Christian Rage and Muslim Moderation
In Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah was pushing an agenda of political and religious moderation even before he assumed full control of the country in 2005. The kingdom still holds to the ultraconservative Sunni religious dogmas known as Wahhabism, and the monarchy's legitimacy is tied to its custodianship of Mecca and Medina, the two holiest sites in Islam. That won't change. But Abdullah has fired 1,000 of the Muslim prayer leaders on the government payroll and decreed that the 40,000 who remain must be retrained to make sure they are not stoking radical violence.
Yes, there may be less here than meets the eye. When I talked to Hakura on the phone Wednesday morning, he cautioned that the Turkish rethink of Islam is rooted in national traditions and might be a hard sell in the Arab Middle East. Fadlallah may be enthusiastic about reconciliation with Christians, but on his Web site he still presents himself as an implacable foe of what he calls Israel's "Zionist project that is based on violence, arrogance and despise [sic] of other countries." A highly placed Saudi friend assured me the other day the so-called "retraining" of Saudi Arabia's retrograde imams really would be more like "a dialogue" to discuss the best ways to preach.
Islam, like any faith, has plenty of violent fools and fanatics. Certainly it is hard to credit the judgment or intelligence of anyone in Sudan connected with the arrest of British expatriate schoolteacher Gillian Gibbons a few months ago. You'll recall she made the nearly fatal mistake of letting her class of seven-year-olds in Khartoum name a Teddy bear Mohammed. To the kids, many of whom were named Mohammed themselves, the name just sounded friendly and cuddly. Sudanese authorities claimed Gibbons was inciting religious hatred and insulting the Prophet. Eventually she apologized and they released her—against the wishes of the mob calling for her death.
But even with many qualifications and reservations, in my view the conciliatory trends in Islam make an interesting contrast with renewed provocations coming out of Europe.
There's no use wasting much space on the Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, the dyed blond with ugly roots who is promoting a film he says will prove his belief that "Islamic ideology is a retarded, dangerous one." What to say about a politician reminiscent of Goldmember in an Austin Powers film who claims the Qur'an should be banned like Adolph Hitler's "Mein Kampf"? No Dutch television network will show his little movie, so he released it on the Internet this week, reportedly drawing 2 million page views in the first three hours. The general reaction in Holland thus far has been little more than shoulder shrugging.
Danish cartoonists and editors previously unknown to the wider world garnered international attention when they published caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad in 2005 that brought on bloody riots in several Muslim countries in 2006. Having sunk once again into obscurity, the editors decided to publish one of the cartoons again last month, reportedly after the arrest of an individual plotting to kill the cartoonist. Great idea. Take one man's alleged crime and respond with new insults to an entire faith.
The most problematic event of late, however, was Pope Benedict's decision to baptize the Egyptian journalist Magdi Allam in Saint Peter's on the night before Easter, thus converting a famously self-hating Muslim into a self-loving Christian in the most high-profile setting possible. Perhaps Benedict really thought, as the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano opined, that the baptism was just a papal "gesture" to emphasize "in a gentle and clear way religious freedom." But I am not prepared to believe for a second, as some around the Vatican have hinted this week, that the Holy Father did not know who Allam was or how provocative this act would appear to Muslim scholars, including and especially those who are trying to foster interfaith dialogue.
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Mariana S @ 05/06/2008 10:34:52 PM
Comment: Chistopher Dickey has problems with the Catholic church. When JPII was dying, he wasn't doing it fast enough for Dickey and of course Benedict's election was a catastrophe. Newsweek should consider hiring reporters for the Vatican beat who have no animus toward Catholics. They don't have to LOVE Catholics, but it would be nice if they did not so overtly hate them.
Posted By: getzel @ 04/21/2008 5:45:10 PM
Comment: Dickey: No I do not agree, I think the Dickey representation of the actual market conditions is as accurate as if Dickey wrote the world is flat;
The idea that Islamis are now: I am Ok and you are OK and if we just talk I am sure we can be good friends; and if westerners want to criticize and make fun of Islam that is OK. For Dickey to write that Islam has moderated because he found a few people who say one thing in English; & no doubt have a completely different tune in their native language, is beyond irresponsible, & may be treasonous.
The Islamis say openly that they use this type activity as a ruse to lull pacifist into encouraging pacification.
What the actual market conditions are: Terrorist &/or Islamis are at war with The West because terrorist believe Islam can not survive against a free market, free speech to criticize Islam, representative Republic. Yes, terrorist believe Islam is doomed to the trash heap unless freedom to criticize Islam and democracy are eliminated. That is why they send suicide murderers and attack the West. Propaganda, the big lie???
..if only Israel???is only an excuse, propaganda, for Islamic terror; as we see that wherever the Moslem terrorist bump against another culture they say the same thing they say about Israel. In India: same thing in Kosovo: same thing In Israel: same thing. In Darfur: same thing. In Thailand: same thing, the Philippines: same thing. Wherever the Moslem terrorist are contiguous with another people: They say the same thing they say about Israel: If only???Sharia???and no freedom of speech to criticize Islam???
there is no such thing as "moderate Islam".... As Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan said the other day, and I quote, "There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it".... Islam is in pursuit of dominance. It wishes to exact its imperialist agenda by force on a worldwide scale (8:39).
Intelligence analyst: Getzel
Posted By: getzel @ 04/21/2008 5:44:22 PM
Comment: The Jews are the only ones with any claim to the land; no one else was there for any period of time, unlike the American Indian who was also nomad. Nor do you state any claim to the land, only invalid objections to Jewish claim to the land.
I do not agree with your numbers. There has been a continuous Jewish presence in Israel since at least 1313 BC: 2000 years before Mo was born. Jews maintained the countryand had a Capital in Jerusalem for hundreds of years before Mo was born. Just as in Kosovo 1997-2008 where Moslem hordes kill rape and murder Christians and run them out of town and now few Christians live there. So Moslem Hordes did the same to Jews in the Jews land of Israel. Stealing does not make for a legit deed. Moslem hordes did the same thing to Christians in Lebanon 1979-present; now fewer Christians than before. Liars and thieves figure, but figures do not lie. Thanks for the opportunity to remind everyone about Moslem land thieves.
A. I suspect you are trying to say, the erroneous point, that Jews do not belong in this area. Jews lived in this area for 1800 years before Mohammed was born; Jews are documented in this area dating to +/- 1313 BC.
B. Jews had a capital in Jerusalem +/_ 1000 years before Mohammed was born. There is written documentation to prove it. 20th and 21st century ( and previous centuries) archeology to prove Jewish presence and verify the written documentation.
C. Since the Jewish presents predates the Moslem presence and has been open and continuous for +/- 2300 years and includes deeds; it is bazaar to claim the Jews have no claim to the land; and such a statement could only be made by one who has ones mind made up and is not interested in facts
The Ottoman Turks were the government in the middle east until from around 1300 until 1917-8. France and England were given Mandates of these areas of the middle east after the demise of Ottoman Turkey . All of the counties of the middle east were drawn by lines in the sand in the 20th century; including Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Lebanon et al. These countries are either all legitimate or all not legitimate as they were all created the same way at near the same time.
Sharia people are at war with The West because Arabs, Persians, & Sharia people believe Islam can not survive against a free market, free speech, republic with: womens rights & no honor killing: murdering women is legal in Sharia.
Arab, if only Israel: is only an excuse, propaganda, for Islamic terror; as we see that wherever the Mohammedans bump against another culture the Mohammedans say the same thing they say about Israel. In India: same thing, in Kosovo: same thing, In Israel: same thing. In Darfur: same thing. In Thailand: same thing, the Philippines: same thing. Wherever the Moslems are contiguous with another people: The Moslems say the same thing they say about Israel: If only: Sharia and no freedom of speech to criticize Islam
Intelligence analyst: Getzel