double standard here, Bush is the guilty party. He rightly denounced Iran’s president for mocking the Holocaust but would not denounce the European press for mocking the prophet.
If Bush and Rice cannot muster the moral courage to condemn the insulting content of the cartoons, as well as the violence being promoted by anti-Western agitators and demagogues, our wars for democracy in the Middle East are in vain. For we can never win the friendship of these people if they believe our words of respect for their religion cover up a sneering contempt.
"we can never win the friendship of these people if they believe our words of respect for their religion cover up a sneering contempt"
_____________________________________
They want us dead or Dhimmi you idiot. We can never win their friendship except under those circumstances. Censoring our press while allowing them to do all manner of evil against all that are not them is just incredibly stupid. But then, you Mr. Buchanan, are incredibly stupid.
Long war ? What long war ? If we turned things really on (but remaining conventional) it could be over within a couple of months.
That said, it is not *US* that are attacking anyone's culture. You don't see us saying "be tolerant or die", or "behead those who say we're violent". This is being brought to our door. And god help them and us if they make us cross that line. We wouldn't be able to forgive ourselves for a generation. But at least there would be the next generations of Western civilization and enlightenment.
As every greenpisser can tell, the planet is seriously overpopulated. Especially when they breed like rabbits.
This is like two children fighting and when you ask them what is going on, both yell "He started it!!!"
The fact is, there are probably a LOT of nice, peaceful muslims in the world and slapping all of them across the face is not beneficial to anyone's position.
On the other hand, simply waving hi to some of them will start an uproar and one thing leads to another and away the fight is flying.
We have to be effective and sorting the idiots out on both sides and condemning them. The 1st amendment carries responsibility with it.
Let me explain, I was at a basketball game once while in high school and our predominantly white team was playing a predominantly black team. One of the guys from our school went up to the bleachers in front of the opposing team, flipped them the bird and yelled F*** you N******s!!!!
Needless to say, it took the police about 2 hours to clean up the situation.
He has first amendment rights, but at some point we should all acknowledge that he failed in his responsibility to recognize that his words would lead to a violent situation.
Now putting up these cartoons is more subtle because it only draws violence from the reactionaries, but it still offends the majority of muslims. It doesn't deserve arrest, but it does deserve contempt.
Very well said, excellent. Thank you.
Pat, how does one "make nice" with a culture that wants to see all Americans dead? This is not an evolved group of people who want to peacably coexist with the West. I'm getting to the point where I just don't care about "moderate" Muslims and catering to the "reasonable ones". The so called moderate Muslims have done NOTHING to stop this perversion of their faith. Their silence is approval of the actions of the extremists.
Koran "5.51": O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
This is becoming increasingly difficult and not because of our actions. My Thai friends spouted the above rhetoric with great sincerity and Buddhist equanimity over a year ago. At that time, the Muslims there were beheading Buddhist Monks, School teachers and Muslims who cooperated with the government. There are just a few bad apples, they said. Now, after entire Muslim villages have joined together to torture and kill young soldiers, kill Buddhists living in their midst and bombing restaurants, the Muslims have escalated to attacking and burning Buddhist villages. The killing rate is 2 to 4 each day. This has accomplished one thing. My friends are no longer talking about the "peaceful majority". There isn't one.
Screw Pat Buchanan... Nuke Mecca and stop it today...
How can you say that nuking Mecca would "stop it today"? That would only enrage one hundred percent of the Muslims in the world and make this a thousand years MORE war. You are way too radical. Thank God people like you don't call the shots.
Buchanan is wrong. Freedom trumps prophet. I think it was stupid to print the cartoons, I also think it was essential to reprint them so people would realize how stupid the riots were. And we all know (all but Buchanan) that the riots weren't about the cartoons anyway, but about Islamic law subjugating the free world.
I'm surprised that it took Pat this long to surrender.
Not exactly breaking news.
;-)
I'm getting to the point where I agree that the moderate Muslims are of no help. However there has been an occasional brave one who speaks out. Their silence, which is deafening at times, could be related to fear and\or tacit approval;who the hell knows which? Their whole entire religion needs a true REFORMATION. I have little or no faith that will happen. I do think Mr. Buchanan is correct that you should not insult their religion, the cartoons have had a negative effect in general.
Patrick simply does not understand freedom of speech. It may be a moral good to be respectful of others, but it should not be legally required. No one has a right not to be offended by others. Courtesy and politeness cannot and should not be legislated, and any law will be selectively and hypocritically enforced. Pat certainly did not learn the lesson of Salman Rushdie.
He has first amendment rights, but at some point we should all acknowledge that he failed in his responsibility to recognize that his words actions would lead to a violent situation.
Yeah, oh damn, huh?
Now putting up these cartoons burning American flags is more subtle because it only draws violence from the reactionaries, but it still offends the majority of muslims Americans. It doesn't deserve arrest, but it does deserve contempt.
So what's it going to be then, eh? Are Muslims to be held to the same standard as everyone else, or not? Are you willing to treat them like adults, or treat every riot that they start as some unavoidable force of nature, some inevitable consequence of something that "we" did, rather than a conscious choice that came about through human agency?
Part of being civilized is not expecting people to pamper you and never question anything you say or do. Part of being civilized is having the ability to be criticized and not respond with a temper tantrum. Want to know who I actually do have respect for? The Muslims that didn't riot. They're on the ball. The ones that reacted to a criticism of their beliefs by burning embassies down have a ways to go.
I agree that the moderate Muslims are of no help. However there has been an occasional brave one who speaks out. Their silence, which is deafening at times, could be related to fear and\or tacit approval;who the hell knows which? Their whole entire religion needs a true REFORMATION.
What they need is more outside sources of information. Many of their societies are very insular, and they get most of their information from the local Imam.
What they need is satellite TV. That'll straighten them out in no time!
I couldn't agree more and your words,to me, are extremely wise and basically the bottom line. I don't think the average Muslim has evolved nearly enough to grasp your words, unfortunately. Could you please tell me just what is (was) the "lesson of Salman Rusdie"? I know he wrote "Satanic Verses" and was ordered to be killed by some fatwah, I guess you would call it, way back in the late 1980's I think.
Without that idol they pray to every day, Islam is over. No pilgrimage to that black rock, nothing to pray to.
It would prove to them and the rest of the world their phantasm they created is not omnipotent.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
That would only enrage one hundred percent of the Muslims in the world and make this a thousand years MORE war.
As if they aren't already enraged somehow... No, the war would last about an hour, maybe two, when they realize somebody is done f---ing around with them.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
You are way too dumb...
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Thank God people like you...
Thank which God? The one that nuked Sodom?
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.