| GREG-STRANGE.COM |
"If you haven't found something strange during the
day, it hasn't been much of a day." -- John A. Wheeler
day, it hasn't been much of a day." -- John A. Wheeler
PROVIDING SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTARY ON THE
PEOPLE, POLITICS, EVENTS AND ABSURDITIES OF
OUR TIME. SERVED UP WITH ACERBIC WIT, YOU
SHOULD FIND IT QUITE SATISFYING.
PEOPLE, POLITICS, EVENTS AND ABSURDITIES OF
OUR TIME. SERVED UP WITH ACERBIC WIT, YOU
SHOULD FIND IT QUITE SATISFYING.
Muslims Angered Over Pope's Remarks; Here We Go Again
Here we go again with another outburst from the Religion of
Perpetual Outrage. Muslims worldwide are angry again, this
time at (Can you guess who? Drum roll, please. . .) the pope!
Muslims are angry over some remarks made by Pope Benedict
XVI during a lecture at a German university. The Vatican later
said that the pope did not intend the remarks to be offensive,
but you know how that goes. Anyway, here are some excerpts
from the speech. As a sort of amusing exercise, see if you can
pick out the parts that, once again, have Muslims worldwide
having conniption fits.
I was reminded of all this recently, when I read... of part of
the dialogue carried on - perhaps in 1391 in the winter
barracks near Ankara - by the erudite Byzantine Emperor
Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject
of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.
In the seventh conversation...the emperor touches on the
theme of the holy war. Without descending to details, such as
the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the
"Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a
startling brusqueness on the central question about the
relationship between religion and violence in general, saying:
"Show me just what Muhammad 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."
The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully,
goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the
faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is
incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the
soul. "God," he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting
reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the
soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith
needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly,
without violence and threats."
Sounds kinda like the pope was basically saying that violent
jihad might not be a particularly good way to spread religious
faith. What could be more infuriating than that, especially
coming from a pointy-headed chief infidel? As my
grandmother used to say, it's enough to make an imam -- er, I
mean, a preacher -- cuss.
Reaction from various imams, clerics and other Islamic
authority figures continues to pour in now. Here are a few
choice comments:
"He has a dark mentality that comes from the darkness of the
Middle Ages. . . . It looks like an effort to revive the mentality of
the Crusades." So said Salih Kapusuz, deputy leader of the
Turkish prime minister's party.
Sure, sure, it's the Crusades all over again. Anyone can see
that.
Or how about this from Pakistan's Foreign Ministry
spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam: "What he had done is that he
has quoted very offensive remarks by some emperor hundreds
of years ago. It is not helpful (because) we have been trying to
bridge the gap, calling for dialogue and understanding between
religions."
Really? I must have missed that call for dialogue and
understanding in between the alleged Gitmo Koran-flushing
riots and the Mohammad cartoon riots. I'll have to pay better
attention from now on.
Ms. Aslam went on to say that Muslims had a long history of
tolerance, adding that when the Catholic kingdom of Spain
expelled its Jewish population in 1492 they were welcomed by
Muslim nations such as the Turkish Ottoman Empire.
That's lovely, but they're not very welcome now, are they?
Iran's President Ahmadgenocide -- er, excuse me, Ahmadinejad
-- wants to wipe that Zionist regime off the map and the funny
thing is, I haven't heard anything about the Muslim masses
protesting his intolerance of Jews.
But maybe the best comment of all came, once again, from the
same silver-tongued spokeswoman: "Anyone who describes
Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence."
Wait a minute. If Islam was actually tolerant as the good lady
wants us to believe, then the mere description of it as
intolerant wouldn't encourage violence, would it? Doesn't her
statement actually confirm the very thing she is denying, which
is the intolerance of Islam?
There I go again, trying to make logical points about
something that was said by a disgruntled representative of the
Religion of Perpetual Outrage. Talk about an exercise in
futility.
As of this writing, it remains to be seen if riots will break out
around the world as they usually do when someone offends
Islamic sensibilities. We can only hope for the pope's sake that
no one takes to heart one of the placards that was being
displayed during the last round of riots: "BEHEAD THOSE
WHO INSULT ISLAM."
Here we go again with another outburst from the Religion of
Perpetual Outrage. Muslims worldwide are angry again, this
time at (Can you guess who? Drum roll, please. . .) the pope!
Muslims are angry over some remarks made by Pope Benedict
XVI during a lecture at a German university. The Vatican later
said that the pope did not intend the remarks to be offensive,
but you know how that goes. Anyway, here are some excerpts
from the speech. As a sort of amusing exercise, see if you can
pick out the parts that, once again, have Muslims worldwide
having conniption fits.
I was reminded of all this recently, when I read... of part of
the dialogue carried on - perhaps in 1391 in the winter
barracks near Ankara - by the erudite Byzantine Emperor
Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject
of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.
In the seventh conversation...the emperor touches on the
theme of the holy war. Without descending to details, such as
the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the
"Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a
startling brusqueness on the central question about the
relationship between religion and violence in general, saying:
"Show me just what Muhammad 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."
The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully,
goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the
faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is
incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the
soul. "God," he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting
reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the
soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith
needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly,
without violence and threats."
Sounds kinda like the pope was basically saying that violent
jihad might not be a particularly good way to spread religious
faith. What could be more infuriating than that, especially
coming from a pointy-headed chief infidel? As my
grandmother used to say, it's enough to make an imam -- er, I
mean, a preacher -- cuss.
Reaction from various imams, clerics and other Islamic
authority figures continues to pour in now. Here are a few
choice comments:
"He has a dark mentality that comes from the darkness of the
Middle Ages. . . . It looks like an effort to revive the mentality of
the Crusades." So said Salih Kapusuz, deputy leader of the
Turkish prime minister's party.
Sure, sure, it's the Crusades all over again. Anyone can see
that.
Or how about this from Pakistan's Foreign Ministry
spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam: "What he had done is that he
has quoted very offensive remarks by some emperor hundreds
of years ago. It is not helpful (because) we have been trying to
bridge the gap, calling for dialogue and understanding between
religions."
Really? I must have missed that call for dialogue and
understanding in between the alleged Gitmo Koran-flushing
riots and the Mohammad cartoon riots. I'll have to pay better
attention from now on.
Ms. Aslam went on to say that Muslims had a long history of
tolerance, adding that when the Catholic kingdom of Spain
expelled its Jewish population in 1492 they were welcomed by
Muslim nations such as the Turkish Ottoman Empire.
That's lovely, but they're not very welcome now, are they?
Iran's President Ahmadgenocide -- er, excuse me, Ahmadinejad
-- wants to wipe that Zionist regime off the map and the funny
thing is, I haven't heard anything about the Muslim masses
protesting his intolerance of Jews.
But maybe the best comment of all came, once again, from the
same silver-tongued spokeswoman: "Anyone who describes
Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence."
Wait a minute. If Islam was actually tolerant as the good lady
wants us to believe, then the mere description of it as
intolerant wouldn't encourage violence, would it? Doesn't her
statement actually confirm the very thing she is denying, which
is the intolerance of Islam?
There I go again, trying to make logical points about
something that was said by a disgruntled representative of the
Religion of Perpetual Outrage. Talk about an exercise in
futility.
As of this writing, it remains to be seen if riots will break out
around the world as they usually do when someone offends
Islamic sensibilities. We can only hope for the pope's sake that
no one takes to heart one of the placards that was being
displayed during the last round of riots: "BEHEAD THOSE
WHO INSULT ISLAM."