Islamic Anti-Semitism - NY Times

[Cassandra]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/18/opinion/18SAT2.html

"It is hard to know what is more alarming — a toxic statement of hatred of Jews by the Malaysian prime minister at an Islamic summit meeting this week or the unanimous applause it engendered from the kings, presidents and emirs in the audience.
<snip>
When Israeli officials noted that such talk brought Hitler to mind, the assembled leaders were mystified. Yemen's foreign minister said he agreed entirely with his Malaysian colleague, adding, "Israelis and Jews control most of the economy and the media in the world." The Egyptian foreign minister, Ahmed Maher, called the speech "a very, very wise assessment." Even the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, said the speech was "very correct."
<snip>
The European Union was asked to include a condemnation of Mr. Mahathir's speech in its statement yesterday ending its own summit. It chose not to, adding a worry that displays of anti-Semitism are being met with inexcusable nonchalance."

Since the Times gets hit with the "Jews control the media" canard often, I'm just wondering why they're writing this on Saturday instead of sooner.

[LARED]

1. Hummm

Anti-Semitism is unfortunately expected from Islamic countries but the EU keeping silent about this baffles me.

The European Union was asked to include a condemnation of Mr. Mahathir's speech in its statement yesterday ending its own summit. It chose not to,

I wonder why? It seems simple enough that outright anti-semitism should be spoken against. What's up with the EU?

[rini]

2. the EU has

an enourmous Muslim population and they are afraid of the riots speaking up will bring upon them. Sad but true. The Battle of the Vienna Woods may have been won, but the war is not over. Plus, they probably agree.

[Darranar]

4. Thanks for the daily victimization...

The EU has and will make mistakes.

If Islamic radicalism is such a threat, ma'am, how come far more people die from lung cancer?

And how come a misproportionate amount of our budget is spent on fighting terrorism, when so many other things cause far more deaths?

Has the culture of fear exteneded to a progressive message board?

[drdon326]

8. Thanks to you also....

for the daily delegitimization of anti-semitism.

"The EU has and will make mistakes."....you flippantly let that that
go but cut no such slack to the IDF who are actively protecting its
citizens against jihadofascism.

"If Islamic radicalism is such a threat, ma'am, how come far more people die from lung cancer?"....better question, what does one
have to do with another??

"Has the culture of fear exteneded to a progressive message board?"

oh nooooo.....the culture of realism has. And the fact that as part
of "islamic radicalism", there are people, who as part of that
"radicalism",will use propaganda to tell everyone that this "radicalism" is not a big deal and that they live in some
culture of fear.

[Darranar]

12. Hahahahahahahaha!

Fear is the tool of the establishment. The war on terror is a fraud meant to subdue the populace and serve corporate interests.

The fear of Islamic radicalism is stregthened by Bush and his cronies.

The EU isn't killing people here. Thogh I disagree with their decision, I think that there were those among them who wouldn't agree because they didn't want to delegitimize his whole speech, which did have some appealing points. How much of it was based on anti-semitism is questionable, though it would be naive to think that none of it was.

"Realism," Doctor, does not mean distortion, fraud, and lies. The war on terrorism is a tool. The public's fear of Islamic radicalism as their rights are swept away is also a tool.

[Muddleoftheroad]

17. The war on terror

Has been going on for decades. Now it's a worldwide war with everybody in it whether you like it or not.

It is not a tool. The only tool here is Mahathir and those who agree with him or fail to denounce his comments.

[Darranar]

19. LOL...

I guess we all need a douse of neocon junk now and then.

Now, which two nations have we invaded for this "war on terror?" Have we actually severely disrupted the actions of terrorists? The most we've done is lay the seeds for another generation of terrorists.

What else have we done against terrorism? Well, we repealed our civil liberties, alienated the world, killed thousands of civilians, inspired more terrorists, got stuck in two quagmires...

More to come from the great war on foul Islamic terrorists!

[rini]

34. I prefer realism to being an ostrich

[Darranar]

35. And that has to do with anything because?

[Muddleoftheroad]

46. Forget what was done, do you deny what I said

This war has been going on for decades.

[Darranar]

47. What war?

The war on terrorism? Who's been fighting it?

[Muddleoftheroad]

55. Israel

The Palestinians, the Iranians, the Syrians, the Libyans, etc. the U.S. has too, but it has willingly acknowledged it. The same goes for much of Europe.

[Darranar]

56. Once again, the war on terror is a fraud...

especially since Israel's "war on terror" seems to involve oppression of a native population and simply enhances terror instead of combating it.

As does the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

I will say this for America though; some sort of action in Afghanistan was needed, and Clinton planned for it, but a war like the one that was faught was unneccesary and wasteful.

[Muddleoftheroad]

58. Just because you don't like Israel doesn't mean the war is not active

The war in Afghanistan can be blamed directly on the Taliban, not the U.S. The Taliban wouldn't give up the terrorists living in their nation. That was why the U.S. attacked. Iraq is...just stupid.

Now most 1st and 2nd world nations have to contend with prospects of radical Muslim terrorism or insurgency or both. Need I list the nations where al Qaeda people have been arrested since 9/11? How about the places where Muslims are fighting non-Muslim governments by using bombs against civilians and such?

[Darranar]

59. The war on terror isn't the real war we should be fighting, though...

and that's what you and others fail to see.

The war on terror is a tool of one part of the true enemies of humanity. It is used to advance their causes, and at times it does eliminate a few other enemies of humanity, but all in all it is a tool.

[The Magistrate]

60. One Cannot Always Pick And Choose, Sir

The round of attacks by al Queda rather imposed a sort of war on those attacked.

This does not mean that what is being done in response is necessarily the best course of action in the matter, or even a particularly sensible one.

A serious war in this regard would be directed militarily at Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. An essential strategic element of it would be liquidating the hostilities between Israel and Arab Palestine, by imposing a settlement on both parties. This would dry up a great part the enemy's recruiting pool, and allow piecemeal reduction of its manpower and financial reservoirs.

[Muddleoftheroad]

61. I would add

We need to promote freedom and democracy in the Arab world. Nothing will screw that bunch more than having people who feel like they gained freedom and improved their lives BECAUSE of America.

[Darranar]

63. That would require a drastic change in US Foreign Policy...

though I agree that it is neccesary.

[Muddleoftheroad]

64. Woohoo!

We agree! :) Nice ain't it.

[Darranar]

67. A change, certainly.

n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

77. No 'we' don't...

I'm left really cold by the neo-con strategy that 'we' must impose US values and democracy on other parts of the world. I think it's very dangerous to impose democracy on people who either aren't willing or aren't ready to embrace it. I think people would be more inclined to see the US in a positive light if it stopped meddling in affairs where it's not wanted, while refusing to do anything to help bring freedom and democracy to folk like the Palestinians...

Violet...

[Darranar]

78. "Impose" isn't what should happen...

"promote" is closer to it.

The arab leaders of countries like Saudi Arabia run their misrule on oil money. Cut off that money, and perhaps real change will come. War isn't neccesary for that to happen; a real change in foreign policy is.

[Muddleoftheroad]

79. Two for two

You actually also used the word I had as well. PROMOTE democracy and freedom. That means we shove up the ass of the dictators by advocating freedom. We don't have to impose it, freedom is more natural than dictatorship.

[Darranar]

81. But the way to do that...

and here is where I think we disagree - is by doing some of what i advocated in my post below, and NOT going to war with anyone.

War brings destrution and suffering. Destruction and suffering are EXACTLY what is causing the current problems, and those current problems cause even more destruction and suffering.

Israel's actions are similar.

[Muddleoftheroad]

83. Wars do happen

But I am not advocating war against any nation right now. Terrorists are a different matter.

They are the wild dogs that need to be shot down before they harm others.

[Darranar]

84. But that's the problem...

Trying to destroy terrorism militarily without also using economic and poltical methods in conjunction is like trying to get rid of an ant problem by spraying the workers with insecticide. And not only is it worthless in the long run, but it helps in the long run to create more terrorists all too often and in the actual war you have noncombatant casualties.

[Muddleoftheroad]

87. It is one tool

Face it, there will always be poor people. Always been less advantaged people. Always been parts of the world where things aren't as nice as others. We can work on making some things better, but that is the long and slow approach. It is necessary, but in the meantime, anyone who goes after women and children should die a horrible and nasty ass death.

[The Magistrate]

89. Still, Mr. Muddle

It cannot be the only tool employed. Guerrilla struggles are predominantly political rather than military, and attempting to prosecute them without giving prominence to political measures is certain to fail.

[Darranar]

91. I know that, rest assured...

I'm a cynical idealist. I recognize that things can never be perfect, but I understand that they CAN be made better.

War is a temporary solution, when a solution at all. It must be combined with economic and political actions to actually solve problems.

[Muddleoftheroad]

97. I agree

Wow, a trend!

[rini]

99. well my friend

once again we agree. People should have any type of gevernment they want. Not what we think is "right for them." Change comes when women are educated and are able to participate in daily life without fear. Education is a good start anywhere. Medical care, food, shelter, these are necessities that all cultures everywhere can agree about.

[sushi]

106. I very much agree with you, Violet

:)

[sushi]

105. What we need

is stop meddling in other people's business, until they ask for help. What the West is doing, and has been doing for a very long time, is trying to dominate by meddling.
The systems in the "underdeveloped" world will evolve by themselves, given time. If we get democracy in Iraq now they will most probably choose a Shiite leader who doesn't like the West. Will the US like that, or will it meddle again.

[Darranar]

62. A better plan...

than all this wrangling and war-mongering and anti-terra rhetoric by Bush* would be to start reducing the US's dependence on oil - ALL oil, whether from Russia or Saudi Arabia. This would reduce funds flowing to terrorist groups, and would also reduce the power of various Arab regimes, perhaps stopping or at least reducing their misrule. A real peace settlement in Palestine/Israel would also be an essential part of such a plan, as you pointed out.

Being the dove that I am, I am of the opinion that few things militarily are strictly neccesary in this situation. Action against bases in Afghanistan with air power and Special Forces would have likely produced the same results at less cost and with less innocent casualties then doing what the US did do. The problem with military action in Pakistan is the fact that they have a few nukes handy; such a detterant is always useful, and I doubt that the US would attack them.

A humanitarian aid package for the Middle East is another possible solution, with funds aiming towards education and fixing the failing infrastructure in the Middle East. The main problem with this would be how exactly to distance it from imperialistic motives; I can only remember one plan that did such a thing in regard to fixing infrastructure, which would be Truman's Marshall Plan, and accusations of imperialism followed that one wherever it went.

[The Magistrate]

65. All The Things You Mention, Sir

Would indeed be useful elements. War is not a purely military execise: economic and political power is also involved, and must be used.

[Jim Sagle]

82. Very good ideas here - idealistic AND practical.

[Darranar]

85. Thanks!

[The Magistrate]

88. What A Pleasure To See Agreement Between The Two Of You Gentlemen

That is worth a tot of rum!

[GabysPoppy]

94. Drink it quickly

[Violet_Crumble]

76. Darranar doesn't like Israel?

That's news to me. So if someone supports the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, but does criticise Israels actions in the Occupied Territories, that makes them someone who doesn't like Israel?

Terrorism has replaced Communism as the new bogeyman under the bed. Unfortunately there are some for whatever reasons they have that eagerly jump on the bandwagon...

Violet...

[sushi]

104. I think the US attacked Afghanistan

because it needed to hit back at somebody for 9/11. I'm wondering if the Taliban had allowed a gas pipeline through Afghanistan, would the US have attacked?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Darranar]

28. LOL.

n/t

[drdon326]

29. You found that funny, Darranar??

tell me what you found so funny.

[Darranar]

30. I find lots of things funny...

and that one was one of them. It doesn't mean that I agree with them.

I'm not sure how to explain humor. Maybe you can find a definition somehwere in Mad Magazine.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluesoul]

5. Muslims in Europe

As though the "enormous" Muslim population here in Europe is so radical. Give me a break...

[rini]

36. of course they are not

when French Jews tried to join an International Solidarity protest against the War in Iraq, the Muslem students turned on them and caused a riot. But of course these students weren't radical. So please admit at least some Muslems (how I hate to keep using that word but there are to many countries to list and unfortunately Muslem covers them all) are extremely radical.

[Darranar]

37. Yes, some are...

as are some Jews.

[bluesoul]

3. I agree

I agree that the EU (being European myself) should condemn this. But the problem I have is that those that condemn such statements apply double standards when Israeli concrete actions are to be condemned (like killing Rachel Corrie) or resolutions are passed and vetoed by the same people shouting against this..

[mmm]

10. You nailed it

[LARED]

13. I see your point

But, I make a distinction between condemning an ideology of hate, like antisemitism, and condemning actions by a state that may be viewed as incorrect. Antisemitism is an ideology that permeates large segments of Arab culture and radical Islam, and the EU needs to take a position on antisemitism.

Actions that a state may take, such a the Rachel Corrie incident, or Israels or Palestinians actions in the intifada are not driven by ideology, there are driven by at it's core a land dispute (yes that's grossly simplified). The EU must walk a differ line here. I'm not saying they should be silent in these matters but they need to addressed differently.

[Fight_n_back]

38. Condemnation should be made on its own

what you consistently do is akin to if one said "I deplore that Kobe Bryants accusser forced him to rape her."


When Palestinians killed Americans the first wave was to blame Israel, the second attempt was to say the victims were CIA and one person even said that it was Mossad. Yet Rachel Corrie remains your touchstone, a Mother Theresa of people protecting shrub brush.

[sushi]

102. There's nothing wrong with the EU

The EU is acting in its own interests, just like the US.

[baby_bear]

6. The Times DID report on this sooner

Since the Times gets hit with the "Jews control the media" canard often, I'm just wondering why they're writing this on Saturday instead of sooner.

In fact, there were two articles in Friday's paper. The one you posted was an editorial concerning the content of those articles.

The articles are:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/17/international/europe/17MALA.html
<snip>
Malaysian Attacks Jews
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 17, 2003

BRUSSELS, Oct. 16 (Reuters) — The European Union on Thursday accused Malaysia's prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, of offensive anti-Semitism in remarks he made at an Islamic summit meeting there.

On his way to meeting President Bush at regional economic talks in Bangkok, Mr. Mahathir offered his theory about how world power is organized : "The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them."
</snip>

and

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Islamic-Summit.html
<snip>

Malaysia Apologizes for Comments About Jews
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: October 17, 2003

PUTRAJAYA, Malaysia (AP) -- Malaysia's outspoken leader accused Western countries of using a double standard for criticizing Jews and Muslims, and refused to apologize Friday for a speech in which he said Jews ruled the world.

``Lots of people make nasty statements about us, about Muslims,'' Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said. ``People call Muslims terrorists, they even say ... Muhammed the prophet was a terrorist.''
</snip>

For the life of me, I can't figure out how they got the title of the article from the context of it, because clearly the Malaysian president refused to apologize and in fact elaborated upon his remarks. Weird.

s_m

[bluesoul]

7. generalisation

Not even mentioning how generalising it is "Islamic anti-semitism". As though mr Mahathir was speaking in the name of the Muslim population of the world...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

9. Since Jews are People of the Book

they are to be respected. The Prophet had two Jewish wives who he didn't try to convert from their faith. I understand that some Muslims are anti-semite, but I do get upset when people object to Sharon's policies and are immediately labeled as anti-semite. I support Israelis and Palestinians working for peace. To say that all Jews are the same would be like saying all Americans are like George Bush.

[bluesoul]

11. yep

Exactly! And to say that more then 1 billion Muslims around the world are like Osama Bin Laden is just as stupid...

[Gimel]

45. But to ignore this spouting of filth

would be like ignoring something potentially as dangerous as Mr. bin Laden.

[Violet_Crumble]

54. Can you please pass that opinion on to John Howard?

His public stance on Mahathir's regular potshots has been to 'let them go through to the keeper' without responding to them. Though of course maybe folk here who say what he said about Jews is 'spouting of filth' don't find the much more vitriolic and regular comments about Australia to be filth. I'd hope not, though. All intolerance is disgusting, not just when it manifests itself against one particular group of people. I detest Howard and his policies, but tend to agree with his non-responsive approach to Mahathir's diatribes. It's obvious that Mahathir makes them to gain attention for himself, and probably sees any reaction as confirmation that he's a tough talker and a big fish in a little pond, rather than confirmation that he's what he really is - a nasty bigot who doesn't realise that his complaints about intolerance shown towards Malaysia or Muslims etc get negated by his own reaction to the intolerance, which is to react in an equally intolerant way towards other groups...

Violet...

[Gimel]

95. Your government

...is not my concern. Nor am I a constituent of the Austraian PM. You'll have to do your own response there.

[Violet_Crumble]

96. Let's try this again...

I didn't realise you'd take the title of my post literally and think I was demanding you pick up the phone and give little Johnny Howard a call. If you'd read the actual post, you would have understood what I was saying about the virtues of not giving a serial attention-seeking bigot the attention he craves. It may be of no concern to you that Mahathir has a previous history of more vitriolic comments - after all they've been aimed elsewhere....

I think the governments of any country should be our concern when they violate human rights, something the current Australian government does with it's habit of sticking asylum seekers in prison-like conditions in the middle of nowhere for what can be years. It's a policy that's earned some condemnation from the UN, but since posting in this forum I've learnt that the UN ain't nuthin' but shit, that it's terribly biased, and that criticism of the US makes us anti-American, criticism of Israel makes us Israel haters, so therefore I must be an Australia hater, so we shall talk no more of asylum seekers ;)

Violet...

[Gimel]

101. So I'm at fault

for having posted this? DucTape was trying to tell me the same thing. I'm sure I haven't caused the worldwide protests that followed. Sorry that I'm not in tune with Australian politics, so I can't help you out there.

[Cassandra]

32. You think I didn't notice this was an editorial?

I wasn't asking why they didn't report this sooner, but why they waited for Saturday (and low readership) to comment on it. It is the editors and owners that get attacked regularly on that canard, not the reporters.

[bemildred]

14. "a toxic statement of hatred of Jews"

Having read Dr. M.'s statement in its entirety, I have to say
that as anti-semitic stuff goes it was pretty tepid. Bigoted
in it's expression? Yes. A toxic statement of hatred? No. If
any thing he was trying to calm things down, not inflame hatred.
Not that he was likely effective. If anything all the noise about
this has ensured that his statement is more widely read.

[The Magistrate]

15. There Are Some Interesting Elements To The Gentleman's Speech, Sir

Extracts from its critique of Moslem history and thought, if put up here without attribution by, say, our good Dr. Don, would probably meet stern denunciation as proof of bigotry against Islam.

We do live in a funny damned world, my friend....

[bemildred]

16. What I found interesting is that he

did not see the inappropriateness of certain language,
and that it would discredit his message in the rest of the
World; reminds one of Mr. Limbaugh and the black Quarterback.
OTOH for his intended audience, perhaps a smidgen of Jew-bashing
is de rigeur.

[The Magistrate]

18. That Is Likely, My Friend

And it is worth pointing out that the de riguer "Jew-bashing" is the essence of the point many of us on "Team Israel" urge in this regard: that there is, as a matter of practical fact, a good deal of bigotry against Jews in the broad culture of Islam today.

[Darranar]

20. But what some on "Team Israel..."

fail to realize is that such bigotry is also present in the West against both Muslims and Jews, if one looks - and since the West holds much of the power, this bigotry has more affect.

[The Magistrate]

21. It Is Hardly My Habit To Deny That, Sir

What seems to my mind important about the Islamic bigotry against Jews is that it makes a substantial contribution to the intractability of this problem in the Levant. It has been one of the reasons, from the start, for the refusal of any negotiated compromise, and is one of the chief motives steeling radical elements to persevere in rejectionist and maximalist positions.

[Darranar]

23. That is true as well.

n/t

[varun]

22. After reading about that bigoted U.S. army guy...

who called Muslims "Idol worshippers" (ignorance knows no limits)...and His God better than "Their" God....

I must say that the West is as much guilty of bigotry as the East.

What Mahathir said was despicable...but lets put things into perspective here...West has its own Taliban to deal with.

[Lithos]

24. Yes

Intolerance is , alas, live and well throughout the world.

L-

[Darranar]

26. Sadly, that is true.

n/t

[bemildred]

48. Humility in this regard would serve us all better

than self-righteousness, although it appears it would
provide a good deal less entertainment.

[The Magistrate]

49. Entertainment Is The Key, My Friend

Amusements must be taken where they can be found....

[bluesoul]

25. True

Very true Varun!

[Violet_Crumble]

50. This 'broad culture of Islam'...

What, with Indonesia being the most populous Muslim country in the world, I'd imagine if there was a good deal of bigotry against Jews in the broad culture of Islam, we'd be seeing it raise it's head there big time. So, can you give some examples of this widespread bigotry in the broad culture of Islam in Indonesia?


Violet...

[Darranar]

51. He's right...

sadly enough.

I spend too much time watching the Middle East to really know what's going on in Indonesia, but bigotry of all kinds from all religiions is a problem everywhere.

[Violet_Crumble]

53. Actually, he's wrong...

He made a broad, sweeping comment about an entire religion without taking into account that if the bigotry he speaks of is widespread in the 'culture of Islam' then it would be evident in places like Indonesia, which is the most populous Muslim nation on earth. When it comes to the Arab states, I think there's only one of them that ranks in the top ten of countries by size of their Muslim population, so I think when it comes to saying bigotry is widespread in the culture of a religion, then if it's not evident in the population of the nation with the largest numbers of that religion, then the credibility of the comment is very questionable...

Being an atheist I agree that bigotry of all kinds from all religions is a problem everywhere. And despising all religions equally, I only have a problem when one religion is singled out and bigotry portrayed as a part of the culture of that particular religion. I think with all religions they'd have their share of bigots, but to take those bigots as being representative of any religion is wrong...

Violet...

[The Magistrate]

57. Indonesea, Ma'am

May be the most populous Moslem country, but it is neither predominant among Islamic countries, nor is it particularly typical. It is one of the few where conquest played no part in conversion, and it has accordingly displayed a greater tolerance, and numerous syncretic features in accommodation of earlier beliefs. Even there, among radical elements, there is certainly display of this bigotry.

In the ancestral regions of Islam in the Near East, and in those parts of Africa and Central Asia wherre the religion spread through conquest, wherein are found the founts of orthodoxy and cultural leadership, the bigotry is well marked and deeply rooted. There is nothing wrong with observing, and commenting on, this fact. There is nothing good to be gained by ignoring it. To my knowledge, no religion is unmarked by bigotry: even Buddhists have been known to persecute. It sounds as if our general views of religiosity are largely similar, Ma'am, but it does not seem to me to be to be wrong to take the bigots as representative of their religion: they are often the most active and most loudly devout elements of a faith, after all, and generally those who take its most clearly stated tenets most literally.

[Violet_Crumble]

80. Then there's no 'broad culture of Islam'

You can't make a generalisation like that about a religion and then when it's pointed out that the bigotry rife through this 'broad culture of Islam' isn't evident in the most populous Muslim nation in the world, say that those many millions of Muslims don't count. And Indonesia isn't an isolated case. Other SE Asian nations are the same. And I personally think it's irrelevent whether any religion spread through conquest or traders coming into contact with populations and the religion spreading that way. It's all the same religion and no matter what the origins of that religion was in any area, people are practising the same religion....

And I totally disagree that it's not wrong to take bigots as representive of their religion. It doesn't matter if they're Christian, Jewish or Muslim. Bigots of any of those religions are NOT representative of their religion and have attitudes and carry out actions that are in direct violation of the tenets of their religion...

Violet...

[The Magistrate]

86. It Is Hard To Know What To Make Of Your Line Of Argument Here, Ma'am

We are, after all, participating in a discussioned pitched as consideration of a speech by the Malaysian Prime Minister redolent with such bigotry, and nearby is another reporting on the favorable reception of that speech by the President of Indonesea. Heads of state cannot be dismissed as inconsequential, however tempting. It is customary to consider the Malaysian P. M. a buffoon, but it is worth pointing out his policies, during the recent economic difficulties of Southeast Asia, were sound, and of great benefit to his country. The Indonesean President seems politically skilled, and may be presumed therefore to be catering to some perceptible constituency within her nation.

Certainly all discussion of large cultural blocs and trends must consist of generalization, but it cannot reasonably be foregone on that account. It would be pointless to cavail at identifying a broad culture of Christendom in the world, with certain features widespread within it, but that would not mean all discrete units comprising that bloc are identical, or that all share the same features in the same proportion. Nor does the identification of a unit within a bloc as the most populous mean it is either most typical or predominant. Russia is probably still the most populous country of Europe, but it is hardly typical of European countries, or European culture or politics, on that account. Though it is the largest single unit, it is not a great proportion of the total.

Indonesea is in a similar relation to the Islamic world. It is a little less than a sixth of the Islamic population, with other Southeast Asian countries putting the total to a little over a sixth. Sub-Saharan African countries probably comprise en toto a similar proportion, leaving nearly two thirds of the total population in the contiguous Near Eastern, Central Asian and North African heartland of the culture. The coastal countries of Sub-Saharan Africa have long been closely tied to this, and the Southeast Asian countries have never been too tightly knit into it. This makes them, as a practical fact, a small minority of the whole. That one of them, due to European colonial practice, is a single, and very unatural, jurisdiction, while the predominant region retains a more natural fragmentation, does not alter that status.

Further, there is an appreciable fundamentalist presence in modern Indonesea. My recollection of the cast of characters has dimmed somewhat since the fall of the Suharto regime, but they would probably poll a third of the vote in an honest election. There is a good deal of Wahabbi missionary activity, some radical mahdrassas, and appreciable militia cadre. The Bali attack seems to have been counter-productive to their ambitions, and the army remains firmly set against them. These are good things, but the phenomenon is certainly present, and as secessionist struggles mature, it can be expected to increase, since it provides such a useful organizing principle.

Beyond this, there is something troubling to me about what seems to be a difficulty with any criticism leveled at Islam. Surely it is not to be maintained that Islam is immune from criticism, or that all criticism of Islam is based on bigotry or stereotyping? There are deep flaws in Islamic culture, that must be obvious to any person of progressive views. There is certainly a radical tendency within it that, though a minority, defines a good deal of its current tone, and which is itself bitterly and violently hostile to all that progressives value. The greatest harm this tendency does is to the Islamic peoples themselves, and if left to run unchecked, will only further retard their development, and further diminish their liberties and economic prospects.

As to the final matter, Ma'am, perhaps my curmudgeonly tendencies did carry me away a trifle, but it is not uncommonly my feeling. There does not seem to me much sound ground from which to say, for example, that Pat Robertson is violating the basic tenets of the Christian faith, because he disagrees with Bishop Sprong, or Albert Schweitzer. Each simply cites different portions of the book, and with different emphasises and degrees of literal or symbolic interpertation. As a matter of history, Robertson's views are far more typical of what most Christians have believed during the time the religion has been adhered to than are the doctrines of modern liberal divines.

[Darranar]

90. Those are good points...

But it doesn't make it true that Islam is inherently racist, which is how your comment could have been taken...

I think that progressives perhaps have become a little oversensitive to criticism of radical Islam; that is something that I am probably guilty of myself. What I think many of us feel is that the agenda of the current illegitimate occupant of the White House is being backed by all this yelling about Islamic radicalism - as if islamic radicalism and Islamic extremism and Islamic terrorism were the only threats to our world. These distortions DO sometimes border on racism; not the sort of blatant and intentional racism practiced by some like the Prime Minister of Malaysia, but the sort of subtle racism that those who believe it don't even know is racism.

Threats larger then anything originating from the Middle East exist in our world; some man-made and some not. As efforts to stop and prevent some of these things are swept away by hysteria and fear of Islamic radicalism, I, personally, am angered. It DOES seem to me that our illegitimate president has exploited 9/11 and the public's general fear of such things to push his radical domestic and foreign policies. That is why I call the war on terrorism a fraud; whether or not it needs to be fought, it isn't being fought; rather, it is being used to serve the interests of the few over the many.

[Violet_Crumble]

98. It's easy...

There's a world of difference between criticising radical Islamic elements (something I do myself) and painting a very broad and negative generalisation of the entire religion. There's nothing overly sensitive about objecting to the second, as I object to it when done to any group or religion. What I find unfortunate is the second sentiment is openly expressed in a forum where a bit of Muslim-bashing by those who see Islam as some monolithic religion that doesn't have diversity sees the light of day every now and again...

I hope yr not implying that Mahathir's speech was representative of the Malaysian people or the Muslim population of Malaysia, because it wasn't. Same goes for Megawati, who probably would have stood and applauded if Mahathir had got up there and started reciting the Yellow Pages. The whole concept that she stood up spontaneously and wildly applauded a speech on the basis of a few bigoted comments in it and the rest of the speech, which wasn't bad at all was ignored by her, is a really bizarre concept. When it comes to leaders standing and applauding, I doubt there's anything spontaneous about it, or that it's an indication that it was a rip-roaring speech. There's going to be no spontenaety on Tuesday in our Parliament when Labor MPs stand and applaud Bush when he addresses Parliament, and their standing and clapping will offer no indication as to what they think of him, though I'm cheering on the few rebels who are going to ignore their leaders demand that they show respect and will turn their backs on Bush when he speaks. It's the done thing to stand and applaud leaders regardless of what they're saying. But if you say Megawati is catering to some perceptible constituency in Indonesia, I think you should have a look to see whether or not this constituency actually exists. It shouldn't be too hard seeing they're supposedly perceptible and all...

I've never said or even applied that Islam has to be immune from criticism. I just think that criticism should be constructive and not the sort where Muslims are labelled as anti-semites etc based on nothing but assumptions. If someone were to post here making sweeping and negative generalisations about followers of Judaism, they wouldn't last five minutes before they were shown the door. And so it should be, but I at least try to be consistant in that opinion when it comes to all religions and groups...

Violet...

[dudeness]

39. The call should be

"for every country to denounce racism"..Jews suffer racism the same as any other culture suffers..it is to be condemed..at ALL levels..including racism directed at muslims that occurs in this forum..

[Fight_n_back]

40. Feel free

to alert the moderators of any perceived racism. But remember, on DU, the offended party has no say as to what is racist. It is more likely that the offender can just say, "You are just trying to stifle debate of the worldwide Jewish conspiracy" or something to that effect.

I don't know,maybe you will have better luck.

[dudeness]

41. I feel no need to alert moderators..

comments of a racist nature only castigate the perpetrator and should be displayed for all to make judgment..

[Fight_n_back]

42. One thing though

it is actually against the rules of the message board to make allegations of someone being a racist. So you should either alert the moderators or keep it to yourself.

We just aren't allowed to point out who on the board are rabid anti semites. Its against the rules.

[bluesoul]

43. Anti semites

Rabid "anti-semites"? LOL And who's that supposed to be, I haven't bumped on one till now..

[Fight_n_back]

66. I don't know what you are talking about

I am merley helping someone understand the rules, thats all.

If you are sensitive about something then you should talk to your therapist about it.

[dudeness]

44. thanks for the advice Yang..

allegations of racism based on religious grounds are obscene , but in fact have little impact on me personally as I am an atheist ..whom people choose to worship or follow has no bearing on my life, however I am pleased they find some comfort in their practices..I would dearly love to see a peaceful I/P resolution , not so as people can wail or chant , I do not care..but as an end to unecessary murder and carnage and to make the world a safer place for me and my family..

[Classical_Liberal]

52. Israel needs to get the hell out of the west bank and America

should stop enabling them. If it doesn't this antisemitism in the middle east will spread. The Israelis are not innocent in anyway of bluring criticism of their nation with the Jewish people. That is what we are being too nonchalant and dismissive about. Lack of Democracy in the middle east is unimportant to me as an American and not the cause of muslim antisemitism, or a contributer to it. If it were Bush wouldn't be holding off on letting one happen in Iraq. If it were how do you explain the fact that this antisemitism came from the Prime Minister of Malaysia?

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Darranar]

69. What exactly are YOU saying?

Are you saying that if it weren't for Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, anti-semitism in the Middle East would still be at the level it is now?

Of course there was anti-semitism beforehand; bigotry towards everyone and anyone exists in every culture, every religion, every location. But can you say that Israel has absolutely nothing to do with the level of anti-semitism in the Middle East?

And, btw, I do say that regardless of reasons, anti-semitism and all forms of bigotry are despicable. I do think that the Arab nations are in part responsible for the level of anti-semitic sentiment in the Middle East. However, I also think that Israel does have something to do with the high level of it.

[Fight_n_back]

70. To say that

the group hated bears repsonsibility for being irrationally hated is despicable.

Lynching is not an appropriate response to looking at a white woman.

[Darranar]

71. So you don't think it's true?

You think that if Israel had never existed, if Zionists had never traveled to Palestine, the level of anti-semitism would be the same?

That's ridiculous.

[Fight_n_back]

72. No it isn't

what you are saying is that racism is justified by the actions of the hated and that is not only absurd but dangerous.

[Darranar]

73. I said nothing of the sort...

Atrocities might provoke atrocities, but that doesn't mean that atrocities justify atrocities.

Bigotry towards Jews in the Arab world has to be acknowledged and has to be condemned. It is indeed inexcusable, but that doesn't mean that there is no reason for it.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Classical_Liberal]

92. I consider the occupation bigotry

It is like saying white people in the US were victims in the 60s because Malcom X didn't like them. The Palestinians are the victims here. Some are bigots, but it doesn't change the facts.

[Gimel]

93. Victims in Palestine

Some paelstinians are victims and some are terrorists who provoke the conflict. The creation of the modern state of Israel was not a neutral event, but the land distribution could be accepted by the population in a more humane manner. Terrorists are the opposite of humanitarians. They could in no way be considered victims, except that the suicide bombers accept that role. It has become a tradition.

[Classical_Liberal]

100. Some are terrorist and it will never decline until Israel

get's out. Israel is causing the problem by staying. It is like taking over someones house and expecting not to get punched in the nose, or claiming the fact that you got punched in the nose justifies the fact that you invaded someones house. They shouldn't have to accept land theft.

[rini]

103. Good answer, blame the victim for being....takes all responsibility off

the hater.