If people want on or off this list, please let me know.
Perfect!
Ping
-----------------------------
I doubt this. Islam is a history of dictatorship.
The lesson was clear: A European power could come to the region and do what it pleased, and only another European power could get them out. Thus began the game, so to speak, of playing European powers off against one another.
For two centuries or more, the scenario remained the same -- though the players were sometimes different. In the final phase, the players were the two superpowers, the Soviet Union and the United States; and Middle Eastern leaders used the skills they had perfected over two centuries in playing them off against each other.
Then, suddenly, it came to an end. The phase in history that had been initiated by Bonaparte and Nelson was terminated by Bush and Gorbachev. Suddenly, there was no rivalry; there were no rival powers. First one and then the other seemed disinclined to play the Imperial role -- the Russians because they couldn't and the Americans because they wouldn't. Some Muslim leaders are trying to keep playing the old game, and so are seeking another power to play off against the West, as it is embodied by the United States. The prime candidate is the European Union, or at least some parts of the European Union where there is a negative sentiment regarding America. Unfortunately, for those who pursue this policy, even if the Europeans have the will to play this role, they lack the ability.
Maybe the prime candidate is not the European Union, but China.
"Islamic civilization" duly added to my comprehensive oxymoron list.
America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
Download 8 Mb zip file here (60 minute video)
Answer: G_d has the same opinion of moslems that I do.
The Nazi could have had a similar "perception." Nazism "spread rapidly" to Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, Holland, ...
For all of Lewis's supposed brilliance, I find the statement, "Anyone who has been to Jerusalem will surely have visited the Dome of the Rock," to be absurd. I have visited Jerusalem. I have been several hundred feet away from the Dome of the Rock. But I have never visited it, and it's not because I wasn't interested.
ML/NJ
I truly believe Islam is a Satanic manifestation. Further, evil always attempts to copy what God does, and twist it. The Book of Revelation speaks of an un-holy "trinity": Satan, the Anti-chirst, and the false prophet.
But you know what? God is soverign, and in control. And nobody is ever going to kick Him off the throne.
Dear Satan: you lose.
As many Muslims see it, the world continues to be divided between the Islamic world and its age-old imperialist rival, the Christian world.
Not quite. The muslims see the world divided between the islamic world and everyone else. They hate India, too, and that can hardly be regarded as a Christian nation. They hate anyone who is not muslim - the infidel.
The analysis here is very interesting - the debate seems to be simply
#1 seems to the majority like giving in and giving up. #2 is a sure-fired ticket back to the stoneage.
I'm encouraged.
The other thing they need to teach is honesty. It really has nothing to do with democracy, I just detest liars so I thought I'd throw that in ;o)
There certainly has, Mr. Lewis. And you--you sly dog--got the tongues wagging, didn't you?
Who is Bernard Lewis? From what Zeusian head did he spring, fully-formed, with his "clash of civilizations" in mind? How did it spread, like wildfire, throughout the Land? How nice that he was able to fashion a theory so firm, so round, so fully-packed; so available; so terribly appropriate; so capable of being bumper-sticker-ized. How fortunate that his theories so closely conform to traditional Anglo/Saxon prejudices and yet pay careful homage to the proper multi-cultural pieties.
"...I mention this point because I think it's important in understanding Muslim perceptions of what is going on...."
And you're just the fellow to explain it all--so we can understand it the way it needs to be understood.
"We are at the end of not only the century, but of the entire modern age. It began about 500 years ago with the discover of new continents . . . That age is not only passing, it is now over . . One of the superstitions of the modern age . . . is that this age was going to last forever. There's an awful lot of people who still think that. There was an excuse for that in Gibbon's time, there's no excuse for this today. You know, that progress . . also a very debatable and disgusting word . . But this age is now not only passing, it's over finished, termine kaput, you know. What were the main conditions, symptoms of the modern age?Watch John Lukacs give his talk on At the End of an Age At the End of an Age