But relax: it's just in books that "ominously warn of a catastrophic culture clash between Europeans with traditional Western values and fundamentalist Muslims" -- including mine. It isn't as if it's really happening.
"In Books, a Clash of Europe and Islam," by Patricia Cohen in the New York Times (aka New Duranty Times), with thanks to all who sent this in:
Award nominations are generally occasions for exaggerated compliments and air kisses, so it was something of a surprise when Eliot Weinberger, a previous finalist for the National Book Critics Circle award, announced the newest nominees for the criticism category two weeks ago and said one of the authors, Bruce Bawer, had engaged in “racism as criticism.”
What race is Islam again?
The resulting stir within the usually well-mannered book world spiked this week when the president of the Circle’s board, John Freeman, wrote on the organization’s blog (bookcriticscircle.blogspot.com): “I have never been more embarrassed by a choice than I have been with Bruce Bawer’s ‘While Europe Slept,’ he wrote. “It’s hyperventilated rhetoric tips from actual critique into Islamophobia.”
Freeman should be more specific about what he finds objectionable about Bawer's superb book. If he could point out the actual instances of "Islamophobia," we might be able to see what he's really talking about.
The fusillade of e-mail messages on the subject circulating among the Circle’s 24 board members mirrors a larger debate over a string of recently published books that ominously warn of a catastrophic culture clash between Europeans with traditional Western values and fundamentalist Muslims — books including “Londonistan” by Melanie Phillips, “The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion” by Robert Spencer, and “America Alone” by Mark Steyn.Most have been written by conservative authors and published by conservative presses, but not all: the celebrated Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci, who died last year, so angered Muslims with her strident books, like “The Force of Reason,” that she was sued for defaming Islam. The publication of such books coincides with a rise in anti-Muslim sentiment and reports of violent attacks and plots by radical Muslims in Europe. Bombings in London and Madrid, heated disputes over bans on women wearing the veil, gang attacks on young Muslims, rioting in Paris and violence in Berlin by disaffected Arab immigrants have brought to the surface anxieties over the growing number of Muslims in Europe. In December the European Union reported that Muslims faced deep-seated discrimination in education, housing and jobs, but that they should also do more to integrate into society. In this environment, it is no surprise that the books have elicited a mixture of praise and contempt, raising the question of where the line is between legitimate criticism and bigotry.
Why doesn't the Times explore that question in an honest way, instead of pretending, up to now, that these books don't exist? I know this is the first time mine has been mentioned in its pages, except for when it was on the Times Bestseller List. This is the first time they've noticed Bawer's book as well. The fact that they have reviewed neither book is just another indication of their tendency simply to ignore perspectives that do not coincide with their own.
For Mr. Bawer, the condemnations are more evidence of liberals’ one-sided blindness. “One of the most disgraceful developments of our time is that many Western authors and intellectuals who pride themselves on being liberals have effectively aligned themselves with an outrageously illiberal movement that rejects equal rights for women, that believes gays and Jews should be executed, that supports the coldblooded murder of one’s own children in the name of honor, etc., etc.,” he wrote on his own blog, www.brucebawer.com/blog.htm. In an e-mail message yesterday he said he did not have anything to add to his posts.Mr. Bawer’s book jacket is covered with admiring blurbs from well-known conservatives, but he does not fit the typical red-state mold.
That must confuse them so!
An openly gay cultural critic from New York who has lived in Europe since 1998, Mr. Bawer has published books like “Stealing Jesus,” a harsh critique of Christian fundamentalism. “Some people think it’s terrific for writers to expose the offenses and perils of religious fundamentalism — just as long as it’s Christian fundamentalism,” he wrote on his blog.
Exactly so. Read it all.
I came across an essay,"The Appetite of Tyranny", by G.K.Chesterton. Now on JW/DW, LGF and other sites, we have characterised this war as not a war between civilisations but one between civilisation and barbarism. In this essay, Chesterton defines the essence of barbarism, but in the context of Prussia. Some of the language is not quite consonant with our PC times, nonetheless, this essay of Prussian barbarism and the Islamic barbarism we face today, has many similarities, particularly the essence of barabarism.
The Appetite of Tyranny
Download it and read at leisure. Recommend it highly.
"Now on JW/DW, LGF and other sites, we have characterised this war as not a war between civilisations but one between civilisation and barbarism..."
-- from a posting above
That may be how some have characterized things. I would prefer to characterize it differently: as a war of Islam not against the West, but against all the rest, that is the entire world of Infidels. Some of those Muslims may be soft-spoken and "civilised" while most are primitive in manner as well as matter. Some of those Infidels are extremely uncivilized. But that's not the point. A classic Jihad, made up of all the local Jihads that are waged, with different immediate targets, though with each local Jihad group willing to lend a hand to any other local group, for it is always Believers against Infidels.
This Jihad proceedes using whatever instruments are both available and effective. As a duty for Muslims, Jihad has always been central. As a duty that they are required to take part in, it has had to await the right circumstances. OPEC oil money, the nearly simultaneous movement of large numbers of Muslims into Infidel lands (especially in Western Europe), and finally, the advances in Western technology that have benn appropriated by Muslims to disseminate Da'wa and other kinds of propaganda, have all helped to make the Jihad the threat it is: the money weapon, demographic conquest, and propaganda being, in fact, far more dangerous as instruments of Jihad than is, at the moment, any kind of direct military assault. That assumes, of course, that no Muslim state, beyond Pakistan (which has to worry about India and is helplessly dependent on the West for staying economically afloat), acquires weapons of mass destruction or the means to deliver, against Infidels, such weaponry.
The Times has been feeling poorly recently, as has its novanglian succursale, The Boston Globe, and one wonders if those in charge think it is all to be chalked up to Craigslist, or whether they quite realize that part of the disaffection with them has been, over the past five years, their scandalous misreporting, underreporting, outright nonsense and lies, not once, not twice, but again and again, about the matter of Islam.
And if they think that is only of concern to these "right-wingers" they prate about, they haven't been coming to the right sights. They haven't dared to take notice of the actual views of, inter alios, Oriana Fallaci (always famously anti-fascist and, in Italian terms, republican and anti-clerical), or Ibn Warraq, or Ali Sina, or any number of those who do not fit their banal template.
The banality of banality. It's something, isn't it?
Interesting (and typical) how the article above talks about how the poor, innocent muslims in Europe suffer through gang attacks, 'heated disputes over bans on women wearing the veil', etc.
All the while not mentioning how Europe, and Britain in particular, is bending over backwards for the pitiful disaffected muslims (new cemeteries being laid out so ALL plots face mecca, renovating prisons so the toilets don't face mecca, schoolchildren of all faiths being fed halal meat, muslim neighborhood leaders being given advance notice of raids on fellow muslims, outreach and 'education' programs out the ass.)
Just like we never, EVER read a word in the MSM condemning the suicide bombers in iraq (of course it's all The Great Satan's fault for not being able to provide security -- notice how muslim men are never made responsible for their own repugnant behavior?)... we are reading about how muslims are being victimized IN RESPONSE TO THEIR OWN VIOLENT BEHAVIOR. Not a word about how the muslim community would not be having this FBI problem if so many in their community weren't blowing themselves up and taking innocent lives with them. Not a word about how they bring this on themselves. Not a word about the fact that muslims are 'discriminated' against when looking for housing because nobody wants to live with terrorists in their midst.
Not one sentence about (the lack of) personal responsibility on the part of muslims. It's always (ALWAYS) the fault of anyone and everyone else in the world.
When will we read an article about how the civilized West is sick and tired of being victimized by muslims, without portraying islam as a RoP and without the usual 'tiny minority...' bullshit? Cause I am SICK AND TIRED of being a target simply because I am not a dirty muslim.
The New York Times has lost half of it's market value in the last five years.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=105317&p=irol-stockchart&control_javaupperindicator=&control_javauf=&control_javatype=&control_javascale=&control_javanumberperiods=&control_javamovingaverage=&control_javalowerindicator2=&control_javalowerindicator1=&control_javachartfunctions=&control_javaapplet=
muslims suffer through gang attacks? do these journalists ever go to muslim neighbourhoods in europe? i worked in a muslim neighbourhood, one day a gang of muslims, hijacked a car, pushed it into the center street (drummond street about 50 meters from euston station british transport police in london) and proceeded to racially abuse and threw rocks at white car drives that tried to drive around the car. one of my colleagues bravely went out to challenge them but they called him a white c**t and he left. we called the cops (keystone cops) they looked out of their depth, fightened even, they moved the car, pushed it back to the side and quickly drove off. guess what? yeah, the muslim gang pushed it back. we called the cops again, this time they gave the gang a friendly word, then quickly fled. the then gang decided to spray paint all our cars in the car park. this was when i worked at calumet, the photo store. which was also targeted on 9/11/02 with a fake bomb right after the towers fell. (the fake bomb was left on the door step of the business). thankfully this was my last week at that place, the staff are now getting racially abused and threatened. this is plainly ethnic cleansing, yet no one does anything about it.
Where is your proof Leonthepigfarmer. I never have any problem with the Black Moslim and I than white.
First they arenot moslim it they behavor that way.
You and your racist kind never allow Islamist school
to be open and your bad mounth Islam and moslim doesnot help at all.
DefenderofIslam, is English your first language?
I am glad our kind in Dar al-Harb "never allow Islamist school to be open" is because the students there will only learn how to hate.
They will not learn what it means to be a part of a western democracy. Nor will they learn the language, nor what it means to be a truly tolerant person, nor anything useful.
But they will know the Koran by heart! and what else does one need to know beyond that?
Take care
Gee NYT idiots, what the hell took you so long? Robert Spencer et al have posted about this for years. After doing some reasearch about this Duranty guy, now the joke is more obvious.
No wonder the NYT readership has gone down 40%. With blogs, we don't need those rags.
QUOTE from article:
"It’s hyperventilated rhetoric tips from actual critique into Islamophobia"
Yes to you useful idiots who support the islamist ANY critique that exposes the true nature of the universal commands to violence for the muslim in mainstream Islamic teachings just MUST be "islamophobia". You idiots are dumber than the squirrels we shoot in the backwoods in Ontario. sheesh.
Second QUOTE from article:
“Some people think it’s terrific for writers to expose the offenses and perils of religious fundamentalism — just as long as it’s Christian fundamentalism,”
yes so true. Oh God forbiiiiiid we speak ill of ISLAM which is actually doing EVIl but its okay to critisize Christianity because they are so gwarsh darn mean wanting prayer in schools again and opposing gay marriages and such. Yes that compares to muslims CRASHING FREAKING AIRPLANES INTO BUILDINGS AND BEHEADING ANY WESTERNER THEY CAN GET AND SUICIDE BOMBINGS ETC. oh suuuure it does. Hey if you are reading this and thinking "oh yes Christian fundamentalists yes yes they are as bad or worse then Islamic fundamentalist" [1] YOU are a freaking idiot. Seriously go back to the mental institution you escaped from.
Man I am soo tired of western useful idiots who just loooove Islam and hate christianity because some father or mother figure in their past probably made them wear a suit and attend a sunday school class or a catholic school they hated so now they spend their E N T I R E lives hating Catholicsm or fundamentalist christianity etc and like Madeline O'hair go on and on about the evils of a decent faith because oh the poor dears were 'hurt' . GET FREAKING OVER IT YOU MORONS! Look past your arrogant self absorption of how 'mean' your religious dad was too you growing up and SEE that the Christian faith when practiced honestly ("pursue peace with all men if possible" [2]) is a good and decent faith. ISLAM on the other hand will chop your western infidel heads off gleefully shouting allah ackbar. Get a clue you western useful idiots.
Obviously I am not addressing the main readership of jihadwatch who 'get it' but the various useful idiots who I KNOW are reading these articles on jihadwatch and saying under their breath: 'tsk tsk yes Christianity is sooo bad and Islam oh oh [look of ecstasy here as only Bill Mahr can fake after having sex with a prositute] its sooo peaceful.'
------
[1]
Mark Steyn wrote:
You get the picture: sure, Muslim fundamentalists can be pretty extreme, but what about all our Christian fundamentalists? Unfortunately, for the old moral equivalence to hold up, the Christians really need to get off their fundamentalist butts and start killing more people.
At the moment, the brilliantly versatile Muslim fundamentalists are gunning down Maryland schoolkids and bus drivers, hijacking Moscow theatres, self-detonating in Israeli pizza parlours, blowing up French oil tankers in Yemen, and slaughtering nightclubbers in Bali, while Christian fundamentalists are, er, sounding extremely strident in their calls for the return of prayer in school.
[2] -Bible: Hebrews 12:14 - "Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord"
-Bible: Romans 12:18- "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men."
[notice it says IF possible. Self defence is not a sin and we will RISE UP like the CRUSADERS did in self defense and crush Islam if they keep refusing to accept peace.]
People recommending the works of any of the fascist Chestertons (yes, I am aware of the difference between A K and G K) are as dangerous to democracy as the islamonazis themselves. Are these islamoswines pushing otherwise reasonable kuffars towards fascism? If so I have even less faith for the future of the world.
I do believe that the primary challenge of Jihad is not Jihad itself, but political correctness---which is exemplied in the people Stalin called "useful idiots."
There were some "useful idiots" when the U.S. fought the Germans. The number of useful idiots during the Cold War as alarming high, particularly in the later years. When facing this unique threat of assymetrical war, the population of "useful idiots" seems to be at its zenith.
I think it is important to recognize that the West has been plagued with useful idiots for a long time. I also think it is important to realize that the number is increasing.
I blame the dumbing down of critical thinking in our schools, politics, and media. Hannity & Colmes is a great example of this dumbing down. I don't think I have ever learned anything while watching that show. Not a single fact. Pure entertainment (and not very good at that). Can anyone in the media think critically anymore? Do college students learn anything about the Founding Fathers much less the ancient Greeks or European Enlightenment. The last high school text book I looked at emphasizes that Washington owned slaves, not that he freed them or that it was only by his self restraint that he did not become a king.
More from a media outlet which should know better, The Economist.
A critic of Islam
Dark secrets
Feb 8th 2007
From The Economist print edition
"Ayaan Hirsi Ali blames Islam for the miseries of the Muslim world. Her new autobiography shows that life is too complex for that"
The article just criticises Hirsi Ali it doesnt actually address islam
http://www.economist.com/books/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8663231
One of the many troubling undercurrents of this debate/discussion/denial thingy going on right now is the idea that it is completely NATURAL for Moslems in Western societies to side with the enemy of that society if said enemy is Islamic.
This is just perverse.
The idea that a Japanese or a German-American during WWII wasn't a "real" American, or could be assumed to be more sympathetic to the enemy than to his adopted country is considered offensive nowadays - a cruel and unfair assumption that inspired concentration camps for Japanese Americans.
Unless your a Moslem, in which case, of course you will prioritize your religion of your country (and that's....okay) and we (your country) will apologize for putting you in this awkward situation.
Aarg!
I wish you could edit these things.
A community in Canada published a code of conduct for new arrivals.
http://municipalite.herouxville.qc.ca/Standards.pdf
The muslim community says the code reinforces muslim stereotypes. (Anyone who finds reference to muslims or Islam in the document, please let me know)
defenderofislam, dude, what the hell are you talking about? so i witness one of many crimes perpetrated by your brethren in a predominantely islamic pakistani neighbourhood adn you have the balls to give me your taquiyah. dude, london used to be a nice place before you bastards invaded my city and spread your lies, deception and war upon us. now crawl back under your rock and go play with the other little evil creepy crawlies that inhabit your mind.
Hey NYT: what came first the rise in anti-Muslim sentiment or the reports* of violent attacks and plots by radical** Muslims in Europe?
*this, by the way, is such a weasel word as there have been actual attacks and plots by moslems throughout Europe...witness the rapes, honor killings, subway bombings, and the numerous plots, e.g., the recent airplane plots including the one involving the parents with the baby formula and the other involving the 10 airliners.
** most here, I would venture to say, would eliminate this word and perhaps include the words "koran-believing"
These are the funniest NEW cartoons. In case no onte's advised, QUICK, check 'em out!
http://www.laughyourheadoff.org/Winners1.html
"People recommending the works of any of the fascist Chestertons (yes, I am aware of the difference between A K and G K) are as dangerous to democracy as the islamonazis themselves."
While A. K. Chesterton was a fascist and anti-Semite, his estranged cousin G. K. definitely was not. G. K. Chesterton was a devout Catholic and an advocate of radical decentralization, exactly the opposite of fascism. In fact, G. K. was one of the first to see the danger of the coming Islamic revival. He is also one of the few Christian thinkers who are admired and quoted equally by liberal and conservative Christians, and indeed by many non-Christians. Chesterton's own theological and political views were far too nuanced to fit comfortably under the "liberal" or "conservative" banner.
G.K. Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw were famous friends and enjoyed their arguments and discussions. Although rarely in agreement, they both maintained good-will towards and respect for each other. I don't think Shaw would be friends with a fascist.
As for accusations of anti-semitism levelled at G.K. in "The New Jerusalem", he made it clear that he believed that there was a "Jewish Problem" in Europe, in the sense that he believed that Jewish culture (not Jewish ethnicity/Semitism) separated itself from the nationalities of Europe, something most Orthodox Jews and all Zionists would agree with at the time. He suggested the formation of a Jewish homeland as a solution, and was later invited to Palestine by Jewish Zionists who saw him as an ally in their goal to achieve just that.