![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||
|
An insightful piece by Canadian Michael Coren. (Thanks to Fanabba) Coren is a deeply religious man. As such he understands the power of religion far better than the shallow thinkers who think that leaders cloak the "root causes of terror" in religious lingo to hornswoggle the unenlightened masses.
HOW DOES one discuss the state of the Islamic faith, the Middle East, terrorism and the world without upsetting people? Frankly, it's almost impossible.I'm not talking here of a fear of abuse and attack or of being accused of political incorrectness. I couldn't give a fig about that. No, I mean the need to hold on to common courtesy and avoiding making generalizations that could hurt good people.
Here are some recent examples, in that I have so little room to discuss this issue in full.
We used to be told by pop stars and other philosophers that "the Russians love their children too." It was self-evident then that all people loved their young. Now I'm not so sure. Do the Palestinians, for example, love their children too?
I should think most of them do.
But I have to be candid: many of them don't. We can't just rely on tired old relativism when we look at all this. Nobody who loves his or her child will send that little being out as a suicide bomber. Nobody who loves their children will line them up in front of tanks.
The natural instinct of a loving parent is to hide the children. Armed struggle and resistance I can understand, even if I do not approve. This, though, is something different. I've seen it myself. Mothers screaming for their tiny offspring to come out of the house, stand in front of Israeli patrols and throw stones at soldiers.
I take here no position on the causes of Israelis or Palestinians, but I do on the moral substance of a parent who would send children to fight the battles of adults.
Do not, please, tell me they have no option. There are legions of young Palestinian men willing to kill Israelis. It's just that children can sometimes be undetected. And are easily convinced of the delights of paradise in the world to come when, I quote, "Zionist skulls, blood and limbs fly against the walls."
British Muslim fundamentalists planned terror attacks and arrests were made in Ilford, England, my hometown. Boring Ilford may be, but nobody is oppressed there! Muslims who grew up with British democracy, free British health care, free British education and British tolerance have no reason to kill anyone, let alone those who gave them such privilege.
Remember, these people came to Britain, as they did to Canada, the United States and the rest of the free, Christian-based world to escape Islamic states and their harshness.
It is the pluralistic openness and decency of Europe and North America that has allowed so many Muslim immigrants. How ironic that a minority of those people hate that very pluralism and decency and want to slaughter women and children in the name of their god and their cause.
I opposed the war in Iraq, but I cannot remain silent when people kill contract workers, then disembowel and hang them from wires in the street. While children dance.
And, no, these murderers are not refugees from pain but the favoured sons of Saddam. Their fight is to restore fascism, not liberate their nation. Even if it was, nothing justifies such sadism.
German bomber pilots, their planes shot down, would parachute into London after destroying entire towns and killing thousands of people. Almost without exception they were treated properly, as prisoners of war.
It's not about colonization, globalization, Zionism, American dominance or any other cliches. The Muslims themselves are colonizers, having pushed most Christians out of the Middle and near East, once the cradle of the Christian world.
The Ottoman Turks, Muslims all, colonized the region for centuries. Arabs colonized Persians, Assyrians, Kurds and others. The Saudis, sponsors of so much terror, are nobody's victims. They are wealthy beyond belief, and deprive women and minorities of most basic civil rights.
This is something deeper, darker, than an imagined fight against a foreign foe. There is a virus at work. For the sake of the good, law-abiding Muslims of the world -- the majority -- we cannot pretend any longer it's about anything other than what it is: a religion gone mad and gone bad.
Stop the lies, they only make it worse.
Posted by Robert at April 18, 2004 5:52 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
From what i can remember they sent Charlie to prison for life for what he called a religion. (yes i mean Manson). He wasnt recognized as a religious leader and his group was not a church, (yeah i know they can be called a cult but so can any other religion or group for that matter. . . look it up) so why do we as americans recognize Islam a religion and then we condem a man who sent people to kill and only killed one family to my recolection.
There is a "religion of peace" that has declared Jihad or Genocide on the non-believers. Why do the Repubs and the dems, . . . oh hell, the whole world feel the need to recognize them as a religion. THEY WANT TO KILL YOU! wake up people! if they are a religion than they are a religion of Satan.
and dont tell me that there are a few bad seeds that have hijacked the religion. that is a bunch of B.S. The people that believe the teachings of ALA and MOHAMAD are ill informed if they think that its a religion of peace. it is a religion of oppresion, anger and hate. name a war that is not involved with an islamic group.
Posted by: Doug at April 18, 2004 10:44 PMHOW DOES one discuss the state of the Islamic faith, the Middle East, terrorism and the world without upsetting people?
This is a question posed by all fence sitting moderates. Always refusing to take a stand on an important issue for fear of "upsetting" someone.
MICHAEL COREN you say two things that puzzle me:
1) "I take here no position on the causes of Israelis or Palestinians, but I do on the moral substance of a parent who would send children to fight the battles of adults"...
and, "...Nobody who loves his or her child will send that little being out as a suicide bomber".
o.k, NOW WHAT? Do you have a position now, or are you still safely "sitting on the fence"?
Besides, those acts, (parents who send children to fight the battles of adults), are not so surprising. I call acts such as that, "Post Natal Abortion". Those parents simply lack "natural affection" for their children. The lack of natural affection exists in developed countries also, but they are hidden acts...It's commonly called "pre-natal abortion". However this act is not performed to attain any particular political goal. If a woman can have the brains sucked out of her childs head in a "late term abortion", then how is the act of strapping explosives onto one's child so surprising???
2nd Timothy 3:1-5
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away".
ALSO you say...
2) "I opposed the war in Iraq, but I cannot remain silent when people kill contract workers, then disembowel and hang them from wires in the street. While children dance"
Well, by your writing, I haven't been convinced if you still would have opposed the war or not...knowing what you know now. Besides haven't you heard of the deaths caused by Saddam and his regime???
Why did you oppose the war???
It's unfortunate that it takes graphic video footage in order to stir one's attitude against the barbarism of islam.
My advice to you: Quit being a fence sitting naive moderate....and if your a muslim, turn away from that cult.
Posted by: Bill at April 19, 2004 1:53 AMIn pre-Islamic religion and pre-Israelite as well
children were sacrificed to the gods in order to 'appease' them. Could this be a carry-over of that? Could someone do some research on that?
As for the " violent-few-hijacking-a-religion " argument, that has a lot of vialidity. One only has to look at the history of Islam it's self to see this tendency.
Who ever could insipre the most people to deal out the most amount of death was see to be the blessed one of God. Not to mention, the most repressive brutal punishment was seen to be the most pure Islamic.
So an Osama Bin Laden and a Taliban , using more modern techniques none the less fit right nicely into that grand ole tradition.
Yes it is a violent few hijacking a religion but that is nothing new to Islam.
Wesley
Posted by: wesley at April 19, 2004 11:39 PM

(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)