The Moral Victory of The Pope
From the desk of Filip van Laenen on Sun, 2006-09-17 17:39
The events of the past days concerning the speech which Pope Benedict XVI gave at the end of his journey to Germany have resulted in what some could describe as an apology towards muslims. I think that in fact the Pope is the moral victor of the conflict, but whether the Islamic religious and political leaders who have mobilized against him will ever understand (or be able to understand) is another question.
The whole story is in fact rather bizarre. In the speech it is clear that the Pope never intended to make any judgment about Islam in general or Jihad in particular. Nevertheless churches are being attacked in the Middle East and ambassadors are called back from the Vatican. At least one striking parallel with the notorious Danish cartoons can be noted: those who lash out the hardest against the Pope, are exactly those who are least informed.
The Secretary-General of the Central Council of the Muslims in Germany (Zentralrat der Muslime in Deutschland) Aiman Mazyek said he could not understand why the speech should insult Muslims. Ali Bardakoğlu, the leader of the Turkish Presidency of Religious Affairs (Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı) first demanded apologies from the Pope but later admitted that he had done so only on the basis of the first, incorrect press releases about the speech. However, he did not admit his mistake entirely spontaneously, but only after some harsh comments by Mehmet Yılmaz in the Turkish newspaper Hürriyet. The comments of the latter did not apply to Ali Bardakoğlu alone, but to the rest of the Islamic world as well.
The intervention of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel is similar to that of Mehmet Yılmaz. In essence she said that the Islamic leaders who are demanding excuses from the Pope should either first read the text of the speech, or simply do not understand the meaning of it at all. If those leaders ever come to their senses, they will perhaps realize that they made fools of themselves. And perhaps even Tasnim Aslam will realize that what she said was nonsense.
Maybe the Pope is the moral winner for those who are able to read, but on the other hand, did he have much choice but to apologize for something he never said? After all, there was the threat of brutal violence, or rather, it had already started with attacks against churches in the Middle East, some of them not even Roman Catholic! Maybe a reference to Luke 6.29 («To him who strikes you on the cheek, offer also the other.») should be made here. But that he saw no other option than to express regret over the fact that he had caused such anger in the Muslim world also says something about the weakness – unwillingness or incapacity? – of the political West to force the Islamic world to reason.
Commentators in the German press also react with surprise at the intensity of the responses coming from the Islamic world, and wonder whether the clash of civilizations has already started. The fact is that today large parts of the Islamic world apparently do not need reason to mobilize against the Christian world, and incorrect reports can spread through the region at lightning speed while religious or political leaders do nothing to calm down people or bring them to reason. On the contrary, they add fuel to the fire and try to beat each other in making yet bolder statements. Quite some moral and intellectual bankruptcy, and how convincing as the ultimate proof that Islam is all about peace and love.
Freedom, western style #2
Submitted by marcfrans on Wed, 2006-09-20 16:49.
Yes, freedom is "freedom, western style". Is there any other in the world of today. Can you give me concrete examples? Please do.
I note that you have managed, again, to avoid answering my two questions, even though I had clearly separated them in two separate paragraphs for you. But you are not strong in making EMPIRICAL OBSERVATIONS, are you? You continue to prefer parroting absurd false slogans.
You say the US is "in a bad way" and Iran is "benefiting". What do you mean? Can you distinguish between (a) trend lines and (b) daily ups and downs and political 'noise'? Per capita income in the US is around $ 40000, and in Iran below $ 4000. That is a ratio of 10 to 1. And in Iran the trend line is downwards (not the last year because of temporarily high oil price), which means that people in Iran are poorer today than they were 20 years ago, etc..
You ask if I have "freedom of speech". I certainly do, but that is because I do NOT live in Iran, nor in Belgium. It is true that in some European countries freedom of political speech is 'abridged' and limited. But that is because they are already part of Eurabia. In other words, your local allies (i.e. the radical-left and the naive-left) have already managed to violate their own constitutions by limiting 'free speech'. But it is not as bad YET in Eurabia than in Arabia.
And, yes I can criticise "the jews". Of course! Have you ever looked at the European media, and some of the American media. They are full of criticism of "the jews", and certainly of Israeli political leaders. But, I forgot.....you don't make empirical observations.....
The Islamic World is once again predictable and stupid...
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Tue, 2006-09-19 08:01.
Today the average Muslim is the child who "plays poorly with others." Individually, the vast majority of Germans during the early 1930s were average people and as frustrated with the Depression; similarly Soviet citizens of the 1950s were still reeling from Operation Barbarossa, and terrified of Allied invasion and the American atom bomb...
However, none of the "average person is good" or "just like us" arguments work in the realm of national security. That so-called "minority" of National Socialists conquered Continental Europe from the Volga to the Atlantic, nominally responsible for tens of millions of deaths in the Soviet Union alone. The "minority" of hardline Communists led by a single dictator were quite capable of gobbling up East-Central Europe...
As much as I see peoples of Iran and Lebanon as the future of a more properous and moderate Middle East, the regime in Teheran must not be allowed access to nuclear weapons under any circumstances. Pakistan, India, and North Korea are quite enough to contend with for all the global powers incl. the PRC. As for the Muslims living in the West, it is time for them to go. There is enough silent support of radical Islam to label them as a threat:
Freedom on the Western style
Submitted by Nansi on Tue, 2006-09-19 16:00.
I really did not know that the American gave a crap about freedom and democracy. I wonder what would happen if Iraq did not have oil and other natural resources. I wonder if Israel was not in occupied Palestine and Iraq was no threat to the little Zionist state. Get your head out of the sand Mr. marcfrans. The US is in very bad situation as it is and only Iran is benefiting from the situation not the US. This is normally how it is empires bring their destructions onto themselves.
If you have freedom of speech as you claim then tell me if you can criticize the Jews? Can you make any doubts about holocaust? Or may be the anti Semitic laws will haunt you all over.
Another thing you people ought to think about is that the way you think may not suite other people. So maybe your democracy does not fit into another part of the world.
Lastly, I will tell my little APOSTLE PAUL; no one screws little boys like your ministers and religious leaders.
Criminally violent mind-set
Submitted by Miriam on Tue, 2006-09-19 01:52.
There is no doubt that the islamofascists have a serious mental issue of criminally violent mind-set that is bred by quran. If quran was holy, this wont be happening.
Soon after conversion, the individual who was a gentleman becomes ready to kill like the American taleban, John Walker Lindt and shoe-bomber, Christopher Reed.
Why? The reason is simple:=
quran promotes savagery and that is why places like India has the maximal number of barbaric savages - 200+ mil and counting..Serbia is not any better with kosovar savagery.
Submitted by Miriam on Tue, 2006-09-19 01:52.
There is no point in civilizing the islamofascists who with their criminally violent mind-set, would always remain uncivilized brutes.
Why only one religion is so stinky rotten - out of all world's great religions like Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism...? The reason is simple:=
quran promotes savagery and that is why places like India has the maximal number of barbaric savages - 200+ mil and counting..Serbia and Bosnia are not any better with islamic savagery.
Submitted by Kapitein Andre on Mon, 2006-09-18 15:53.
Apparently in Somalia an Italian nun was shot 4 times in the back while the Union of Islamic Courts looked on...
Violence against women disgusts me to begin with, and quite frankly if we retaliated in kind against Muslims in the West, those back home would have to listen up, or start to see the transfer payments of their brethren dwindle...
Submitted by APOSTLE PAUL on Mon, 2006-09-18 19:46.
Look, I am tired of coddling these assholes. We try to be tolerant and put up with their bullshit. I am sick of it. They won't allow their prophet to be slandered, but they want to kill in response. Well i'm ready. Fuck islam, fuck mohamed, fuck all of your clerics and your dumbass offspring. You goat fuckers will always be goatfuckers. mohamed is a false prophet. You believe whatever the head sand sucker tells you. I hate you. mohamed sucks goat dicks in Hell. Notice that I don't capitalize mohamed. That's because he was a fucker of little boys.
Nansi, the hate-speech guy..
Submitted by marcfrans on Mon, 2006-09-18 15:20.
What is your problem? What is it that you are criticising?
1) Is it the 'freedom' of speech of the pope? Can't he express his opinions just like you and me, or Ahmadinejad, or Putin, or whoever? Who is rioting and burning and killing when Ayathollahs and mullahs speak? If you attack the freedom of speech of the pope, or anyone else, you lose all moral standing for your own freedom of speech. You are a hypocrite.
2) Is it the removal of a terrible tyrant and the Baath Regime in Irak? What has that got to do with the freedom of speech of the pope or anyone else? You like to parrot false slogans like "occupation" and "freedom to kill" etc...But these are smokescreens that have nothing to do with the issue at hand. Furthermore, the USA has removed tyrants before, say in Germany and Japan for example. I don't see them "occupying" these countries. And, as a European I have no problem with the USA removing a terrible tyranny like nazism. Why should you have a problem with them removing Arab fascism? After all, Irak has today elections, its own government, etc... If Irakis want to kill each other, then you should blame them for that behavior. Not the Americans who gave them chances for freedom and democracy. Nansi, you are a hypocrite.
Submitted by xyan on Mon, 2006-09-18 11:00.
It says a lot about the state of contemporary Islam when so many react with so much affect for so little - nothing even. On a personal level that sort of behaviour points to insecurity.
Muslims not to resisit
Submitted by Nansi on Mon, 2006-09-18 09:42.
I wonder if the pope would have used those words if Muslims have not resisted the barbaric occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine…etc.
I wonder if George Bush would have used the word Islamic fascists if his superb army was getting things done in the places he sent them since their mission was to spread democracy and freedom (the freedom to kill).
I wonder why John Paul II apologized to the Jews and freed them from the blood of Jesus where all previous popes would not even touch on the subject. Maybe his reasons were more political than anything else.
No pope ever at least as of yet apologized to the Muslims for the savagery and barbaric wars the crusaders waged on the Islamic world before Jerusalem was cleansed at the hands of Salah-A-Deen in 1187.
In his speech Benedict XVI:
“In the seventh conversation …edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion". According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur'an, concerning holy war.”
This is not only misleading statement but big fat lie since those verses were revealed onto the prophet much later when he had political and military power. Those Verses were revealed in Medina after the migration from Mecca.
The pope knew everything he said and sure meant to attack Islam while quoting very racist emperor similar to George Bush who in our time blames Islam for his failures. I guess the Muslims should welcome and accept the occupation and stealing of their resources to appease the president and the pope.
Islam In Europe
Submitted by Esther on Mon, 2006-09-18 08:51.
Islam In Europe
Submitted by Esther on Mon, 2006-09-18 08:50.
Here are some of the Vatican's comments at the time of the Danish Mohammed cartoon controversy.
The freedom of thought and expression, confirmed in the Declaration of Human Rights, can not include the right to offend religious feelings of the faithful. That principle obviously applies to any religion."
Coexistence, the statement continued, calls for "a climate of mutual respect to favor peace among men and nations."
The statement continued: "Moreover, these forms of exasperated criticism or derision of others manifest a lack of human sensitivity and may constitute in some cases an inadmissible provocation.
"A reading of history shows that wounds that exist in the life of peoples are not cured this way."
The Vatican clarified that the government cannot be held responsible for the actions of the press in its country, but the "authorities might and should intervene eventually according to the principles of national legislation."
I wonder if the Vatican has changed its mind on the topic.
Islam In Europe
Exposing the vulgar lies, indecent hate and obscene ideology
Submitted by Miriam on Sun, 2006-09-17 19:24.
I could not have said it any better:=
"...there was the threat of brutal violence, or better, it had already started with attacks against churches in the Middle East, some of them not even Roman Catholic!
large parts of the Islamic world apparently do not need any reason any more to mobilize against the Christian world, and incorrect reports can spread through the region at the speed of light while religious or political leaders do nothing to calm down people or bring them to reason again. On the contrary, they bring more wood to the fire .."
We have been misled that they "mobilize against the Christian world" while the truth is they whip up xenophobic frenzy against all the infidels - be it Hindus, Buddhists or Sikhs...and so on. They have been burning churches in South Asia and blaming it on the Hindus.
We have solid and reliable friends in ASIA. By foolishness, we should not lose them as we are losing the Catholics of Latin America with Chevez of Venezuela hugging the iranian islamofascist types - some of whom are already running smuggling rings as Lebanese immigrants and as pakki illegal aliens there and all over the globe.