Friday, September 15, 2006

Muslims accuse Pope of ‘bigotry’

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

Not the words of the Pope, but his quotation of a relatively obscure 14th-century Byzantine Christian emperor, in a speech given in Freising Cathedral. Pope Benedict twice said ‘I quote’, emphasising that the words were not his own, and added that violence was ‘incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul’. He also admitted that the words were ‘brusque’.

But none of this has placated the wrath of Muslims all over the world. The problem is that if one is quoting someone else’s words to make one’s point, the inference is that they accord with one’s belief, and the Pope neither affirmed nor repudiated the words. Anger is particularly acute in Turkey, where the Pope is due to make a visit next year. It was a Turk who attempted to assassinate Pope John Paul II (or was it a Soviet plot?). Will history repeat itself?

The head of the Muslim Brotherhood thinks it may. He has asked how the Pope ‘the highest authority in the West’ – could issue statements which could ‘trigger wars among the followers of religions and threaten international peace’. The Pope's remarks ‘have aroused the anger of the whole Islamic world’ because they are, apparently, a ‘distortion’, and reflect his ‘ignorance’. Certainly, surah 2:256 says: ‘There is no compulsion in religion’. But it is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was powerless and under threat. Later, as he gained political power and military strength, it is written in Islam’s most sacred writings that he advocated spreading Islam by the sword.

Instead of hurling insults, therefore, it would be more illuminating if Muslim leaders could enlighten the kafir of the justifiable reasons for Mohammed’s murderous and violent actions, or tell us why the Pope has misunderstood the Islamic concept of ‘holy war’. They might even consider a little restraint, since their own words are now edging towards justification of violence against ‘the West’, on whose behalf they seem to think the Pope speaks. They might even consider reading the entire speech.

Given the histrionics, hyperbole, partial quotation, wilful misinterpretation, threats of violence, and allusions to more ‘holy war’, it may be that the ‘religion of peace’ is not so tolerant of other faiths or contrary theologies at all. This being the case, the Emperor’s 14th-century assessment of Islam may just have been spot on.


Blogger istanbultory said...

One cannot help but rue the painful absence of militants like Mr. Al-Amin in discussions like the current one...
Here in Turkey Ali Bardakoglu, head of Turkey's Religious Affairs Directorate, castigated the pope statements on Islam, adding that he expected the pontiff to apologize for his remarks.Bardakoglu remarked that prejudiced, hostile, biased, and non-scientific assessments have often been made in the West regarding Islam, its prophet and the Muslim world.

But surely Turkey's top religious leader would agree with the pope's assertion in his regensberg address that "Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul,".
Or then again maybe he wouldn't

15 September 2006 at 15:05  
Blogger Croydonian said...

I was much amused by one of the Islamic lobbies in the UK having asked the government to exclude the Koran from legislation on incitement to religious hatred. I wonder why.

15 September 2006 at 15:15  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr GC,

His Grace laments the absence also. He further notes that few Mohammedans stick with his revered blog, and he wonders why.

Mr Croydonian,

Indeed, indeed. The increasing frequency with which Christians are being arrested for various 'phobic' crimes (simply handing out gospel tracts, in quite a few instances) must herald the imminent arrest of assorted Mohammedans for quoting the Qur'an. It is hardly the epitome of inter-faith relations.

15 September 2006 at 15:29  
Blogger istanbultory said...

But how will the Muslim response to the current furore evolve?
If the Mohammedan masses are whipped up by their leaders into torching a Catholic church or two somewhere or garroting the odd priest...they will sort of be proving the Pope right. It's a tough one for the fundamentalists to call - unretrained violence or resoned debate but I confidently expect they'll err on the side of bloodshed...

15 September 2006 at 15:31  
Anonymous Rick said...

I thought this was more interesting still - that Erdogan's party has exposed itself so clearly.

The Pope has done us great service before our very stupid politicians handed over the EU to Turkey...........their madness is inducing them to surrender control of our justice system on 22 September, but their destructive craze may be halted by The Pope with this reference to Byzantium under siege .........

He is warning Europe that just as Byzantium - The Second Rome - was besieged until it eventually fell - sotoo is Europe itself once more courting disaster

15 September 2006 at 15:44  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Apologies for the grevious digession but I thought some might be interested to know (if you don’t know already) that a fearless scourge of the left and Eurabia, Orianna Fallaci has died.Well, at least that's what the New York Times is reporting.
Hat tip to Mr. Croydonian.

15 September 2006 at 15:46  
Blogger Wibble said...

Thank you for your summary of this - your finishing paragraph was excellent and I especially liked the remark "They might even consider reading the entire speech. "

I don't always agree with you, but on this occassion you've reached a very high standard and better yet, have my full agreement!

15 September 2006 at 16:10  
Blogger istanbultory said...

The deputy leader of Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan's party, Mr. Salih Kapusuz has declared that the pope:
"... is going down in history in the same category as leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini."

The pope is scheduled to make an official visit to Turkey at the end of November. I wonder if he'll turn up...

15 September 2006 at 16:31  
Blogger Wibble said...

Hat tip to Mr Eugenides for this quote: "Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence"

15 September 2006 at 16:35  
Anonymous Rick said...

Orianna Fallaci has died

Yes in Florence - it is reported in Der Spiegel she was 76.

15 September 2006 at 16:45  
Blogger Puppy's Multitasking Dream Brew said...

'Spot on' indeed.

15 September 2006 at 17:18  
Anonymous Rick said...

So The Pope was invited to visit Turkey in November by the Head of the Orthodox Church there but since the Tuks won't recognise him they put up their President to invite the Pope to demean the Head of the Orthodox Church.

It is clear that whatever flavour Muslims come in they are either at your feet or at your throat. This should finally keep Turkey on the other side of the EU border

15 September 2006 at 18:21  
Blogger istanbultory said...

The Turkish media is certainly making prodigous efforts to fan the flames of Mohammedan discontent. Expect to see a few protest marches and demos in Istanbul/ Ankara, etc, on your tv screens over the next couple of days.

If Benedictus ever arrives in Turkey, he needs to have a word with the authorities about the offices of the Vatican representation in Istanbul which (unlike those in Ankara) have no diplomatic status.

The Turkish authorities refuse to grant the Vatican's office diplomatic status and have been refusing to do so for the past 150 years. I guess the dhimmis should know their place....

15 September 2006 at 19:08  
Anonymous Rick said...

I think it must have percolated into even the densest rock that Muslims loathe Christians for their attainments as much as their moral superiority. Arnold Toynbee take note

15 September 2006 at 19:58  
Anonymous the ironic maiden said...

"I think it must have percolated into even the densest rock that Muslims loathe Christians...

If only it was just Christians they loathed, I could sleep easier.

15 September 2006 at 20:09  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Anyone for a Crusade? Get to see the world and participate in a spot of slaughter along the way....

15 September 2006 at 20:37  
Blogger CityUnslicker said...

As an Anglican country should we not be happy at the potential overthrow of hated catholicism?

just kidding, I see they have burned effigies already; have they been stockpiling in preparation?

15 September 2006 at 22:45  
Blogger Fruning Graplecard said...

Is this story news? The Pope has, or might have insulted Islam. Islam is the man in the pub. You have seen him, he's the one at the end of the bar, tight as cat gut, with a bulging neck and blood shot eyes and he's saying, "Are you LOOKING at me?"

There is no appeasing them. We are going to have to stand and fight or run away. There is going to be no middle ground on this one.

15 September 2006 at 23:21  
Blogger dearieme said...

Yer Grace, wouldn't you rather have been burned in effigy than suffering the real thing at the hands of the......ooops?

15 September 2006 at 23:51  
Blogger Praguetory said...

I don't know the real reaction, (I'm a little out of touch in this suburb) but the BBC makes it very clear that Islamic anger is growing. "Flames" and "fanning" spring to mind. I seem to remember a cartoon...

16 September 2006 at 01:32  
Blogger Praguetory said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

16 September 2006 at 01:32  
Anonymous Rick said...

As an Anglican country should we not be happy at the potential overthrow of hated catholicism?

Islam does not despise Christianity denominationally but wholly and completely.

Only factionalists divide their forces when under attack

16 September 2006 at 06:28  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

I would like to recommend to you all, a rather excellent example of modern oration ... one of the finest I have heard in a very long time anyway.

Acutely accurate, and delivered sans script, interrupted by a too impatient interlocutor in full flow, but still carried through to its end with dignity and aplomb. Some of you will doubtless find it all very inspirational. I sincerely hope you do.

Please recommend this speech (URL link) to as many people as you have the time to contact.

The audio quality is not that good, so ensure your volume settings are set high.

And who is the speaker? None other than the brother of Mail-on-Sunday columnist, Peter Hitchens ... namely ... Christopher Hitchens.

Here is his contribution to a debate held very recently in Washington DC, to celebrate the formal opening of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The audio stream should open via the Quicktime plug-in in your PC browser. If you haven't yet got one installed, then your browser should prompt you to install one, by connecting to (free download).

I suggest you find a comfortable chair, and first get your self a delicious cup of tea or coffee. His oration lasts for about 7 mins. It will lift your spirits.

Click on this link I am providing, and then dwell on the reality that Englishmen truly are a breed apart. The world needs us and our unique qualities.

Over to you Mr. Christopher Hitchens.

A good, contented, and optimistic weekend to you all!

16 September 2006 at 07:35  
Blogger istanbultory said...

In an interview with Turkish newspaper "Zaman" German Green Party politician said that the Pope’s primary duty was to build bridges (!?!) between Muslims and Christians and urged the Vatican to clarify the Pope’s statements. Roth, citing the crusades as the Catholics’ jihad, stressed the Pope should have referred to the Catholic Church’s history of savagery as well.
While Roth’s view are clearly of no significance whatsoever, they do painful reveal the Dhimmi sell-out of most of the European left. Thankfully, the leadership of the Roman Catholic church increasingly argues that a meaningful dialogue with the Muslim world is not possible while Christians are denied religious freedom in Muslim states. A quick example- a small Catholic community in the southern Turkish city of Adana has been trying to obtain state permisssion to establish a church there...since 1967 (without success).

Well, even the leader in The Guardian (16/9/ 2006) says “…There cannot be dialogue without rigor and openness. The Muslim world should also take pains to be thoughtful in its response, and perhaps less quick to take offence…”
I would certainly note that as healthy progress from a section of the left-liberal elite. Is the message finally, if ever so slowly, getting through to even the left (if not the German Green Party?)
Could it really be true?

16 September 2006 at 08:20  
Anonymous Ulster Man said...

The Pope should build a bridge. He is a Pontiff. A Pontiff is a bridge. I think its derivation is something to do with the way of salvation.

I'm kindof pleased the Pope is in deep trouble on this one. Rome has been purposely misrepresenting Protestantism for centuries. Now they know what it feels like to be unfairly criticised.

16 September 2006 at 09:41  
Anonymous vikki said...

Your Grace,
Arent we such hypocrites! we love to criticise our Muslim brethren for being trigger-happy.....but then there are some our Christian brethren on this forum who would react violently at any real or imagined slight.Does charity not begin at home? These people seek to curtail freedom of speech through anger,verbal abuse,long speeches......this brings to mind the Pharisees.....all they probably need is a flowing gown.....they dont need to go to the market place....they are already in the market place!(this forum) but then again they need a pious look to go with this!......Before I incur the wrath of our dear brother(s)I must hasten to add I was merely quoting from the Bible! Since intellectualism is devoid of humour,I must stifle a smile.Your Grace, I am sorry I got carried away. I shouldnt have voiced my views on this for I am only a woman and a woman should always know her place!

Going ack to the topic at hand.Does Shakespeare not tell us Its only cowards who die before their time....? Does the valiant not taste death but once? Did your grace not try to avoid it by recanting? When you saw the death was inevitable, did your courage fail you? I think not! You would have been quaking in your boots begging for your life instead of difiantly putting out your right! I do not believe the Pope spoke hastily......He said what he wanted to say.....probably knowing he could end up paying with his life.......! The ball is now in their court let them prove him wrong! If Christians believed one tenth of their Bible the way Muslims believe their Koran, the story will be different today! When Rageh Omaar decided he wanted to write about "Christ's Resurrection"... Did the Christians do more than debate? What would have happened had a Christian chosen to write about Phophet Mohammed in the same fashion?

16 September 2006 at 09:48  
Anonymous Colin said...

Thank you His Grace, for this well-written article.

@ Rick,

Thank you for the link to the reaction of Erdogan's party.

According to Rick's link "Salih Kapusuz, deputy leader of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamic-rooted party, said Benedict's remarks were either "the result of pitiful ignorance" about Islam and its prophet or, worse, a deliberate distortion."


In 1997, when Erdogan was mayor of Istanbul, he recited a poem in the course of a political speech.

"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, the believers our soldiers,"

As a consequence, he had to serve a four-month prison sentence in 1999 for "inciting hatred based on religious differences".

Under the court ruling, Erdogan was banned from public life and political life forever.

According to the Time magazine, "Erdogan has gone to considerable lengths to distance himself from the Islamist label.".."Speaking to Time dressed in a crisp blue suit and red tie, Erdogan insisted that he was a moderate in all things, and that he has no interest in imposing Shari'a, the strict form of Islamic law, in Turkey, even if it were permitted by law. And he denies outright that the AK is an Islamist party... Saying anything else, of course, would land Erdogan in jail again."

16 September 2006 at 10:40  
Anonymous Colin said...

@ GC,

Thank you for your information about Mrs. Roth, one of the leaders of the Green Party in Germany.

I apologize for my inability to get the amusing image of Mrs. Roth in a burka out of my head. She would look much better in a burka and TV audiences would not have to put up any longer with her hysterical facial expressions. Obviously, Sharia has its advantages. His Grace, please forgive me for these improper thoughts.

16 September 2006 at 11:23  
Blogger Dark_Heretic said...

Your Grace,

An excellent posting on a 'touchy' subject.

I must congratulate you on your site its postings are most lucid, illuminating and often send you off looking for more information.

On a lighter note does anyone know if the company that makes the flammable effigies is listed on any stock market? The amount that are ready at any given moment speaks of a well oiled machine and is surely worthy of buying shares in?

16 September 2006 at 12:26  
Anonymous Colin said...

@ Vikki,

You are correct about critizing hypocrisy. But than again, what would you like to do to protect yourself from becoming enslaved by Sharia ?

Is it any wonder that men react aggressively when feeling under attack. In all the animal kingdom including homo sapiens, males defend their group against outside aggressors. Psychologists differentiate between aggression and reactive aggression. The former serves the purpose of social domination and is elicited by the weakness of the victim. The purpose of reactive aggression is defense and it is activated by fear. It's a form of deterrence like the barking of a dog to scare burglars.

Isn't it much better that men are - at least in words - attempting to defend your freedom instead of converting to a religion which puts women down by promoting men to their masters.

In regard to the gender war elicited by some feminists, men would have more to win than to lose by converting to Islam since the latter puts men in an advantageous and women in a disadvantageous position. Women from Islamic countries successful in the Western world know the difference. Among former Islamic believers, the strongest opponents of Islam and the fierciest defenders of Western values are not men but women. These women know from their own experience what is advantageous to them. On the other hand, women in the West vote more often than men for parties promoting immigration from Islamic countries. Thus Western Women are destroying their own liberties.

A good example are female teachers in Europe. They are fiercely favouring multiculturalism. And now they have a problem because the young men among the students from an Islamic background don't respect women and occassionaly beat or kill their women teachers because of bad grades supposedly showing a disrespect of male superiority according to press reports. For instance in Northern Germany, a woman teacher was killed at home. In France, a teacher was beaten in class and filmed by mobile phone camera. The clip can be found on the internet. In Berlin, the principal of a school (a woman) demanded the authorities to close down her school because it was impossible to maintain order. She was replaced by a man. He is more respected by its students and order was restored.

My impression is that you are referring to MI's comments concerning dropping atomic bombs, feminism, and the relationships of races.

I do not share his view on these matters. But I understand his strong emotional reactions which are motivated by fear. In his phantasy, he is saving his group by destroying the aggressor. But these are just phantasies, sort like superman saving the planet. He knows that it is not going to happen. He is a human with emotions, fears, a strong intellect, and very knowledgable. I always enjoy reading his comments. And often I learn something new from him. It is good that he is sharing his thoughts with us, even if we do not always consent with him. And wouldn't it be boring if everybody had the same opinions?

Don't feel offended. Just enjoy the diversity of views.

16 September 2006 at 12:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@ Mission impossible,

Many thanks for giving us the link to Christopher Hitchens' marvellous speech. I listend to it in awe and pleasure because of his oratory skills and clear-mindedness.

More of Christopher Hitchens would be greatly appreciated.

As a German, I absolutely agree with your conclusion that "Englishmen truly are a breed apart. The world needs us and our unique qualities."

16 September 2006 at 13:35  
Blogger Rigger Mortice said...

War,it's the only peaceful solution

16 September 2006 at 14:08  
Anonymous vikki said...

I havent mentioned names! Perhaps I am the coward.....Maybe I should start quaking in my shoes....or should I should put on my running shoes...? Maybe I should stay and fight like a man(sorry woman)....but then again I havent really said anything have I? I will leave you with the words of William Lenthall when asked if he had seen any of the five MPs King Charles 1 had ordered to be arrested.He said "I have neither eye to see, nor tongue to speak here, but as the house is pleased to direct me" So Colin, how are you pleased to direct me......?

16 September 2006 at 14:13  
Anonymous Rick said...

.this brings to mind the Pharisees..

and what pray is wrong with The Pharisees ? What do you know of The Pharisees as opposed to the Sadduccees ? Do you know the Pharisses are Perushim and the foundation of modern Judaism ? Just what is it you find so wrong with The Pharisees who are surely one of the more devout and consistent believers in God and the foundation of much of the Christian Gospels ?

Did you understand that Resurrection is a Pharisaic doctrine alien to Sadduccees ?

Claudia Roth is a nonentity, a former dramatist at the Dortmund City Theatre and a member of the Humanist Union, Pro-Asylum, and the Lesbian & Gay Association (LSVD). Like most Greens she is an atheist - they are Pantheists rather than christians

16 September 2006 at 14:16  
Anonymous vikki said...

rick, see my post on Dr David Jenkins then we 'll go from there....

16 September 2006 at 14:25  
Blogger istanbultory said...

The “Religion of Peace” strikes back: The Balance Sheet so far...

Following Friday's prayer sermon, Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya condemned the Pope’s comments, demanding him to retract his offensive remarks. Four churches attacked in Palestinian areas on Saturday

A bomb attack took place on a church in Basra, southern Iraq on Saturday.

Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi called on the pope to withdraw the comments which he said had offended Muslims all over the world. "The pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created," Abdullah was quoted as saying.

Indian Muslim leaders and political parties have demanded an apology as well. The chief cleric of the 17th-century Jama Masjid mosque in New Delhi said "What the Pope said is absolutely wrong. Prophet Mohammed only preached love and peace." Police in Kashmir detained nearly two dozen people protesting Benedict's remarks in the second straight day of anti-pope rallies in the territory.

Turkish Prime Minister R.T. Erdogan has called for a papal apology if Benedict’s scheduled visit to Turkey is to take place. The pope must apologize for his "ugly, unfortunate statements".

All fairly predictable…at least, there haven’t been any beheadings so far.

16 September 2006 at 14:56  
Anonymous Rick said...

Nothing there has happened which does not happen usually in Muslim countries.

Churches are regularly burned, Christians routinely persecuted and attacked. It is only nbow that the media points its lens where Christians have suffered physical and mental abuse at the hands of Muslims and the only revelation will come if Muslims in the West one day reap the what their co-religionists are so enthusiastically sowing

16 September 2006 at 15:04  
Anonymous Rick said...

16 September 2006 at 15:07  
Anonymous vikki said...

rick, I guess you now agree I know the difference between the Pharisees and the Saducees

16 September 2006 at 15:21  
Anonymous Colin said...

@ Vikky,

Thank you for your reply.

Sorry for my misinterpretation. I thought that blogging is about the exchange of ideas.

You posted an idea and I posted mine.

Now you seem to be claiming that you are a victim not allowed to say anything by writing "I have neither eye to see, nor tongue to speak here, but as the house is pleased to direct me" So Colin, how are you pleased to direct me......?"

As far as I can see, I did not criticize you. It seems that the pure fact that I added some ideas after you already had expressed your undoubtedly valuable thoughts is considered an offense.

So, Vikky, please enlighten me about what kind of comments are permitted in replying to your comments.

16 September 2006 at 15:31  
Blogger Ramon Goma Segui said...

His Grace, why the Pope deserves now a better treatment other than King of the Vatican of Hitler's Disciple (as a couple posts before)? Is it because you think he agrees with you or because you can doctor his words to the advance and benefit of your particular catholic-hate agenda?

16 September 2006 at 15:37  
Anonymous vikki said...

Colin, I am all for a good laugh! was just trying to have one.....I am sincerely sorry if you misunderstood me.

rick, i despair are you the only one who understands my style of writing? gc...? croydonian....

16 September 2006 at 15:53  
Blogger Cranmer said...

Mr Ramon Goma Segui,

His Grace suggests you improve your command of the English language before you attempt to engage with him in theology, or presume to judge his opinions on any matter.

16 September 2006 at 16:05  
Blogger istanbultory said...

The one known as Mr. Ramon Goma Segui, obviously not quite up to speed regarding His Grace's strictures on erudition and lucidity.

As for Vikki, I am fully capable of discerning the wit and wisdom, cut and thrust in your distinguished contributions. Others, alas.....

His Grace, and other esteemed denizens of this blog, will be aggrieved to learn that Mr. Iain Dale has failed to nominate Cranmer's blog as one of the Top 100 politically-non aligned blogs. I have forcefully expressed my fury at this regrettable ommission in the appropriate comments section at Mr. Dale's place. I suspect others will want to follow suit.

16 September 2006 at 17:11  
Blogger istanbultory said...

To be fair, Cranmer's blog is at no:8 in the Top Conservative blogs. My fury stands somewhat abated.

16 September 2006 at 17:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So what is Iain Dale's aversion to religion ?

16 September 2006 at 17:49  
Anonymous margarethoxha said...

Anonymous said...
So what is Iain Dale's aversion to religion ?

Probably has something to do with the fact that he is an atheist.
Mr. Dale's politics are highly virtuous though.

16 September 2006 at 18:53  
Anonymous Colin said...



"The Prophet said: the Jews will hide behind the rock and the tree, and the rock and the tree will say: oh servant of Allah, oh Muslim this is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!… ”

These were the words, Sheikh Madiras, an Imam from Palestine, used in 2004 to address his faithful according articles written by the German journalist Matthias Kuntzel. "No-one protested when the Palestinian Authority’s official TV station broadcast this call for genocide."

The readers of this venerable blog might be interested in the little known historical relationship between the Third Reich and jihadism as revealed by the writings of Matthias Kuntzel. Here some quotations from several of his articles posted at

"Although Islamism is an independent, anti-Semitic, antimodern mass movement, its main early promoters – the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Mufti and the Qassamites in Palestine – were supported financially and ideologically by agencies of the German National Socialist government" discovered Matthias Kuntzel.

"ally of the Nazis was the Muslim Brotherhood, which in 1939 received more money from Berlin than any other Egyptian group. These Muslim Brothers were the nucleus of Islamism and have remained at the centre of Islamic antisemitism up to the present time. The Nazis appreciated not only their anti-Jewish campaigns but also their “fierce hostility to Western liberalism”, as Giselher Wirsing, a prominent journalist of the Third Reich, put it.

The most powerful tool of Nazi propaganda in the Islamic world was, however, a radio transmitter near Berlin whose very existence is virtually unknown today. In the years from 1939 to 1945 the Zeesen short-wave transmitter broadcast its Arabic-language programs to the Islamic world every day. These programs skilfully mixed antisemitic agitation with quotations from the Koran as well as bits of Arabic music. A contemporary described the constantly repeated message like this: “the Jew has been the eternal enemy of the Muslims since the time of Mohammed. It is pleasing to God to kill him”. Between 1939 and 1945, no other radio station enjoyed similar popularity in public places in the Arab world as this Nazi broadcast which from 1941 onwards was directed by the Mufti.

"Wirsing, a member of the SS, noted with satisfaction “a marked return to the religious traditions of Islam” and “a fierce hostility to Western liberalism….Recent developments in Egypt…show how strongly this theocracy is able to revive itself after the first onrush of liberalism.” Theocracy instead of democracy, Salafism instead of liberalism: this SS man takes a clear line."

In April 1945 Radio Zeesen was closed down. From now on, however, antisemitism in the Arab world began to spread even more rapidly. Today, we are confronted with a Jew-hatred which fuses together the traditional European notion that Jews are deviously powerful with the Islamic view that they are inferior. At one and the same time, we find Jews being derided as “pigs” and “apes”, while simultaneously being demonised as the puppet masters of world politics.

The result is a genocidal Islamist ideology which produces genocidal programs and genocidal actions."

"“Listen!” says a rabbi to a young Jew. “We have received an order from above. We need the blood of a Christian child for the unleavened bread for the Passover feast.” In the following shot, a terrified youngster is seized from the neighborhood. Then the camera zooms in on the child for a close-up of his throat being cut. The blood spurts from the wound and pours into a metal basin.

The Al-Manar satellite channel that broadcast this episode is run by the Islamist Hizbollah (“Party of God”). The scene is part of a twenty-nine-part series entitled Al-Shatat (“Diaspora”), produced by Al-Manar with Syrian government backing and broadcast for the first time during Ramadan in 2003. Episode by episode, the series peddles the fantasy of the Jewish world conspiracy: Jews have brought death and destruction upon humanity, Jews unleashed both world wars, Jews discovered chemical weapons and destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear bombs.

With a permanent staff of three hundred, this channel has the greatest reach in the Arab-Islamic world after al-Jazeera. Ten million people a day tune in to the round-the-clock broadcasts from Beirut. Al-Manar (“the Beacon”) is the first and to date only satellite channel that, not even pretending to objectivity, sees itself as the global voice of Islamism. Its popularity is due to its countless video clips, which use inspiring graphics and uplifting music to promote suicide bombing."

"What kind of political ideology pushed Mohammed Atta, the ringleader of the 9/11 perpetrators, into acting the way he did?

It is precisely this question that the German weekly Der Spiegel put to those friends of Mohammed Atta who were members of his Quran group at the Hamburg Technical University. Their answers were remarkable: „The members of his Quran group attributed a ,Nazi weltanschauung‘ to him“, according to Der Spiegel. „In his opinion, Jews were the wire-pullers not only of the media but also of the financial world and of politics as well. Jews, as he saw it, were behind America´s Gulf War, were behind the Balkan wars, were behind the Chechnyan war, were everywhere. ... He considered New York City to be the center of world Jewry. Mohammed Atta wanted to establish a theocracy between the Nile and the Euphrates which would be free of Jews; his war of liberation had to start in New York.“ (Spiegel No.36/2002, p.117) Mohammed Atta´s obsessive hatred of Jews, shared by his al Qaida instructors and financiers, was obviously the key motive for the massacre of so many innocent people in Washington, D.C. and New York City."

"There is, however, not much debate about the anti-Semitic motives of the 9/11-perpetrators. This is all the more amazing since the history of Islamism has verified in no uncertain terms the interrelations between anti-Jewish hatred and Jihad. In contrast to a widespread belief, this polito-religious movement did not come into existence during the 1960´s but during the 1930´s. The success of this movement was not inspired by the failure of Nasserism but by the rise of Nazism.

Up to 1951, all its campaigns to mobilize the people had not been directed against colonial powers but against Jews. It was the Organization of the Moslem Brotherhood, founded in 1928, which established Islamism as a mass movement. The meaning of this organization for Islamism is comparable to the meaning of the Bolshevik party for Communism in the 20th century: Up to now it is the point of reference in terms of ideology and it is the organizational core, which decisively inspired all following islamist tendencies including the al Qaida network and which is inspiring them to this very day.

It is true that British colonial policy produced Islamism as a resistance movement against „cultural modernity“ and triggered the call for a Sharia-based new order. But the Brotherhood did not conduct its jihad primarily against the British; it did not conduct it against the French or against the Egyptian elite who had collaborated with the British. Instead, the jihad movement of the Brotherhood was focused almost exclusively on Zionism and the Jews."

"the Moslem Brotherhood has been the organization which firstly created the idea of a belligerent jihad and the longing for death as an Islamic model for modern times. As early as 1938, Hassan al-Banna, the charismatic founder of the Brotherhood, presented his idea of jihad to the public by publishing an article entitled “The industry of death“. This headline, however, did not refer to the horror of death but to death as an ideal to long for. Hassan al-Banna wrote: „To a nation that perfects the industry of death and which knows how to die nobly, God gives proud life in this world and eternal grace in the life to come.“
This slogan met with enthusiasm within the „Troops of God“ as the Brotherhood referred to itself. Whenever their battalions marched down the boulevards of Cairo in a semi-fascist formation they burst forth into song: „We are not afraid of death, we desire it… Let us die in redemption for Muslims.“ This idea of jihad was not formulated in modern times until the 1930´s;"

"In fact, we are witnessing the revival of Nazi ideology in a new garb."

"This new impact of Nazi-like conspiracy theories becomes particularly obvious if we look at the Charta of the Muslim Brotherhood of Palestine which calls itself Hamas. This Charta, adopted in 1988, represents one of the most important Islamist programs in present times, by far exceeding the conflict over Palestine. Here, Hamas defines itself as being a „universal movement“ whose jihad has to be supported by Muslims all over the world. Correspondingly, their enemy is not only Israel but „world Zionism“ or, as the Nazis called it, „Weltjudentum“. Hamas, according to its Charta, is „the spearhead and the avant-garde“ in the struggle against „world Zionism“."

"Can it be a surprise that Osama bin Laden accuses „the Jews“ of „taking hostage America and the West“ given the fact that a founder of Hamas, the Palestinian Abdullah Azzam, was at the same time the most important teacher and patron of al Qaida´s leader?"

It is "mistaken belief that hopelessness and deep desperation are at the root of murder-suicide. Under close inspection, this reasoning does not hold up. There are many people in the world who have every reason to feel desperate about their wretched and indeed hopeless lives. None of them, however, resort to killing people by entering overcrowded buses or by hijacking planes with the sole purpose of blowing themselves up with the intention of killing as many innocent people as possible. This is definitely not a method of how people respond to misery. By studying the testamentary videos which so-called ‘Palestinian martyrs’ produce before setting off on their deadly missions, we will find no evidence of desperation or hopelessness but will instead find an enormous amount of pride and even joy, a joy close to rapture... These men do not consider themselves as evil, but see themselves instead as being courageous liberators and as the God-fearing avant-garde of the best."


Seemingly, we may conclude that Nazism is alive and well today, predominantly in the Middle East but increasingly again in Europe.

16 September 2006 at 20:43  
Blogger istanbultory said...

I congratulate you on your forthright and well-argued commentary which successfully raises a wide-range of important points. As a supplementary remark, it’s also worth making explicit reference to the year 1920 and the rise of a virulent anti-Semitic mufti of Jerusalem whose ideology embodied more similarities to that of Nazi Germany than to the historical Islam of the Ottoman Turks.
Haj Amin Muhammad Al Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem had aspirations to rule a pan-Arabic empire in the Middle East that was based on the elimination of Jews and Arab opponents. He regularly instigated murderous anti-Jewish riots in the 1920s and 1930s and bumped off a not inconsiderable number dissenters on his own side. In 1941, Al Husseini fled to Nazi Germany. He found the Nazis to be a strong ideological match with his anti-Jewishness, and schemed with Hitler and the Nazi hierarchy to create a pro-Nazi pan-Arabic form of government in the Middle East.
Al Husseini later played a central role in the creation of the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1964. Many of his relatives and descendants have played a major role in Palestinian politics and terrorism over the past 40 years.
The would-be Caliph, Haj Amin Muhammad Al Husseini is revered by most Palestinians and many Arabs to this very day. It is perhaps not surprising that Hitler's Meinf Kampf is ranked as the sixth all-time bestseller among Palestinian Arabs.

16 September 2006 at 21:38  
Anonymous Colin said...


Thank you very much for your kind words and your valuable information concerning the grand mufti of Jerusalam and its relationship to the PLO. I always enjoy reading your contributions.

The fact that Hitler's Mein Kampf is a bestseller among Palestinian Arabs as well as among the Turkish people

is worrisome, indeed. Considering that Turkey will soon become the member of the European Union with the largest and fastest growing population within the EU.

Maybe you could provide us with some additional information in this regard since you seem to be living in Turkey.

16 September 2006 at 22:09  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It really was too much to expect the Pope to stick by his words instead of cowering to the Islamists, maybe its time the Glorious Reich of the Vatican called on its followers to put the Mohameddans in their place, no use expecting the Church of England or the Anglicans to stand up for Christianity when they are too busy being apologists.

Oh for a Clash of Civilisations to redress the imbalance, will the West ever find a leader with a spine or will the impending bloodbath be denied us all by some clever PhD with his GM bugs...Cranmer can we posthumously pardon Guy Fawkes and give him a Honorary Protestant Award.

16 September 2006 at 22:24  
Blogger Cranmer said...


16 September 2006 at 22:39  
Blogger Croydonian said...

Congratulations on your richly deserved Dale-ranking your Grace. Perhaps a small celebratory glass of sherry would be in order?

Returning to the topic at hand, anyone who does not know the excellent work of the Middle East Media Research Institute, which translates the Arab press etc, is urged to investigate their archives for evidence of the vicious anti-semitism and hesperophobia said press all too often promotes.

16 September 2006 at 22:47  
Anonymous Colin said...


THE TIMES (UK) writes

"Serious errors of both fact and judgment"

in regard to the Pope's speech.,,3-2360087,00.html

"His mistake was his failure to distance himself from the emperor’s comments — surely inflammatory enough in their own time,.."

In his own time, the Byzantine Emperor was attacked by an Islamic army and complained about the aggression.

Obviously, it is inflammatory to complain about violence if attacked, according to the article published by Mrs. Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent, in The Times.

From this kind of logic follows that Winston Churchill was giving inflammatory speeches by complaining about Hitler's attack on the UK.

It did not take long and the Byzantine Empire was conquered by Islamic forces, probably only because of the inflammatory comments of the Emperor.
Hence, from Gledhill's logic follows that the complaints of Iraqis about the conquest of their country by American forces is inflammatory.

Finally, Mrs. Gledhill would be inflammatory if someone wants to rob or murder her and she dares to complain about the violence.

The mainstream media (MSM) appear to experiment with new formats for attracting a larger audience, i.e. comedy shows about the marvels of logic evolved by modern Homo Insapiens working in these institutions.

THE TELEGRAPH headline is

" Pope apologises for insulting Muslims";jsessionid=E31VJDAMUYQC5QFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2006/09/16/upope.xml

Reading the article, one cannot find an apology but only a statement that the Pope feels sorry about a misunderstanding of his intentions. And that "it should be noted that what the Holy Father has at heart -- and which emerges from an attentive reading of the text -- is a clear and radical rejection of the religious motivation for violence."

See "Vatican Statement on Pope's Words About Islam"

That is certainly not an apology but an reiteration of his lecture's main conclusion. However, the MSM report the opposite.

Are the illogic reports of the MSM based on wishful thinking, a lack of intelligence of its personnel or on the contrary an intelligent strategy to increase the print run?

16 September 2006 at 23:29  
Anonymous Ellee said...

I know you have more holier things on your mind at the moment, but very well done with your latest blessing and elevated high position, very well deserved too, on Iain's blogging compilation.

16 September 2006 at 23:33  
Anonymous Odessa Callingc said...

Colin and gc. Thank you for your interesting comments.

"The success of this movement was inspired not by the failure of Nasserism but by the rise of Nazism".

At the time of Suez, Sir Anthony Eden was obsessed by Nasser, who he saw as the nearest thing to a reincarnation of Hitler. Eden was thought to be losing his marbles,
but pehaps he knew something.

16 September 2006 at 23:38  
Anonymous Colin said...

Odessa Callingc,

Thank you for your kind words and the interesting information unknown to me that Sir Anthony Eden saw Nasser "as the nearest thing to a reincarnation of Hitler"

As Foreign Secretary during World War II, he certainly knew that the Nazi propaganda used one of the most repugnant anti-Jewish publication, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which claims that Jews are killing children during religious ceremonies) for manipulating the masses and also that the Muslim Brotherhood was financed and influenced by the Nazis.

Furthermore, as Prime Minister of the UK during the 1950s, he probably knew that Gamal Abdel Nasser published as member of the Muslim Brotherhood tens of thousands of Arab copies of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

see: Kirk J. Beattie, Egypt during the Nasser Years. Ideology, Politics and Civil Society, New York 1994, pp.47-49, p.57.

17 September 2006 at 00:05  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Cranmers Blog postings are, along with Guidos,probably the only ones I would consider paying to read.
(Dont hold me to that your grace)

17 September 2006 at 00:51  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

, That isn't to say I don't enjoy other peoples blogs, rather that the effort that goes into cranmers blog and the responses to the points he raises makes it more than a mere diary and a forum for some mutual amusement.

17 September 2006 at 00:59  
Anonymous Casual Observer said...

There are thousands of would-be leaders of the Islamic world, all competing with each other to be seen as the most radical and fundamental, and no single leader, such as the Pope for the catholics. As a result we are bound to witness phoney outpourings of apparent outrage whenever the slightest reference is made to Islam because it will certainly offend someone, somewhere who will protest. That will be enough for the rest of them to jump on the bandwagon, not wishing to be left out.

What a sad bunch these Muslim chaps are. Always moaning about something. They should get out more...

17 September 2006 at 05:01  
Anonymous Rick said...

It is to be observed that anyone who uses Hitler as an anology with any political situation ex post is doomed to failure. This attempt to short-circuit an argument by alluding to the past is to fail to make the argument for the present.

Noone used Napoleon as the justification for fighting Hitler and yet his broad sweep was the same across Europe; it was the danger present which needed to be addressed rather than an invitation to re-enact the past.

The concept of "total war" has never entered Western minds since 1945 except as an exercise, unlike Churchill noone has considered using anthrax bombs or devastating firepower since.

It does not occur to present politicians to introduce Rule 18B and intern suspect persons without trial.

Let us then leave the Third Reich to history and find other periods of history less often propagandised in school curricula for PC reasons to instill multiculturalism and denial of nationalism.

What about Charles Martel, Jan Sobieski, Rodriguez (El Cid) ? Or are we so obsessed with a teetotal, cocaine-addicted, vegetarian atheist, whose mindset was totally alien to that of current adversaries ?

17 September 2006 at 07:24  
Anonymous Odessa Calling said...

I wonder what Hilaire Belloc would have made of it all.

I'm sure he would be charged under some crazy law for speaking the truth.

17 September 2006 at 08:01  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Thank you Colin.

The fact that “Mein Kampf” regularly appears on the Turkish best seller lists would certainly seem a disturbing trend for a country that publicly appears to be embracing Europe and one that many see as a bridge between Europe and the Middle East. There are now 13 different publishers releasing editions of "Mein Kampf" in Turkey. Interestingly, booksellers report that buyers tended to be almost exclusively men between the ages of 18 and 30 (many of a bearded disposition I would guess). The appeal of "Mein Kampf" probably has to do with the growing anti-Americanism here, a result of the U.S.-led invasion of neighboring Iraq and the recent Lebanon war. Anti-Americanism has gradually morphed into a hybrid strain of anti-Semitism that in turn arouses curiosity about Hitler. Remember also that only 10% of the Turkish population are university graduates and a huge 45% have received no education beyond elementary school….
Leading political scientist Prof. Dr. Dogu Ergil of Ankara University has commented that "This book, which does not contain a single ounce of humanity, unfortunately appears to be taken seriously in this country…Nazism, buried in the dustbin of history in Europe, is beginning to re-emerge in Turkey," he warned.

See also:,,1447209,00.html

17 September 2006 at 08:20  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Danke Schone, herr Anonymous. I suspect many have declined to click on the link and listen to Christopher Hitchens’ excellent summary of the “War on Terror,” Islamic aggression, Iraq’s connections with Al Qaeda (the base), and World War III. It shall be their loss.

May I take this opportunity of telling you, my German friend, that in my humble opinion, the German people are as much a part of my heritage as 1066, Queen Elizabeth I, and warm beer. I have only visited your beautiful country once (CEBIT, Hanover, 1994) and loved my time there. I have visited many German bars overseas and they have always felt them to be particularly friendly havens. I also fervently believe I don’t need a European Parliament and a Euro identity to remind me of this.

When the cats away, a small clique of little mice will play.

And whose disturbed psychology can we attribute this development to? Why … none other than Vikki, our resident anti-testosterone disciple, who also poses as a whining defender of the whole female gender. Yep, she's another one who thinks she speaks for womankind, the world over.

Let me quote back some of your contributions to illustrate my point:

You've lost me again! My Bible says the pure in heart shall see..... God. What does yours say......?

I could hardly recognise myself in your write up. I could have were describing....Jezebel!

Maybe I should stay and fight like a man(sorry woman)....but then again I havent really said anything have I?

I have neither eye to see, nor tongue to speak here, but as the house is pleased to direct me" So Colin, how are you pleased to direct me......?

I was merely drawing an analogy which you failed to grasp.

Having said that I suppose being a member of my gender automatically prevents me from understanding this very complex topic which is so easily understood by the Albert Einsteins on this forum!

Colin, I havent mentioned names!
[MI: There is no need, we all know what you and your kind are about] Perhaps I am the coward.....Maybe I should start quaking in my shoes....or should I should put on my running shoes...? Maybe I should stay and fight like a man(sorry woman)

I am all for a good laugh! was just trying to have one

rick, i despair are you the only one who understands my style of writing? gc...? croydonian...

After all as the 'fair sex' we are permitted a bit of pettiness aint we?

The only thing I am guilty of is having a sense of humour!

Ad tedium.

It looks like my initial impression was correct, as it usually is. As for this last claim about vikki believing she has a sense of humour. Posting scores of little smileys in her comments does not automatically register viewpoints as humorous. I think most readers have already detected her sarcasm, her inflated yet fragile ego (not backed up by erudition), her lack of respect, and her mentally disturbed attitude towards the male gender. Can she do better, and get off her high horse? Let's hope, although I am not betting on it.

An explanation of the Mission Impossible principle: put one trouble-making, self-centred, western female in a room full of contended and mutually polite males, and before you know it, some men will be tempted to start competing cabals, vying for her attention and approbation. I have actually seen the friendly and cooperative atmosphere of a small British engineering company destroyed by one such a female. All by herself. So much for women’s power, eh? Not much creativity on show, but the destructive powers can be immense.

Unfortunately for society (but fortunately for the likes of many young women these days) the vast majority of males still cannot put 2 and 2 together, despite the mounting evidence, and still obstinately refuse to see the female gender for what it truly is (at least, our corrupted western version of it). Until they do, we are not going to reach the Promised Land. The only things we should be idealizing are our great philosophy, our history, and our religious heritage, and not the female gender.

I welcome contributions from females, but not just from anyone with a skirt. I long for the contributions of women who are not already emotionally unbalanced: those who have failed to acknowledge the damage caused to them by their exposure to half a life-time of poisonous feminist dogma/literature. I welcome the presence of those who have taken the trouble to understand (as far as it is possible for them to do) the male psyche. Women who cast aspersions on others almost every time they contribute a comment to a blog are not welcome, only tolerated. Problem is, such types appear to be in the majority.

Incidentally, what part of the USA or Canada are you from vikki?

Colin, you wrote …

My impression is that you are referring to MI's comments concerning dropping atomic bombs, feminism, and the relationships of races.

I do not share his view on these matters. But I understand his strong emotional reactions which are motivated by fear. In his phantasy [sic], he is saving his group by destroying the aggressor. But these are just phantasies [sic], sort like superman saving the planet. He knows that it is not going to happen.

I don’t entertain fantasies Colin; unless we accept that the long-term targeting of Soviet cities by inter-continental ballistic missiles was also a fantasy. I am sure people accused President Bush of harbouring a fantasy when he first proposed the forcible removal of Saddam Hussein.

I suspect you are interpreting my comments via a hall of mirrors – causing my beliefs to enter your faculties as a distorted image. Distorted, because I don’t blog-comment to an academic standard. I haven’t got the time (it would require too many references) and I have no idea if my audience has the interest or inclination to digest lengthy arguments that fly in the face of their deep-rooted assumptions. My tone is therefore often exaggerated, purposely, in the hope of shaking people out of their reverie. It’s my Blog shorthand. Sometimes, we have to say publicly what “cannot be said elsewhere” so that all cards are placed on the table. Stirring the pot if you like.

As I critique your interpretations, I should have prefaced myself by stating I do hope you will continue to enjoy reading my comments, particularly on Islamic issues.

Unlike the vast majority of other contributors to all and any Blogs on the Internet, I have already spent 10 years of my life living and working in Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, Libya, UAE, Bahrain, Malaysia, and most recently Iraq. Over 26 years, I have watched as some of those countries have come from nothing to thriving metropolis’ in that amazingly short time span. For example, I knew Dubai well before the glitzy edifice it has since become.

Have you ever seen someone being beheaded (on video)? No, I don’t mean cleanly, by a Samurai sword, but slowly, using a short knife, so that the victim can feel during his last 40 seconds of life utter terror and indescribable pain? Have you? No. Well, I have. And I first saw this back in 2001, before … I say again … BEFORE … 11th September 2001. Such images were being routinely shared and enjoyed during office hours, even back then (Alluh Ak’bar) by intelligent and educated Arabs being employed by a major oil and gas company having four major western shareholders. I have not seen the Nick Berg beheading, as I would not wish to dishonour his memory, but I could not imagine it being worse than the one I saw. The victim I saw did not die until is spinal column was severed because of the bestial butchers’ technique these Muslims used.

As regards contact with Arab culture, let me use another measure. Have you ever had a conversation with an Arab woman? No? I have had many, including with educated (and beautiful) Saudi women. Can you speak Arabic? Probably not, right? I am not fluent in Arabic but know more than enough to get by.

So, where does that put my opinions in relation to your, and many others, whose only relationship with Muslims generally, and Arabs in particular, has been through the television, newspapers, or blogs? Think about that for a while will you. Many of you are beginning to write only now about old issues, such as Al Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, whose history I (and some other bloggers) have been aware of for the past four years. Even three years ago, you would have called me a crank for attempting to explain his connection with Naziism and their Final Solution, but now, slowly but surely, people come around. Too often, people prefer to find things out for themselves simply because they despise those who know more than they. Grown up men can behave like this, as I am sure you will realize. Evidence is available within this Blog site.

As for your theory about me being fearful; being motivated by fear, I know not. I was in Baghdad only a few months ago, hardly the act of someone who lashes out with strong comments out of fear. No, you have completely misinterpreted my (and others) motives based upon scant evidence in order to impress a "lady." Shame on you.

Please be informed, what motivates me to make outspoken comments are the old fashioned virtues: pride, dignity, and honour; I place great value in facts and history (I have also visited a great many British colonial outposts), and a rejection of dogma. I don’t like to see our young women being brought up to compete with men, to act like men, to take on manly qualities, as this leaves a void which cannot be filled. A healthy culture needs femininity expressed by its true biological source, and not via male homosexuals or otherwise effeminate men. I don’t like to see my great country being internationally ridiculed. I detest seeing my culture being Africanized. I don’t like to see its citizens cower in the face of a paper tiger. I don’t like to see my government waste millions of (our) pounds trying to buy off a threat that cannot be bought … ever. I don’t like to see an evil & destructive cult being elevated to the status of a religion just because it seems expedient, for now, to do so.

I have seen more than enough British citizens (subjects) being humiliated overseas by Muslims (due to Britons' own loss of cultural identity, and due to their fear of losing employment). I therefore have dedicated myself to putting some backbone back into the minds of at least some of my countrymen, as a form of compensation.

As for the protection of our women. It will be the men who shall decide exactly how this shall be done. It is no business of women. We shall revert to our biology here because the instinct to protect our own genetic heritage is a natural sacrament – a biological duty. If we men-folk determine that aggression is necessary, and justified by circumstance and the impending threat, then no women has the right to question that decision. We don’t need to justify what is an entirely normal reaction. Women will simply have to endure the consequences, as they have done for millennia. Any woman who thinks otherwise, and attempts to ridicule men (and manhood) based on some socialist fantasy of gender equivalence, should be given short shrift and sent back to the infant school from whence she came; sent to Coventry if necessary. Such women are genetic losers. It is time for all western men to stand up and be counted, to take back control of our homes and our culture and start acting like proud and noble guardians of our rich heritage. Anyone who interprets this clarion call as a licence to commit violence against females needs therapy and the most severe admonition.

The nuclear issue is quite clear. If any Islamic group commits another major atrocity within a western country, then we should seriously contemplate dropping a small atomic bomb precisely upon the Kabbah in the mosque of Mecca. As I have said many times, symbolism is vitally important to these primitives. So, let’s give them what they crave. Any violent reactions can be met with another small yield atomic (hydrogen) bomb dropped upon Medina. The Saudi’s are an unlikeable race at the best of times. Other Gulf Arabs detest them. As for pilgrim casualties, well, they should never have been so foolish to absorb Arabic imperial hegemony as a faith. And of course, that would also be payment in kind for the deaths caused to us by terrorist actions. If necessary, holy Shia targets in Iran could be similarly threatened until they are seen to cower, and dissemble their terrorist empire. As for Pakistan, that is and always has been an abomination, and no one should grieve if it was ever wiped off the face of the planet.

Relationship of the races? You’ll need to expand a little on what you mean there. Do you mean I was wrong to imply we have completely distorted our educational system and our laws so that the culture of tribes in Cameroon or Papau New Guinea are now held to be equivalent to ours? If I told you I accept the thesis that the Chinese (and Hasidic Jews) are, statistically, more intelligent than Caucasians would that also cause you offence?

Anyway, I truly don’t wish to be hard on you Colin. Your contributions to this Blog have consistently been from the top drawer. I too enjoy reading your views and look forward to reading more. And we are in good company here at the Cranmer Blog. In response to highly literate articles regularly posted by His Grace, Cranmer, where would we be without the incomparable Rick? In spite of maintaining a high quality blog of his own, Croydonian seems to compress in a few succinct sentences, more intelligence than most. Fruning (when he puts his very humorous irreverence’s to one side) has a good mind that is capable of shooting straight arrows of truth. Others come and go. One or two others get by frantically feigning originality and experience using the power of the Google search engine, before retiring for crepes with Mr. Norman Tebbit’s wife (Lord Tebbit is a man I respect by the way, and I am not so sure he would be enthusiastic about a friend who was so obsessed with engaging in petty conflicts).

The important thing is that, somehow, by hook or by crook, despite the pettiness and jealousies, we slowly but surely begin to sing from the same hymn sheet, or for the atheists amongst you, reading from the same page. By our own oversights and lamentable failures (thanks to our corrupted Universities and two generations of narcissists) we now face existential threats. Those who were amongst the first to raise the alarm have already suffered vile, verbal abuse for their efforts (as I know to my cost from blogging elsewhere). One day, such people will be humbly thanked for having the foresight to see on their own, what others have realized only after being led there by the hand.

You can take a horse to water, but you cannot ... you don’t need me to complete this.

17 September 2006 at 08:47  
Blogger istanbultory said...

The “Religion of Peace” strikes back (Part 2):

An Iraqi insurgent group has threatened the Vatican with a suicide attack over the Pope's remarks on Islam, according to a statement posted on the internet. The statement comes days after Pope Benedict quoted comments about the Prophet Mohammed deemed by many to be offensive. The web threat does not mention the Vatican directly, but is addressed to "you dog of Rome" and threatens to "shake your thrones and break your crosses in your home."

The London-based “Islamic Observer” newspaper comments: "Oh Muslims, after (US President George W.) Bush, (British Prime Minister Tony) Blair, (former Italian prime minister Silvio) Berlusconi (...), now the tyrant of Rome reveals his charlatanism and his calumny," the statement said. "Oh Muslims, rejoice in your victory. Your enemy has no more excuses against their destruction and ruin,"
In Gaza City, a group calling itself the Islamic Organization of the Swords of Righteousness claimed responsibility for unleashing a volley of gunfire on the oldest church in Nablus.


How do you feel about being nominated as a "Conservative Blog"?
Perhaps a more Conservative links section is now in order...Right Links?etc.

17 September 2006 at 09:00  
Anonymous Rick said...

M.I. good and worthy posting.........points well made !

As for An Iraqi insurgent group has threatened the Vatican with a suicide attack over the Pope's remarks on Islam, according to a statement posted on the internet.

little has changed....Al-Qaeda always intended to kill The Pope. When he was in Bavaria last week the sky above was patrolled by an AWACS plane.

It is no use finding issues as " a response" to something in The West as if it is Cause and Effect - it is always the intent.

Look at the track record - most of the mobs in the Middle East think of The West as to be something to be destroyed and looted - it has been the modus operandi of Islamic imperialism over 14 centuries..........

Why do people in The West think that our ancestors fought all our battles for us and all we need to do is decide how to spend our trust fund ? It is like Buddenrooks writ large

17 September 2006 at 09:55  
Blogger Cranmer said...

How do you feel about being nominated as a "Conservative Blog"?

It was 'Conservative or Right of centre'.

His Grace is perfectly chilled and serenely reflective. However, to enter at No.8 out of 100 came as something of a surprise, and will doubtless turn the heads of diverse supporters of the Conservative Party... a Church of England cleric?

17 September 2006 at 10:07  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Indeed, indeed. But it is useful to observe how the mob responds to specific instances of "perceived provocation". In this case, the mob appears to be a little more restrained than on previous occassions in resonse to B.16's comments, or is it the lull before the storm? Is a re-run of the Danish cartoon crisis on the cards? I know not.

Rick, I am far too distracted by work and frankly too lazy to do so myself but have you never considered starting a blog? The same applies to Colin who is truly a master of the post.

17 September 2006 at 10:11  
Anonymous Rick said...

Rick, I am far too distracted by work and frankly too lazy to do so myself but have you never considered starting a blog?

I have but I leave it blank and block all comments. Perhaps letting my cynicism about the human condition free rein would be self-reinforcing, therefore I prefer to engage in various guises elsewhere and Cranmer provides a very agreeable space

17 September 2006 at 10:15  
Blogger istanbultory said...

MI mentioned Saudi Arabia above. There are, unfortunately, very few blogs from the Magic Kingdom (I wonder why?). Does anybody know of any critical voices from KSA? I would recommend one blog. It is by a Saudi exile with somewhat critical reflections on the Kingdom. Alas, he hasn’t posted for a while…I hope he hasn’t been “silenced”. But the archives are worth a look.

17 September 2006 at 10:35  
Anonymous Old Red Socks said...

Judging by his emanations on women, Mr Mission Impossible has much in common with the Islamo-fascist obsucurantism against which he fulminates so vividly.

I grant a certain erudition, but, dearie me, he is - in a caring and compassionat Disraelian sense - consumed with the exuberance of his own verbosity.

(But immensely entertaining nonetheless).

17 September 2006 at 15:07  
Anonymous Rick said...

compassionat Disraelian sense - consumed with the exuberance of his own verbosity.

Pity you cannot quote Disraeli's commentary on W.E.G. correctly.....perhaps a trip to Hansard ?

17 September 2006 at 15:49  
Anonymous Old Red Socks said...

Mr. Rick.

Indeed. Google is a poor substitute. Inebriated - that's what happens when you try and take the pith.

17 September 2006 at 16:00  
Blogger Tommy said...

As we are often reminded by 'moderate' Muslim's that terror is only carried out by hardliners, it will be interesting to see over the next few months how many of the millions and millions of 'moderate' Muslim's step forward and explain just what the Pope was actually trying to say, What he said was a quote from the 14th century. Perhaps they may explain that violence and religion always seem to go hand in hand and that we should learn through history that it is not the best way forward. The violence, terrorism and deaths in Northern Ireland involved religion, there is now peace in Northern Ireland. This was not achieved by the 'bullet and the bomb' but by sitting down and talking. Maybe the Pope was trying to pass this message to the hard line Muslims.

17 September 2006 at 17:12  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Old red socks has a point on Mission Impossible. The guy is high on hate. So much venom, so many 'enemies', so little rationality. Are the Taliban still recruiting? Perhaps he could give them a call

17 September 2006 at 17:49  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Two gunmen killed an Italian nun and her bodyguard at a hospital Sunday in Mogadishu, Somalia.
Apart from that the streets seem not be flowing with the blood of the non-believers thus far….Or is just that the average Islamo-fascist prefers to hang up his ak-47, kick off his sandals and put his feet up at the weekend?

17 September 2006 at 19:30  
Anonymous Lena Mouse said...

A nun shot dead? No apology? What is this world? The Pope uses words, and has to apologise. A Muslim uses bullets, a nun dies, and no-one blinks.

17 September 2006 at 20:01  
Anonymous Colin said...


You said "It is to be observed that anyone who uses Hitler as an anology with any political situation ex post is doomed to failure. This attempt to short-circuit an argument by alluding to the past is to fail to make the argument for the present."

Your point is well taken and absolutely correct.

On the other hand, I find it fascinating that ideas never seem to die out. They reappear in one way or another under different labels. To discover the origin of an "new" idea at least improves my understanding of the phenomenon.

For illustration, two examples:

(1) The ancient Iranian priest Zarathustra seems to have been the first to invent approximately 5oo BC the entire repertoire of contemporary montheist religions including the concepts of heaven and hell, a cosmic struggle between good and evil, a God and the devil, judgment day and a messiah as savior. Zoroastrianism was the religion of the Persian Empire until it was destroyed by Islamic armies.

However, the belief of the Iranian people in messianism survived in the form of schiism from the Arab version of Islam, led to Khomeini as messiah, and seems to have a strong influence on the present Iranian President Ahmadinejad. At least according to an analysis by Hans-Peter Raddatz in his recent book "Iran".

(2) Multiculturalism

What is the intellectual origin of the idea of multiculturalism ? It is propagated by the same ideologists who preached before of the Communist International. Morevover, it has the same aim as the latter, namely to liberate the poor of this world. Finally, the fervor of the priests of multiculturalism increased considerably after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the change of economic policy in China, which destroyed the credibility of the proclaimed socialist heaven. Every child could see that the Emperor had no cloths. New cloths were urgently needed for the old idea that decent human beings (or cultures) should share everything. What is the likelihood that an idea, which has proven to be unsuccessful, will work much better by changing the label ?

To return to the beginning of our discussion, what are the chances that the old idea of international socialism, its national variety - national socialism - and its strategy based on killings, conquest and exploitation will work any better by transfering it to another culture, this time the Islamic culture.

It seems to me that it is sometimes helpful to know the origin and development of a idea as well as its results in the past to better understand what the future might bring.

17 September 2006 at 21:25  
Anonymous Colin said...


You said that "violence and religion always seem to go hand in hand".

In support of your statement, I would like to add a citation from the latest book of the renowed English scientist Richard Dawkins:

"My point is not that religion itself is the motivation for wars, murders and terrorist attacks, but that religion is the principal label, and the most dangerous one, by which a "they" as opposed to a "we" can be identified at all."

-- Richard Dawkins, The Devil's Chaplain (2004)

17 September 2006 at 21:46  
Anonymous Colin said...


Thank you for informing the readers of this blog and myself about the situation concerning Mein Kampf in Turkey and about the sane voice of the leading political scientist Prof. Dr. Dogu Ergil of Ankara University. Thanks also for the links !

17 September 2006 at 21:56  
Anonymous vikki said...

"Unlike the vast majority of other contributors to all and any Blogs on the Internet, I have already spent 10 years of my life living and working in Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, Libya, UAE, Bahrain, Malaysia, and most recently Iraq" Need I say more....?

gc, thank you. That was very kind of you.

"Pity you cannot quote Disraeli's commentary on W.E.G. correctly.....perhaps a trip to Hansard ?" I wouldnt say that about a 'Daniel'......the quality of mercy is not strained.....

Conlin, do you now understand why I said "I have neither eye to see, nor tongue to speak here, but as the house is pleased to direct me" So Colin, how are you pleased to direct me......?" What if.... I had mentioned names.....?

"When the cats away, a small clique of little mice will play." Democracy indeed!

Dare I ask what intellectualism is?

17 September 2006 at 22:17  
Anonymous Colin said...


You wrote "Rick, I am far too distracted by work and frankly too lazy to do so myself but have you never considered starting a blog? The same applies to Colin who is truly a master of the post."

Thank you for your kind suggestion. I am glad that you find some of my comments helpful.

I don't recall how I stumbled into Archbishop Cranmer's blog having never written comments before. And I even don't understand why I seem to become addicted to it.

It might be the topics chosen by His Grace and his impressive style. Moreover, several comments - such as yours, Rick's, MI's, Croydonian's, a few others and last but not least Cranmer himself - indicated that sophistication and intelligence was here at home. Therefore I dared to add a few ideas, was courteously received, which made me come back.

For me it is like going to a party arranged by an educated host, to meet some interesting people in the room (a virtual room in this case), exchange some ideas, learn from others, and hopefully may stop by again if the host and its guests remain as interesting as before. Starting my own blog would only dilute the number of intersting guests to be found at my and/or Cranmer's home.

17 September 2006 at 22:29  
Anonymous Rick said...

Zoroastrianism was the religion of the Persian Empire until it was destroyed by Islamic armies.

True but hardly surprising since the history of ideas is the recycling and assumption of older ideas. It is probably why English philosophers were Empiricists and German philosophers always trying to find a new synthesis - whether Kant or Marx.

The crescent for the Islamic flag is the old Sumerian moon god which Arabs knew as Al-Lah and Mohammed adopted as his new monotheistic god Allah.

It is again the whole political notion of Socialism of being nothing more than village collective politics - the Russian word "Mir" meaning "village", "world", "peace" - which is why conceptually the old Communist assertions of "peace" necessarily implied 'global' dominance as the pre-requisite - rather like the Muslim notion of "Dar-al Islam" requiring global domination as a pre-requisite for the collapse of "Dar-al Harb"

It is so predictable that it is amazing how easily people believe in a superficial sense in words rather than underlying ideas - that "peace" means the same to all in all languages, rather than carrying the ominous subtext of hegemony of one ideology

Most political ideas work on the principle that a) it was better yesterday "golden age" or (b) it will be better tomorrow if only "heaven on earth"...............which is why the Nazis took the old swastika symbol and spoke of "blood" and "earth"; and the Communists proclaimed their theory "scientific" and used the notion of industry with "hammer and sickle", or "hammer and dividers" as in the GDR..............or the Indian flag using the Ashoka Chakra going back to 300 BC.

17 September 2006 at 22:33  
Anonymous Rick said...

For me it is like going to a party arranged by an educated host, to meet some interesting people in the room (a virtual room in this case),

True...very true...........but I do wish our host would be gracious with his wine cellar...........

17 September 2006 at 22:35  
Anonymous vikki said...

rick have you joined the Sharia Court too? I miss the friendly banter

17 September 2006 at 23:03  
Blogger Croydonian said...

I will add a resounding amen to Colin's and Rick's thoughts on His Grace's blog.

Meanwhile, perhaps these comments from the Iranian press will be of interst:

"The reality is that if we do not consider Pope Benedict XVI to be ignorant of Islam, then his remarks against Islam are a diktat that the Zionists and the Americans have written (for him) and have submitted to him." "The American and the Zionist aim is to undermine the glorious triumph of Islam's children of Lebanese Hezbollah, which annulled the undefeatable legend of the Israeli army and foiled the Satanic and colonialist American plot".

"There are many signs that show that Pope Benedict XVI's remarks regarding the great prophet of Islam are a link in a connected chain of a Zionist-American project".


17 September 2006 at 23:07  
Anonymous Colin said...

Mission impossible,

What an analytical, sharp and impressive mind you have. I am in awe.

I enjoyed your strong reply to my comment and your criticizing me. What a wonderful discussion! Don't worry, I will "continue to enjoy reading" your comments. Nothing can deter me.

But you do not really mind that I sometimes disagree, do you? We don't want to bore each other by only consenting to what the other has said. Neither you nor I want to be apple-polishers. We are both able to use our brains to think for ourselves. Well, I cannot guarantee that the result of my thinking process is always right. But who can? Therefore, please correct me if I am wrong in your point of you. I shall not feel offended. Criticism is the most important part in the evolutionary process of improving knowledge by discarding incorrect ideas.

As the great philosopher of science Karl Popper remarked " . . the growth of our knowledge is the result of a process closely resembling what Darwin called 'natural selection'; that is, the natural selection of hypotheses ..."

Thus if you prove me wrong, that makes me wiser than I was before. Why should that offend me.

And since I would like to die a little bit less stupid than I was born. You will hopefully not be so cruel to keep me stupid if you have evidence for proving me wrong. Thus, please don't hesitate to critizise me.

In regard to your statement, "in order to impress a "lady." Shame on you.", I beg to differ.

I just wanted to be polite. Since I will never meet her, what sense would it make to impress her. For what purpose would I want to impress her, since I am already happily married to a beautiful woman. I don't see the need to feel shame for trying to be polite. Should I?

Your summary of Vikki's comments is interesting, indeed. But than again, who are we to judge what others are permitted to say or not to say, the Vatican, the inquisition, the thougth police, a new kind of PC? I totally support her and your freedom to say whatever you both would like to say.

From time to time, Vikky appears to be making an emotional statement along the lines of received wisdom that women are the victims of evil men. Obviously, that makes her feel good. Fine, why not. It's like the background noise at a party. It doesn't really bother and adds to the fun of being at a lively party, at least for me.

MI, I would be very much interested to learn more from you about your experiences and encouters in Saudi Arabia, Iraq etc. I never have been there. So please share some of your experiences with us, but not only the bad, also the good, if you don't mind.

18 September 2006 at 00:08  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Colin ... you are too kind. Frankly, I am at times in awe of the minds who contribute most to this blog. My appreciations extend also to Mr. gc, who as you know I have had the odd spat with. Perhaps his insecurities get the better of him at times. I once defended the BNP on principle, and I instantly became in his mind, persona non grata. That wasn't very democratic either.

Putting my ego aside, the composition of your 12:08 AM post reveals you to be a highly evolved chap, and sharing a blog with such a person is a privilege as well as a pleasure for me.

Aye ... with reference to your politeness shown to the female who's interpretations hang on "received wisdom," I knew what you were doing. If past experience is a valid measure, then I would assert such women are obsessed with encouraging splits, disunity, and factionalism within blogs. They typically use the the "wounded fawn" ploy. You will notice they keep making direct appeals to individual contributors, like sirens. Some chaps are just too damn quick to play the chivalrous knight without analysing what these females are about. Three years ago, I used to contribute to Peter Hitchens' Forum (which attracted several intellectual types of high repute) plus one woman who spent most of her blog time seducing certain contributors over to her point of view, whilst promoting "whispering campaigns" against those she disliked, and causing mayhem in the process. She was either insane, or a very clever agent provocateur. In the end, Peter decided to pull the Forum. His Grace is not obliged to welcome my protective efforts, but I would hate to see the Cranmer blog deteriorate in this way.

Having said that, Peter Hitchens' Forum did attract two female contributors who were mature, erudite, and often posted views that added unique perspectives to thorny issues. They were not always correct of course, but they did successfully stimulate deeper thinking without constantly claiming "victory for the female gender."

As for my experiences in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Muslim world, I suppose I should be writing a book. I attempted to write one about Wahabism way back in 1995/96, whilst employed in KSA at that time. I was making use of unique materials available in the company library. You will note this date is well before the advent of Google, Wikipedia, Blogging, and most other web sources of research. Eventually, my contract came to an end, and so did my ability to research the topic, which at the time was so exotic, few knew of the term, let alone its source. I remained "on the road" (living out of a suitcase) for several years during the 90's so it was difficult to keep carrying all my research material, which was mainly in paper form (photocopies, etc.). Then history caught up with me on the 11th September 2001!

As you will appreciate, it is very difficult to convey the subtleties of personal experience via text. I have a fine collection of photographs of the old Ottoman Fort at the oasis town of Hofuf, some 150 kilometres (or so) west, inland from the Persian Gulf port of Dammam. Hofuf is on the old Hajj trail. The large stone walls riddled with bullet holes, and a few breaches. When I saw it, it was almost exactly like it must have looked on the day after it was overrun, sans the dead bodies, blood, and stench of course.

The desert is something you have to experience to understand. I had the good fortune to be able to travel up and down the oil fields of the Eastern Province in Saudi Arabia, during my early years in that country. Would not have missed that for the world. There are many and still visible signs of a very different climate in that region, from several millennia ago. Stand on some high ground, and in certain parts, you can make out old river courses. I have a small collection of flint arrowheads found in the exact spot where some primitive men (and women) sat to eat a carcass.

Whilst in Iraq, an AK-47 bullet missed me by 1-1/2 metres, much to the frustration, no doubt, of some anonyms posting here! Ha-ha. I say this so that you know I was well within ear-shot of some violent exchanges. A friend just missed being blown to pieces by an IED by about 1/2 second, as he sped along a road en-route to the workplace. The trigger-man keying in the code on his mobile phone was just a 1/2 second too slow. But, I would say that the Iraqis I met were the nicest (don't like that word, but I'll use it here) Arabs I have met anywhere. Whether that is the result of living under siege, or whether they have always been that way is unclear. The Iraqi women can also be acutely beautiful. I had the pleasure of regular meetings with four female engineers. And, contrary to "received wisdom" they are no doormats, and furthermore, the younger ones know how to dress provocatively without revealing skin up to their panties, as I think we would all agree, far too many western women have the habit of doing.

Arab culture has many admirable attributes. You must try and visit a Lebanese restaurant if you have not done so already, and order Kibbeh, Shawarma, Warak Areesh, Hummus, and Tabbouleh (these have many varieties, the full menu is huge). I would personally recommend you try Foul (a dish made from Broad Beans) which is an Egyptian recipe. A bit smelly for some, it makes a hearty breakfast. If you love Greek food, then you will love classical Arabic food.

Some idiot said I was full of hate. Probably a blue-state American. There's no helping some people! You have to laugh. Such people are as silly as the New York Times. My (real) fundamental opinion about the Middle East goes something like this ... it is just a shame they (particularly the more sophisticated northern Arabs) have to follow such a false, ideologically driven faith which has made an art form out of violence. The Japanese Samurai incorporated violence into a marshal code of conduct, that was predicated on honour, and which was (is) highly disciplined. In complete contrast, the Muslims are the inheritors of the Mongol hoards of the Asian Steppes, whose whole way of life was based on wanton butchery and the total annihilation of opposition. Put simply, that is one root source of the problem we are having to face now.

18 September 2006 at 05:49  
Anonymous Rick said...

The other issue of course is that their perception of the West has been disappointed.

Where once they found resolve and a clarity of purpose which they could detest but respect simultaneously, and whose resolve was less demeaning to their inadequacy than the current state of Western society as they observe from within.

The effete and feminised culture of The West is provocative to the Arab mind which can accept defeat by Western military power but not by Western decadent culture and it is that which makes them cling to ever more radicalised versions of Islam in retreat from the assault of secular humanism on their received faith

18 September 2006 at 08:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

cranmer said...He further notes that few Mohammedans stick with his revered blog, and he wonders why.
maybe cus whenever they cum, you tell them to p*** off!

18 September 2006 at 09:40  
Blogger istanbultory said...

Anonymous one,
His Grace welcomes a broad chuch of opinion and would never use vulgarity in his musings.
Two perceptive and cogent posts by MI and Rick. I would add only make one or two brief points on the basis of my own observations.

Clearly, the vast majority of Muslims are equally convinced of two things:One is the superiority of Islam in contrast to the actual cowardliness and moral weakness of the West. The other is the global conspiracy being waged against Islam as a religion and the Muslims as its adherents.

As for exceptions to the rule, from my own experience of living in Tunisia and Turkey (I have no familiarity with the Gulf states), I would observe that there are, indeed, some Muslims who are very wary of Islam as a political movement or Islam’s manipulation for revolutionary ends. I have met some well-intentioned Muslims who quietly wish that Mohammed’s teachings could be updated, revised, reinterpreted, or otherwise altered. Naturally, presuming to modify God’s own directives is problematic when the Koran is believed to be the actual words of Allah, essentially dictated to Mohammed by the angel Gabriel.We should have evangelised much more intensively when we had a chance to do so...that is the West's principal failing.

18 September 2006 at 10:20  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

With reference to the link I provided earlier to Christopher Hitchens' recent oratory on the topic of Niger, Uranium supplies, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the incompetence of America's CIA, and the Left Wing's utterly false claim there are no such links here is his written evidence in some detail, care of the FPM website.

18 September 2006 at 10:53  
Blogger Croydonian said...

I am wary of pyschoanalysis of the Arab mind, but it has been suggested that the utter humiliation of Iraq in Gulf War 1 - then the Arab world nearest thing to a superpower - burnt itself into the people's collective consciousness. Here's a lift from John Derbyshire in The National Review:

"There were also, of course, our Arabs — the Kuwaitis and Saudis, cowering in their plush-lined air-conditioned bunkers being waited on by their Filipino servants while we did their fighting for them.) Final body counts: the West, 134 dead, the Arabs, 20,000 or more. The superiority of one culture over another has not been so starkly demonstrated since a handful of British wooden ships, at the end of ten-thousand-mile lines of communications, brought the Celestial Empire to its knees 150 years earlier. The Chinese are still mad about that: They are still making angry, bitter movies about the Opium Wars. A hundred and 50 years from now, the Arabs will not have forgotten the Gulf War".

18 September 2006 at 10:55  
Blogger Peter Hitchens said...

Here is my twopenneth..
The Arab is a braggart, they love to shout and scream and make threats, sometimes they carry these out in a small and petty way, now why is this?
The fact is that the Arab male is essentially effeminate, they slide very easily in homosexuality (no pun intended) and they behave in the same emotional and irrational way that most women behave when things aren't going the way they want, I would also suggest that this is a character trait of the average Italian male.

18 September 2006 at 13:33  
Anonymous Rick said...

Croydonian - I think it goes a lot further back than about being conquered by the Ottomans and continuing to be run by them until the Caliphate made the stupid mistake of allying with Germany in WWI (must have read Greenmantle !)and losing it all under Sykes-Picot.

The simple fact is that the Arabs hate each other. They band together to hate another family, tribe, race..........and they need a focus of hate to avoid devouring themselves

18 September 2006 at 13:48  
Blogger Croydonian said...

Rick - yup, sounds reasonable.

18 September 2006 at 14:23  
Blogger Croydonian said...

As a sidebar, it is perhaps interesting that the Egyptians did not identify themselves as part of a wider Arab culture until comparatively recently.

18 September 2006 at 16:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

18 September 2006 at 21:41  
Anonymous Colin said...


You said

"The simple fact is that the Arabs hate each other. They band together to hate another family, tribe, race.........."

An old Arab proverb seem to prove your point:

"Me against my brother; me and my brother against our cousin; and me, my brother and my cousin against the stranger."

Permit me to add that it also proves the correctness of "The selfish gene" principle as described by Richard Dawkins:

18 September 2006 at 22:14  
Anonymous Colin said...

Anonym 9:41 PM

gave an interesting link to pictures showing the participants of an anti-Pope demonstration.

What do these pictures demonstrate ?

First, a few lonely people showed up for the demonstration.

Second, many more people would have come if the demonstration were organized by major Islamic organizations in the UK, as was the case in regard to the Danish cartoons.

Third, the major Islamic organizations would have been happy to organize a big mass rally but were afraid to do so because of the high probability of an European-wide backlash. This time it was not a small country like Denmark and a few journalists which could easily be bullied without great risk. This time, a huge number of Christians was involved and an influential EU country which is able to organize the restriction of immigration from Islamic countries and to deny the EU membership to Turkey for security reasons. For example, the religious leader of Turkey said, at least on German TV, that the faithful ought to be more tolerant towards other religions.

Fourth, the few demonstrators in London were afraid to show their face.

In conclusion, the leaders of Islam in the Western world act restrained if meeting determined resistance. Their behavior is very rational, indeed. Why should they not try to gain as much influence and power as possible. And if it is not possible for the moment, they simply wait until it is possible, i.e. until their numbers are sufficiently large.

Somewhere I read that Islam has a sequential strategy which they call themselves "Heart - Mouth - Arm".

Maybe Mission impossible or GC know more about it.

Heart is supposed to stand for emotional deception of the opponents, Mouth for threats, and Arm for violence.

Within the framework of the strategy, the claim to aim for peaceful coexistence seems to be the Heart, mass rallys to claim special priviliges and terrorist acts the Mouth, the Arm is likely to follow when victory is certain.

At the present Mouth stage, Islamism appears to be more like a paper tiger than a real danger to Western society. Faced with determined resistance, their smart leaders become rather docile and wait for a better chance. And many more people die annually in the Western world by car accidents, smoking, fat food than Islamists will ever be are able to kill without atomic bombs. Without the reports of the media, their threats wouldn't be able to change a thing. For European Islam, it might be a smarter strategy to wait until Islamic faith has a majority in Europe instead of committing terrorist acts which weakens Islam by alarming the native population and activating counter-measures. Demography is their only hope.

18 September 2006 at 23:19  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

There is another counter-facet to what you have described Colin. Although I fully agree with your basic thesis.

I recoil at attempts to single out one single factor, but contrary to Peter Hitchens' suggestion the Arab is a braggart, I would say it is far more about an exaggerated sense of honour. In my view, once you step outside Old Europe and North America the average male's sense of honour is far more clearly felt everywhere. For example, in southern China, I was conspicuously putting Mosquito repellent on my exposed skin, and a Chinese male said: where do you think you are, the Third World? If you holiday in Greece, and you chase the local women, watch out; you could soon be in very hot water, from her brother, cousin, or whatnot. Hitchens would be correct if he restricts his braggart theory to the Immams and the Mullahs, and the so-called Islamic media spokesmen.

The counter-facet is that which can be placed diametrically opposite their so-called demographic weapon, as follows.

I have already suggested we are quite within our rights to place a limit on child birth within Europe (under a different political aegis of course). I mentioned three children per family. The problem, after all, is not that population stagnation is bad (only a decade or so ago, we were arguing for a reduction in the world's population in the interests of environmental sustainability) but rather it is the disproportionate growth by parasitic races impinging upon western interests (and largesse).

Trade policy can (should) also be adjusted to reflect a nation's population control success, or failures. Why should we reward profligacy? Once we have our armies of bleeding-hearts under control within our own burgeoning charity industry, then we will formulate more mature policies. This will require the dimmunation of women's political power, as it is they who have been running riot with other people's money.

We are currently reacting (correctly in my view) by returning our (western) focus to a proper understanding of religion and spirituality. We are also (correctly) revisiting the political theories that have dominated our culture for the past 80 years or so. We will soon be drawing great strength, and purpose from this new knowledge and understanding. Once we have realized that population growth has been deliberately used as a weapon against us, I am confident we would no longer tolerate fawning, semi-sane (Lara Croft type) Hollywood actresses flying into the depths of Africa, to be photographed hugging someone elses babies, and being surrounded by hundreds of African children, so that they may be taken seriously, politically. The Princess Diana era is over; it is already no more. We all know about the many sicknesses ailing American culture.

New, and more sustainable energy policies are being pursued right now, in both Europe and North American, that in time will drastically reduce the financial power of the oil-economies of the Middle East. New technologies will provide us with many political benefits.

Overall, I am optimistic. I believe we have an opportunity to bring forth a new Englightenment. We have a great opportunity to re-invigorate western culture and save it, at the brink, from the cultural-Marxist poison that has almost engulfed it. One day, we may thank a chastised, and much weakened Islam for giving us the impetus.

19 September 2006 at 04:28  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Gentlemen, I have felt compelled to return to this Blog, again this morning, to share something I have just read with you.

It represents the most cogent, compelling, and accurate assessment of what exactly Pope Benedict XVI meant about Islam. The author (a religious expert) has also taken the opportunity to expand themes he has been writing about for some years, and taxing most readers whilst doing so. Such issues are often beyond the average person's ability to understand, but will be meat & drink to most contributors here.

Having just read a bunch of Letters to the Editor at The Times (Online), penned by confused or self-serving people, this article has come like a breath of fresh air.

Article by 'Spengler'

19 September 2006 at 06:33  
Anonymous Rick said...

Very good short "Allah" is the image of man, or one particular man...........Mohammed and his Mohammedans follow him............

19 September 2006 at 07:21  
Anonymous vikki said...

I reiterate the last thing I want on this forum is a war of words. However some people are just plain impossible!

MI,is it any wonder your mission is impossible? What sort of intellectualism is full of vulgarity? Iam not a fan of fruning graplecard but I suggest you take a look at his defination of Islam.....! Perusal of the Book of Proverbs specifically on wisdom would do no harm!

Colin, I do not agree with this statement of yours. You said "From time to time, Vikky appears to be making an emotional statement along the lines of received wisdom that women are the victims of evil men." If you can cite just one example of these I'd agree with you whole heartedly.

19 September 2006 at 13:15  
Blogger Hettie said...

It is certainly a bit rich from Turkey to criticise the Pope regarding the quotation as surely that 14th century emperor had first hand experience of the Ottoman expansion.

Thenm again that was then and a lot of things have changed since. Apparently.

19 September 2006 at 16:00  
Anonymous Rick said...

Thenm again that was then and a lot of things have changed since. Apparently.

Just think of Western Europe as Constantinople II

19 September 2006 at 18:05  
Anonymous Colin said...

So many interesting comments here again and so little time to add a few thoughts. Let me start with Mission Impossible.


Thanks a lot for your appreciation which is mutual, for sharing your experiences and for your suggestions of Libanese menues. I will follow your guidance in order to change my habit of trying as many excellent Indian restaurants as possible when I am in the UK. The stories of your experiences in SA and Iraq are fascinating to me. You are a truly interesting man and I hope you might from time to time tell us one chapter or another out of the book you did not find the time to write.


I am glad you are still with us. Somehow, I was already missing your contributions about the best way to solve the clash of civilizations. Unfortunately, I can't remember what it exactly was except that you wanted to put on your running shoes. But that was a joke you said. If you don't mind, could you please briefly summarize your intellectual contributions so that I am better able to answer your question about my incorrectly postulated emotionality of your statements. The alternative would be to check all your valuable comments, which would keep me busy for weeks.

Or would you also be satified if I borrowed a bit from you by saying, Vikky, I was just trying to have a good laugh?

Since we all like to have a good laugh, what about a few citations from the famous British scientist Richard Dawkins such as

"Yes, testosterone-sodden young men too unattractive to get a woman in this world might be desperate enough to go for 72 private virgins in the next."
-- Richard Dawkins, "Religion's Misguided Missiles" (September 15, 2001)

"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, "mad cow" disease, and many others, but I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate."
-- Richard Dawkins, The Humanist, Vol. 57, No. 1

"My last vestige of "hands off religion" respect disappeared in the smoke and choking dust of September 11th 2001, followed by the "National Day of Prayer," when prelates and pastors did their tremulous Martin Luther King impersonations and urged people of mutually incompatible faiths to hold hands, united in homage to the very force that caused the problem in the first place."
-- Richard Dawkins, The Devil's Chaplain (2004)

Oh Vikky, again for a laugh: Please be patient with us men. We just have one X-chromosome compared to the two of women. And the substitute for this lack is the Y-chromosome which is a bit short. Nature has been unfair to us. We are the victims. We need special protection. Would you mind to fight for the rights of us handicapped men by asking the MPs of your country to change the laws for divorce in our favour so that Heather Mills has to pay for poor Paul instead the other way around. And then there is this former male feminist, Warren Farrell. He must be crazy because he claims that his research has proven that women earn less than men because the latter work harder and more dangerously than the former. For having a good laugh about this poor crazy chap, let's watch the video of his lecture at C-span:

Oh Vikky, my dear,

Please forgive me, I did not know that you already made several important intellectual contributions to the topic of Islamism. Your real name is Dr. Phyllis Chesler, the famous American feminist. Why didn't you say so. You wrote "The Death of Feminism" and stated "Is feminism really dead? Well, yes and no. It gives me no pleasure, but someone must finally tell the truth about how feminists have failed their own ideals and their mandate to think both clearly and morally. Only an insider can really do this, someone who cares deeply about feminist values and goals. I have been on the front lines for nearly 40 years, and I feel called upon to explain how many feminists — who should be the first among freedom- and democracy-loving people — have instead become cowardly herd animals and grim totalitarian thinkers." ( You are absolutely correct to complain about our lack of respect for such a major intellectual contribution.

And even more importantly, you worked for more than 20 years on your book "Woman's Inhumanity to Woman" demonstrating that "most women have a repertoire of techniques with which to weaken, disorient, humiliate or banish other group members." Because one of the biggest taboos is against any overt display of female aggression, you wrote, these attacks are invariably covert, indirect. And thank you also for providing in your book such ample quantities of harder data (particularly about the social lives of girls, a popular new area of study) and compelling sagas of intrigue, deception and puppet-mastery that put the doings of Cardinal Richelieu to shame. However, since you described the problem so well, Vikky, I am wondering whether we shouldn't at least give the benefit of the doubt to Mission Impossible that some of his past experiences with women might not have been of the most pleasant kind?

Oh no, how could I have overlooked that. Now, I recognize your style. You are always hiding great wisdom behind a good laugh. So let's laugh together by watching your video (clip #783) on, your debate with the Algerian Islamist Ahmad bin Muhammad over Islamic Teachings and Terrorism on Al-Jazeera TV. I bow in admiration of your wit, your superior intelligence and your courage so clearly displayed in this debate. What a really outstanding woman you are, Dr. Wafa Sultan. Your arguments were so much more forceful, logical and convincing that Pope Benedict's lecture in Regensburg (Germany) proving that women are more than just intriguing beautiful monsters, that they also have a powerful mind. May I remind you what you stated at Arabe Al-Jazeera TV, something that is forbidden to tell at Western TV channels. As as a rebuke to the claim that Islamist violence is the result of Western Imperialism, you sat the record straight by explaining

"The Crusader wars about which the professor is talking – these wars came after the Islamic religious teachings, and as a response to these teachings. This is the law of action and reaction. The Islamic religious teachings have incited to the rejection of the other, to the denial of the other, and to the killing of the other. Have they not incited to the killing of Jews and Christians? If we had heard that a tribe in a distant corner of China has a holy book and religious teachings calling to kill Muslims – would the Muslims stand idly by in the face of such teachings?

The Crusader wars came after these Islamic religious teachings. When these Islamic teachings were delivered, America did not exist on the face of the earth, nor was Israel in Palestine... Why doesn't he talk about the Muslim conquests that preceded all the wars he is talking about? Why doesn't he mention that when Tariq bin Ziyyad entered Andalusia with his armies, he said to his people: "The sea is behind you, and the enemy is in front"? How can you storm a peaceful country, and consider all its peaceful inhabitants to be your enemies, merely because you have the right to spread your religion? Should the religion be spread by the sword and through fighting?..."

Thank you for your enlightning intellectual contributions, Vikky, as well for your jokes to lighten up the tensity of debates.

19 September 2006 at 22:05  
Anonymous Rick said...

The Times September 20, 2006

Carey backs Pope and issues warning on 'violent' Islam
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent, and Richard Owen, in Rome

THE former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey of Clifton has issued his own challenge to “violent” Islam in a lecture in which he defends the Pope’s “extraordinarily effective and lucid” speech.

Lord Carey said that Muslims must address “with great urgency” their religion’s association with violence. He made it clear that he believed the “clash of civilisations” endangering the world was not between Islamist extremists and the West, but with Islam as a whole.

“We are living in dangerous and potentially cataclysmic times,” he said. “There will be no significant material and economic progress [in Muslim communities] until the Muslim mind is allowed to challenge the status quo of Muslim conventions and even their most cherished shibboleths.”

Lord Carey’s address came as the man who shot and wounded the last Pope wrote to Pope Benedict XVI to warn him that he was in danger. Mehmet Ali Agca, the Turkish gunman who tried to murder John Paul II in 1981 and is now in prison in Turkey, urged the Pope not to visit the country in November.

“I write as one who knows about these matters very well,” Agca said. “Your life is in danger. Don’t come to Turkey — absolutely not!”

Since the Pope quoted a Byzantine emperor as saying that the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad were “evil and inhuman”, a nun has been shot dead, a terrorist group linked to al-Qaeda has vowed to kill the Pope, churches in Palestinian areas have been attacked and security at churches and mosques in London and elsewhere has been stepped up.

This morning the Pope, who has already apologised for the offence caused by his words and distanced himself from the sentiments of the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, will elaborate further on what he intended by last week’s address at Regensburg University in Germany.

At his weekly audience at the Vatican the Pope is expected to emphasise the dangers of violence and fundamentalism in all religions, not just Islam, and reiterate his call for a dialogue of faiths based on “mutual respect”. The pontiff will explain why he has been “misunderstood”, Vatican sources said.

Lord Carey, who as Archbishop of Canterbury became a pioneer in Christian-Muslim dialogue, himself quoted a contemporary political scientist, Samuel Huntington, who has said the world is witnessing a “clash of civilisations”.

Arguing that Huntington’s thesis has some “validity”, Lord Carey quoted him as saying: “Islam’s borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”

Lord Carey went on to argue that a “deep-seated Westophobia” has developed in recent years in the Muslim world.

Lord Carey was delivering a lecture titled The Cross and the Crescent: The Clash of Faiths in an Age of Secularism, at Newbold College, Berkshire.

Lord Carey, who has continued to work in interfaith collaboration since his retirement in 2002, said that the relationship between Islamic countries and the West was “the most dangerous, most important and potentially cataclysmic issue of our day.” He described the two civilisations as “polarised and uncomprehending” and said that the Danish cartoons controversy last March showed “two world views colliding in public space with no common point of reference”.

He said the West had been largely responsible for “redrawing the map of the Middle East” and it was the “moral relativism of the West” that has outraged Muslim society. Most Muslims believe firmly that the invasion of Iraq is 2004 was solely about oil, he said.

He went on to defend the Pope’s fundamental thesis, that reason and religious faith can be compatible. “The actual essay is an extraordinarily effective and lucid thesis exploring the weakness of secularism and the way that faith and reason go hand in hand,” he said.

He said he agreed with his Muslim friends who claimed that true Islam is not a violent religion, but he wanted to know why Islam today had become associated with violence. “The Muslim world must address this matter with great urgency,” he said.

20 September 2006 at 06:10  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...


And I peer into the globe
And I see little people, so very many, so very little people
And they are angry, angry they are

And I see that they are demonstrating
And yes they are demonstrating against the Mother

They do not want her referenced
They wish no word mentioned of her
They do not want to hear her name

No not by their governments
Not by their schools
No not in their town squares
No not even on people’s lips

And they are demanding this!

Just as we are being told to no longer say Merry Christmas
But say Happy Holidays instead

So will we be told; no, we will be demanded
To no longer mention the Mother’s name
To no longer make reference of her

How can this be??

I look into the globe in puzzlement
How can such a situation arise

Free speech is a given
Religious freedom is a given
It is the law of the land

Both of these are fundamental and most closely guarded
And cherished

Both as the Law of the Land
And as the fundamental right of the people

What is going on here

And I look and I feel the people’s rage
They are angry

And I am reminded of the mob at Jesus’ crucifixion
How they were manipulated into demanding Jesus’ crucifixion
Why did they do so
How was it in their own interest to do so
Truly they were not doing their own thinking
Clearly they were being manipulated as sheep
Others had control of their minds
Others played them like violins
And they allowed themselves to be so played
They allowed
They allowed
And they actively participated in the unspeakable horror
That followed
They in fact were necessary players
It could not have happened without them

No the crucifixion of Jesus could not, would not
Have happened
Without the insistent demands, the very willing and active
Participation of the mob of angry people present

And a similar scenario is now being presented before my eyes

Oh Lord have mercy

I am seeing women dressed in black
Covered in black, the black garment of the Muslim women
And they are angrily decrying against reference to the Mother

But since when do the Muslims hate the Mother
This makes no sense at all

The Muslims have always shown great respect
And yes affection for Mary the Mother of Jesus

What is this turn of events?


Tune into one of the women dear
Enter into her
Drop your fear, drop your revulsion, drop your prejudice
And enter into one of the women
Do so now


And I take my courage in my hands
And yes we are in Paris
Beautiful, lovely, elegant Paris

Paris being swarmed by these women
In their black robes that cover them from head to toe
And forgive me, my stomach recoils
And I remember my spirit’s instructions
To drop my prejudice, to drop my fear
And yes to drop my revulsion of all this ugly black
This symbol to me of the oppression, yea imprisonment
Of womanhood
Yes drop it all; drop it all; drop it all

Pick a woman
And how unusual
The woman I am focused on
Has blue eyes!
She has clear white skin
She is clearly not an Arab
And yet she is Muslim
And yet she is covered from head to toe in black
In a large and loosely flowing black garment
That hides her, that hides her, that hides her

And I take a deep breath
For truly this is a bit much for me
And I look at this woman
And again her blue eyes startle me

She has chosen for this?
She was not born into this
She of her own free will, freely chose for this

It staggers the imagination
It is beyond my comprehension
Truly it is beyond me

My stomach recoils; forgive me God, my stomach recoils

For one can have sympathy for women who are born into this
But for a woman to freely choose imprisonment

Why it is as preposterous, as obscene
As a black man freely, of his own free will, choosing for slavery!

And yet, this woman I have focused on has done just that
And no she is not Arab
God help me, surely she cannot be French!
And oh my God, she is French

She is a native born French girl
Born to French parents
Raised French
And has married into the Muslim community
And has converted to the Muslim faith and way of life

And I stagger and I reel
And I remind myself that this is not about me
Focusing on my emotions and my reactions teach me nothing

Please God, please God
Give me what I need to be clear
Give me what I need to listen, and yes to hear
What this French woman
Who has of her own free will
Decided to choose for the chador
Decided to turn her back on her country, on her culture
On her very way of life
Yes on the faith of her fathers

What is this French turned Moslem woman thinking
What is her motivation
What does she want

Oh my God can I do this
Can I do this
Can I do this

And again I clear myself
And I look at this woman’s eyes
And they are a clear blue
And I am reminded that I am not to look at her
Not look at her from the outside

But enter her
Experience her from within

And oh dear I have been stalling
Out of reluctance and dread I have been stalling
And now once more I take a deep breath for courage
And I now enter this young woman

And is see and I feel that she is energized
Yes she is empowered!
This march is energizing her; it is empowering her
She has a voice!
She is speaking
She who had been silent for so long
Is now shouting and is now being heard

She who had been invisible for so long
Now has the television cameras, the news cameras
Focused upon her

Yes! Yes! Yes!

She has never felt this good in her whole life
She has never had this much energy in her whole life

Yes she has demands
And yes her demands will be heard
And yes, yes, yes
Her demands will be met
Yes her demands must be met
For she and her sisters will not stop
No they will not stop
They will not ever stop
Until their demands are met in full
In full to the spirit, to the letter

And what are these their demands

And yes it is the complete and utter rejection
Of all that they see as opposition to their culture
Their way of life
Their view of life

And somehow, just how I cannot begin to imagine
The Virgin has become a symbol
An icon upon which they focus

She represents to them

What is it
That the Virgin Mother
Whom the Moslem population has always shown respect
And reverence for

How is it that they have chosen the Virgin
Upon which to focus their rage, yes their strident demands
And yes I can feel the woman’s sense of power
For the first time in her life
She feels power
She feels powerful
And what a wonderful feeling power is!
What an energizing, exciting, vibrant feeling

Why she who had been numb, who had been as half-dead
Is now alive!
Yes she is alive!
She has power
They are listening to her
They must!

They are so many
And they march down the boulevards of Paris

And no the French people are too civilized to stop them
They will not shoot these women down
Of course not

The French people are a very civilized people
And they listen, they listen carefully to what these women
Are saying

And yes, they nod their heads in agreement

Yes it is offensive to have another’s religion
Rubbed in one’s nose

Yes if one is not a Christian
It is truly offensive to see crèches at Christmas

No, the crèches must be brought down
No, the crèches must not be allowed on any public property

One must leave the people to do as they will
In the privacy and sanctity of their own homes

But in the public square, in the community centers
In the town hall, on the street
In the common area

The public domain is simply no place for scenes of Christianity
No, no place at all

And for some reason
The French do not think upon the fact
That in the Muslim countries
Public displays of the Muslim faith abound everywhere
And at all hours of the day

Yes the Muslim bells ring five times a day
And yes these bells are heard by all
Faithful and secular and non-Muslim alike
And no one takes offense
No one suggests that this is offensive
No one demands an immediate halt to this practice

But somehow this is overlooked
And the French government to keep the peace
For the French having experienced war
Having had their fill of war
Would avoid war at all cost
Will keep the peace at any price

And the French decide to yes
They understand the women’s position

Public displays of a particular faith
Are offensive and aggressive
Toward members of other faiths
Toward people of no faith

They are offensive and worse than that
They are hostile and aggressive
And show disrespect to these non-Christians

And so the crèches come down at Christmas
No they are not allowed out in public

And now even the people
Out of respect for the Muslim sensibilities
Do not put up crèches in their front yards at Christmas
For they would show sensitivity to their neighbors

And when the Muslim stops what he is doing
Five times a day
Where ever he happens to be
And drops on his prayer mat
Be it at the office, be it on the street

No one thinks to object
No one finds this offensive
No one finds this aggressive nor hostile

On the contrary
The Muslim is praised for his faith and devotion

And no contradiction is seen
No double standard is seen

The people are oblivious
The people are in denial

They do not realize that they are the ones being aggressed
They do not realize that the hostility is not only
From the French to the Muslim in the form of fear

But also from the Muslim to the French in the form of anger

In the form of anger, in the form of rage
And yes, yes, one must admit it
One does not dare to admit it
Such thoughts are not permitted to be spoken

In the form of jealousy

For of course the Muslim is jealous of the European

He has for generations now blamed the European
For all of his problems

He had blamed European colonialism
He had blamed European imperialism

But European colonialism and imperialism
Had disappeared from the Muslim nations
Decades and decades ago

And unfortunately life has only gotten worse for the Muslim
And truly he understands not why

It is the Jew’s fault
Yes it is all their fault
If Israel did not exist
Then everything would be all right

And yet, somehow that answer
Does not satisfy all the Muslims

The poor and the uneducated
Especially those living close to Israel
Are able to be so convinced
For truly they feel the wrath of Israel
For truly they feel Israel’s hatred and contempt of them

And they internalize it
And they externalize it
And they manifest it

But those Moslems further away from Israel
Are forced to silently admit to themselves
That no, Israel is not the reason that their countries
Fare so poorly

And yes, the fact that the Americans pour millions of dollars
Into their countries each year
Yes just to pacify them
Rankles. It rankles, it humiliates
Especially since they seem to have almost nothing
To show for all these American dollars that have been pouring
Into their countries for how many years now
How many decades

It is humiliating
It is humiliating
It is humiliating

And the Muslim is left bewildered
Just why and how has he been left behind

And now the European has left the Muslim countries
And now the Muslim countries are poorer and worse off
Than they were when the hated colonials were in power

And now the American dollars keep pouring in
Year after year after year
And yet the money seems to evaporate
Where, who can tell
Into the pockets of the politicians in power one suspects
But one cannot be sure

And so the European leaving did not help the Muslim
And the American dollars do not help the Muslim

And now finally the Muslim gives up on his country
He leaves his country
Leave his country he does

And he goes to Europe
He goes to the land of the gods
The land of the white man
Who seems so all powerful, so civilized, so competent!

And he goes to this land and hopes to be converted into
A European himself

But finds himself rejected

His swarthy skin
His thick accent
Give him away

He is not French; no he is not
And he never will be

And so he is confined to the ghetto
And he is treated with contempt

And he is not able to succeed in this land, in this Europe

And he is reminded yet once again
That he is inferior

And he internalizes this self-knowledge
And he externalizes this self-knowledge

Yes he is inferior

He had been inferior
During the times of European colonialism

He has been inferior
Despite the massive infusion of the American dollar

He is inferior now
In the land of the European
Even here where all the structures are already set in place
He is not able to succeed

He is inferior. He is inferior. He is inferior

There is no escaping this apparent fact
There is no accepting this apparent fact

And the Muslim rages
He rages. She rages for him

They rage
They rage
They rage

And are helpless; helpless they are
For a long time they are helpless

They are helpless to construct
They are powerless to build a civilization of their own
They are helpless and powerless
Or at least they were

But there is strength in numbers

And if one is not able to do something oneself
One is powerless to do so
The decades and the centuries have demonstrated such

One may find that one can force others
To do what they do not want to do

And so no the Muslim has no self power

No power of his own to create
No power of his own to build
No power of his own to manifest

But he discovers to his surprise and to his amazement
That he does have power
Yes power he has
Albeit a very funny sort of power
A power granted to him by the wishy-washy European
Why they are not even men!
One can hardly even respect them!

And the jealousy of the Muslim toward the European
And the self-loathing of the Muslim due to his inability
To succeed in all these preceding generations

How many generations has it been since the Muslim nations
Have accomplished anything of note

Too many
One does not want to think of such things
No one does not
It is too humiliating
It is bitter

But now the Muslim has found his power
Finally, finally, finally the Muslim has power

And no it is not power to build
It is not power to create
No, the Muslim does not find a cure for cancer

But the Muslim is able to slowly, insidiously, and with great joy
Destroy the civilization that he had so always admired
And envied

And yes he begins with religion

For the European is sensitive about religion
Hardly rational on this topic is the European
And the European had silenced his religious feeling
A long time ago

Understanding that private spiritual experience
And public religious law were a dangerous and often fatal

And should the Muslim have begun his attack
On other aspects of European life
Say financial or political
The European reaction would have been quite different

Had the Muslim demanded communism for example
His demand
Would have been immediately and firmly rejected

But the Muslim began with religion
And the European is weak in the knees on this topic
And the European allowed the Muslim his foot in the door
As it were
Via religion

And so no, crèches are no longer allowed at Christmas
And no, one does not say Merry Christmas
One says Happy Holidays

One is of course allowed to name the Muslim holy days

And the European takes extra care to make sure
To write articles in the media
Whenever there is a Muslim holy week

Ramadan is covered extensively with great explanation
Of what is entailed

And the European admiration of the daily fasting
Is greatly expounded upon in the media

No mention is made of the nightly feasting

And what begins continues

As the Muslim feeling of power grows
He is intoxicated by it
He is energized by it
He is a man again!
His woman is proud of him again!
He has power! He has power! He can accomplish something
Yes he can

He can change the European way of life
And he does

He starts with religion
This is where he starts
But of course this is not where he ends

For this is the only power the Muslim knows
And he exercises his power
And he exercises his power
And he continues to exercise his power

And the European to keep the peace allows him to
Allows him to
Allows him to

And that is truly unfortunate
For when all is said and done

When the Muslim has completed his work
He looks around to his dismay

And finds that Europe now looks just like the countries
He has left behind

It is as poor, it is as dirty, it is as corrupt
Yes, it is as impotent
As the Arab countries he had left behind

And now what is the Muslim to do
And now where is the Muslim to go

And the Muslim grieves

In helplessness and in despair and in shame

He grieves
He grieves
He grieves

20 September 2006 at 11:03  
Anonymous Colin said...

Rick and MI,

Thank you for these outstandíng contributions. Really remarkable.

Rick cited a newspaper article stating that

"The former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey of Clifton has issued his own challenge to “violent” Islam in a lecture in which he defends the Pope’s “extraordinarily effective and lucid” speech."

It looks like the Pope's courage to risk his life by indirectly accusing Islam's violence has also encouraged the Anglican church to take a stand against violence.

That might be the beginning of resistance to the Islamisation of Europe. Politicians will quickly follow the new trend if the majority of their parties is in danger.


It is difficult to add anything to the beautiful sound of your poem.

Maybe, if you permit, two observations.

Your wrote:

"But finds himself rejected

His swarthy skin
His thick accent
Give him away"

That's the same for other immigrants. Indians and Pakistanis are not different in this regard. As well as Chinese and Indonesians who both are looking orientally.

"And so he is confined to the ghetto
And he is treated with contempt

And he is not able to succeed in this land, in this Europe."

In the UK as elswhere, e.g. Germany, the USA, Indians and Chinese (also Koreans and Japanese) succeed very quickly, at school, in business, in academia. Not rarely they even surpass Westerners. Whereas often the believers of Islam are not successful. Why?

The interpretation of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the revered founder of Turkey, was that it has something to do with Islamic faith. The faitful of Islam believe in destiny and that all there is to know has been already said by their prophet. Therefore it must appear completely useless to them trying to change their destiny by education or science and its applications. Submission to the decisions of their powerful god, praying and fighting for him, appears to be the only strategy left to secure a better life, if not in this world but in an imaginary life after death, which consists of hell or paradise. Fearing an eternal hell, they will work hard to obey all the commands of their god such as regular prayers, protect their children from the harmful ideas and influences of the infidels and to fight the devilish Empire of the infidels.

And you are correct in your analysis, that if Islam is successful in this continent, Europe will become poor similar to the Islamic countries. The cultural habits of the Islamic world are the causes of the underdevelopment in these countries.

This is clearly visible by just looking at the historical development of economy. The Dutch were the first to become economically successful in Europe by economic freedom (i.e. Laissez faire capitalism, limitation of governmental power and religious tolerance). Next, the British people copied the Duch model and had the same success. Other countries adopted the British model in the following order: Germany, France, Italy, USA, Japan, Hongkong, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, and China (not completely yet). Countries which did not follow the British model of economic, political and religious freedom remained underdeveloped and poor (Sovjet Union, Islamic world, Southern America, most African countries). Countries, which abandonned the British model, became poor again. Nazi Germany, East European countries, the UK before Mrs. Thatcher's reforms, and increasingly the EU.

GC outed himself as Germanophil. I confess to be an Anglophil.

In my view, humankind is deeply indebted to the British people for not only successfully limiting the tyrannically power of the king and the Catholic church but also for developing a liberal economic model, an example to be copied by those who want improve the life and happiness of the human species.

An how can it be differently since individual freedom necessitates voluntary exchange for satisfying one needs (i.e cooperation) whereas the lack of individual freedom, i.e. the power of governmental buerocrats or of religious leaders over the populations, leads to exploitation (i.e. conflicts). And it is well known that cooperation is many times more productive than wasting money, time and efforts for conflicts.

Therefore, the Islamic political system of conflict is doomed to failure in the long run as is communism, fascism, welfarism etc. When these systems will have collapsed the people in the Middle East and Europe will have a rude awakening from their dreams. Until then, the struggle to make an unworkable system work will cause a lot of suffering.

Not the Muslims are inferior, as you wrote. Their system is inferior as was the European system before the invention of political and economic freedom by the British people.

20 September 2006 at 14:55  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

I am not the original author of the prose, Colin. I found it linked to an article published in Asia. I omitted to attribute a link to the original as I considered that might spoil its impact. Here is the original. Clearly, its authentic author has given much thought to his creation. Get's the correct message over quite effectively does it not? We should all take heed.

20 September 2006 at 15:27  
Anonymous Colin said...

Mission impossible,

In that case, thank you for the link and the article. I agree the message is correct and effective.

Just being too curious, would you might telling us how you got the idea for your "nom de plume" "mission impossible" ?

20 September 2006 at 16:08  
Anonymous Rick said...

has also encouraged the Anglican church to take a stand against violence.

Careful - Lord Carey speaks for himself and is very focused on thus theme. The C of E has a policy of alternating Archbishops between Evangelicals and High Church - Carey was the Evangelical and is no friend of Rowan fact Carey is a sort of Flying Bishop to certain orthodox churches in the US trying to escape ECUSA's neo-paganism............

I have no doubt the Bishop of Bradford will be apologising to Muslims there for the Anti-Dhimmi from Rome

20 September 2006 at 18:01  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Curiosity killed the cat.

20 September 2006 at 18:43  
Anonymous Rick said...

21 September 2006 at 12:58  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Socialists (and Communists?) controlling the City of Nottingham Council have thought of some new ways of snubbing Christian traditions, even when people die.

22 September 2006 at 10:54  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older