Issues: September 2006 Archives

Fury Over Pope's Remarks Raises Concerns

Pakistan's legislature unanimously condemned Pope Benedict XVI. Lebanon's top Shiite cleric demanded an apology. And in Turkey, the ruling party likened the pontiff to Hitler and Mussolini and accused him of reviving the mentality of the Crusades.

All because he said he believes Islam is a violent religion? The truth must be painful. Especially when you're in denial.



Linked to Hitler and Mussolini because he accuses someone of being violent? Just so we're clear about what we're discussing here, what about repeated Vatican condemnations of George Bush and the US as being too violent?



Oh. I see. It's okay to accuse the civilized, restrained US of being too violent. But it's not PC to accuse Islam, never mind how accurate the accusation. Or is it along the same lines as Han Solo's famous quote: "That's because droids don't pull people's arms out of their sockets when they get upset"?



So don't accuse Wookies of being violent. Or Islam. They'll do considerably more than pull your arm out of it's socket.

"The declarations from the pope are more dangerous than the cartoons, because they come from the most important Christian authority in the world - the cartoons just came from an artist,"

You mean perhaps because he lends the accusation a certain amount of legitmacy, perhaps? The argument is legitimate no matter who makes it. But he makes it more weighty because of who he is. You can get mad at the messenger, or you can deal with the root issues of the message. These folks did the former. The latter is more constructive. Christianity managed it centuries ago, Judaism centuries before that. Buddhism never had much of a problem with it. Of all the major world religions, Islam is the only one in denial of this problem.

"He has a dark mentality that comes from the darkness of the Middle Ages. He is a poor thing that has not benefited from the spirit of reform in the Christian world," Kapusuz told Turkish state media. "It looks like an effort to revive the mentality of the Crusades."



"Benedict, the author of such unfortunate and insolent remarks, is going down in history for his words," Kapusuz added. "He is going down in history in the same category as leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini."

Because he tells the truth as he sees it? As millions of others see it? In accordance with a huge body of observed evidence? Exhibit A of which is the teachings of the holy books of Islam?



This, ladies and gentlemen, is psychological denial. Of the same sort you encounter in addicts of all stripes.



Pope's Birthplace in Bavaria Vandalized

Police were investigating, but so far had no suspects.

Does anyone think it likely to have been a group of marauding atheists? Jews, perhaps? Protestants? Buddhists? Hindus?



Moslems are not the only suspect that springs to mind. But they are the most likely.



Turkish Cleric Criticizes Pope Comments

Bardakoglu said he expected an apology from the pope and said it was Christianity, not Islam, that popularized conversion by the sword, according to Turkey's state-owned Anatolia news agency.



"The church and the Western public, because they saw Islam as the enemy, went on crusades. They occupied Istanbul, they killed thousands of people. Orthodox Christians and Jews were killed and tortured," he said.

And nothing ever happened in the Hindu Kush. Pay no attention to those jihadis behind the curtain. These are not the terrorists you're looking for.



Well, there might be an alternate universe where it's true. But here in this one, the one religion with the strongest history of conversion by force of arms is Islam. In fact, it's the only religion I can think of that has not specifically forsworn conversion by force, and they have been doing it since long before the counter-offensive that was the Christian Crusades, and they've been doing it ever since, even in completely unrelated areas of the world to people who had never heard of Christianity.



Not to mention that this was a thousand years ago, and Christianity has morally evolved while Islam has not. You want an excuse to be savage murderers, you need to think of a better one than that.



It is not enough to say these are actions of a small number of extremists. For so-called "moderate moslems", it is essential that they condemn the actions in no uncertain terms, and materially aid in hunting down the perpetrators and preventing such actions in the future. That's what it takes to convince me that you really mean it. Action that leaves no doubt as to where you really stand.



Why do I suddenly hear crickets chirping?



When so-called moderate moslems condemn such acts in no uncertain terms, undertake political risk to condemn, circumvent, and hunt down and punish extremists who perform these kinds of actions, then I will believe that they actually are moderates. When accomodating the opinions of an 'islamic community' is more important, I call those people sympathizers, not moderates.



Consider the history of the Ku Klux Klan here in the United States. Their power wasn't broken until they were seen as unfit for civilized people to be associating with. Until then, they were supported by a community of enablers that ranged from business organizations to women's organizations to still others that are some of the most respected organizations in the United States, even today. A bigot or denier who protected the Klan by saying "they were only having a bit of fun," or "they were protecting the white community," was a part of exactly the same problem as the actual Klansmen performing his acts of terrorism.



This same principle needs to be applied to so-called "moderate Moslems." Show me by your actions that you are not part of the problem. But most of them are making the same sort of excuses that Klan apologists made. Not to mention apologists for most of the other atrocities of history. To be fair, there are those who are acting in accordance with this. But they are relatively few. The vast majority are acting exactly like the Klan enablers did. QED.



Muslims deplore Pope speech, want apology

"The Pope of the Vatican joins in the Zionist-American alliance against Islam," said the leading Moroccan daily Attajdid, the main Islamist newspaper in the kingdom.

So, because he says Moslems need to improve, he's joining some kind of unholy alliance with the goals of the democide of the Islamic world?



Denial.



Related:

The Pope Tackles Faith and Terrorism



Original of the Pope's Speech here, via Justus for All



SWWBO uses far fewer words to say what I did.



Scrappleface reduces it for easy understanding.

Iran leader vows never to give up nuclear program, accuses West of misrepresenting activities



They've been enriching now for how long? How long did it take the US to enrich the atomic bomb in the first place? China and India both stunned the world with how quickly they became nuclear powers. How much shorter do you think it might be now that the technology is mature? Have you considered the possibility that they use their long held and permitted civilian enrichment equipment to boost their enrichment capability by enriching to that limit prior to further enrichment, thus stretching their weaponry enrichment capability?



Ladies and gentlemen, I think that Iran may be very close to nuclear capability. Their open defiance is only one of many symptoms. Their enrichment centrifuges. Their gas purchases and usage. And so on and so forth.



They may already have a nuclear weapon, or even more than one. They are most likely building to a certain threshold, enough so that no matter what happens, every major antagonist is going to know there's at least one for them.



So, how are we going to behave in a world where the crazy mullahs have nukes?