Feedback about Zapatero's visit to New York
Our blog comments facility does not appear to have been working properly so we are copying below a message received in relation to this post about President Rodriguez Zapatero's visit to the United Nations.
The message is from Mark Alexander and we received it yesterday:
"President Zapatero is so obviously an appeaser! He is weak and ineffectual.He has withdrawn his country's troops from Iraq, and now proposes a'cultural alliance' with Islam. For 'cultural alliance' read 'appeasing theMuslim world'! Does Mr. Zapatero, a man whose country was once overrun byMuslims, not understand that the phenomenon we see today with Islamicterrorism is a manifestation of Islam on the move? The warning signs are onthe wall. We shall ignore them at our peril! There is no compromise with theIslamic world to be: we either value our democracy and freedom in the West,and we 'fight' (whatever that will entail) for them; or we don't. In thelatter case, they win and we loose our freedoms. The Muslim world concedesnothing. It doesn't give an inch. With Zapatero's 'cultural alliance' allthe West will do is give away and concede and appease. It is a recipe fordisaster!"
Thanks Mark! Obviously we do not share your views and we believe that it is at least desirable to try to gain friends in the Arab world. And to help eradicate the reasons which drive so many young Arabs to commit terrible acts of terrorism against the West in the name of Islam which, essentially, is a pacific religion used by a minority of Islamic extremists to justify terrible crimes against humanity.
Spain was conquered (rather than overrun) by the Moors in the same way as it had been by Italians during the Roman Empire, centuries before the Arabs arrived, and in the same way as America and other colonies in Africa and Asia were invaded and conquered in the 1500s onwards by Spain itself, England, Portugal, France etc etc.
We believe that rather than being a sign of "Islams on the move", the current violence is a result of a much more complicated socio-political and economic situation. We also believe that violence cannot be resolved by further violence. As Nelson Mandela said when he was released from captivity after 40 years, we will only win a real victory over our enemies when we talk to them, start to understand why they act as they do and convince them that they are wrong.
The message is from Mark Alexander and we received it yesterday:
"President Zapatero is so obviously an appeaser! He is weak and ineffectual.He has withdrawn his country's troops from Iraq, and now proposes a'cultural alliance' with Islam. For 'cultural alliance' read 'appeasing theMuslim world'! Does Mr. Zapatero, a man whose country was once overrun byMuslims, not understand that the phenomenon we see today with Islamicterrorism is a manifestation of Islam on the move? The warning signs are onthe wall. We shall ignore them at our peril! There is no compromise with theIslamic world to be: we either value our democracy and freedom in the West,and we 'fight' (whatever that will entail) for them; or we don't. In thelatter case, they win and we loose our freedoms. The Muslim world concedesnothing. It doesn't give an inch. With Zapatero's 'cultural alliance' allthe West will do is give away and concede and appease. It is a recipe fordisaster!"
Thanks Mark! Obviously we do not share your views and we believe that it is at least desirable to try to gain friends in the Arab world. And to help eradicate the reasons which drive so many young Arabs to commit terrible acts of terrorism against the West in the name of Islam which, essentially, is a pacific religion used by a minority of Islamic extremists to justify terrible crimes against humanity.
Spain was conquered (rather than overrun) by the Moors in the same way as it had been by Italians during the Roman Empire, centuries before the Arabs arrived, and in the same way as America and other colonies in Africa and Asia were invaded and conquered in the 1500s onwards by Spain itself, England, Portugal, France etc etc.
We believe that rather than being a sign of "Islams on the move", the current violence is a result of a much more complicated socio-political and economic situation. We also believe that violence cannot be resolved by further violence. As Nelson Mandela said when he was released from captivity after 40 years, we will only win a real victory over our enemies when we talk to them, start to understand why they act as they do and convince them that they are wrong.
19 Comments:
I do have to tell you that Euroresidentes' blog in response to mine gives me much reason to despair! Whoever wrote that blog clearly does not understand a.) what Islam is all about, and b.) what motivates Muslims. Europe, if such 'soft' thinking is prevalent, has not got a hope, not 'a snowball's chance in hell, of surviving!
I have lived in the Middle East for many years. I have studied Islam ever since. I can tell you in no uncertain terms that there is no evidence to support your theories. History tells us a different story.
You say that Spain was conquered rather than overrun. Really? What, then, does conquered mean? France was conquered by the Germans/Nazis in WWII. I doubt that the average Frenchman would care to split hairs on the difference in meaning of the two words. Isn't a country that is conquered also overrun?
Am I to assume that you care so little for the Judeo-Christian heritage of Europe, and care so little for the freedoms that this heritage has brought you, that you wouldn't care if Islam took over? If that is the case, Rebecca, you are in for a rude awakening!
It is, in my humble opinion, quite indisputable that Islam is on the move. A mere study of the demographics of Europe would tell you that. But there are many other signs too. Be careful! Lest the things that are happening before your very eyes get missed. One day it will be too late!
You might be interested in reading this website. That will be an eye-opener for you. Please click here:
http://www.nojihad.com/theysaid/ukmuslimstate.htm
Then you might like to read an excerpt from my book, 'The Dawning of a New Dark Age'. You can find it at:
http://www.markalexanderbooks.com
Please click on the hyperlink at the bottom of the page. That will take you through to the excerpt.
By the way, there is no dialogue to be with Muslims. They know they are right. They have the backing of 'Allah's Koranic words'; so they cannot be wrong!
Alas, alas, alas, a new dark age really is dawning in Europe!
"And to help eradicate the reasons which drive so many young Arabs to commit terrible acts of terrorism against the West in the name of Islam which, essentially, is a pacific religion used by a minority of Islamic extremists to justify terrible crimes against humanity."
So Islam is "essentially a pacific [peaceful] religion", is it? And what evidence do you have to support your view? Is there any in the Koran that I have yet to find? Personally, I know of NO such evidence. There is nothing to support this view at all. Maybe, you can supply some. I'm always willing to be enlightened.
Talk about wearing your prejudices on your sleeve, Mark. You only have to look back at the way the Arabs treated the Jews in Spain and the way the Christians treated the Jews in Spain to see which was the more civilised, tolerant culture.
There wouldn't in fact be much of Western culture without the Arabs. Essentially it was the science, medicine, literature and education of the Arabs that dragged Europe out of the Dark Ages.
Open a history book. Get a bit of learning.
Open a history book, eh? Wearing my prejudices on my sleeve, eh? Give me a break! You are the one who needs to open a history book. You are the one who is prejudiced against the finest religion the world has ever known. The one that has given you the freedoms the Islamic world not only does not know, but does not respect either. You are the one who is endangering freedom! You are the one who will be crying foul once your freedoms are taken away! Naïveté. Naïveté. Naïveté. Let Spain go back to the dark ages, for all I care. But don't expect the Americans and the British to bail you out! Go your chosen way. Become benighted. You deserve all you get!
Mark,
Quit the ranting and tell me what you know about the treatment of the Jews in Spain by the Arabs and the Christians.
Tell me which culture treated the Jews better and why you think this to be the case.
I think you need to read my book. Then come back to me. I will not discuss with anyone anything until my book has been read.
Oh, for goodness' sake. If that's the best you can come up with, then clearly your book has nothing of any substance worth reading. Logic, reason, intelligent discourse and that most important quality humanity are obviously missing. Thanks but no thanks.
By the way, "I will not discuss with anyone anything until my book has been read" clearly implies no-one has read your book. That doesn't surprise me really, as your marketing campaign, run through other people's blogs, leaves a lot to be desired. Vanity publishing was it?
What a lost opportunity this correspondence is. A one-view version of any problem inhibits any exhange of interpretation and experience. There has to be dialogue if there is to be peace in the world and between people of different faiths.If this wasn't such an urgent and critical matter, Mark's arrogance and self-importance would be diverting; even amusing. But his manner and refusal to discuss his position with anyone who doesn't share it, means that he forfeits his case. There ARE dangerous militant Muslims just as there are dangerous simplistic fundamentalist Christians -some of whom for example try to make their case against abortion by shooting dead the doctors who perform them. Do they just shout at each other until one of them loses their voice - or their rationality?
Poor religious adverts are everywhere. There are also some rather good ones and there are more of them than the other sort and they find a pacific and constructive inpsiration in the scriptures of their faiths. Our humanity unites us; our perspectives on what is true divides us. Isn't it rather more important to work at the first rather than surrender to the second? I am just another person being 'naive', Mark? Or are you the one?
No, it is not a 'lost opportunity' at all. I merely suggested that if you wish to talk to me about this most important of subjects, it would be helpful if you were to read my book first. You have hardly missed an opportunity to 'slag me off' to the world, and for one simple reason: you sense that I do not share your politically correct view of the world, and nor do I share your distaste for all things Christian.
You asked me about the treatment of the Jews under Islam and Christianity, suggesting that Muslims have treated them far better than the Christians did. I would suggest that you read Bat Ye'or's excellent work on this subject. That means to say, the subject of dhimmitude. She suggests -- and she has made quite a study of dhimmitude, you know -- that Muslim tolerance of Jews is a myth. It is probably a product of this politically correct world we live in, where every damn thing Western is distorted into something monstrous and evil, and everything Eastern, especially Islamic, is somehow wonderful. I do not buy into this balderdash. I believe that Islam is a danger to the free world. And I have good reason for saying so.
If what you want for Spain is dhimmitude, then I guess that your way of thinking is the best. Personally, I should prefer to remain free. That's what we have striven for over the years. And it's freedom I wish to keep. Most people I know do.
I am not averse to discussing with you at all; but I would suggest you read my book first simply because you won't know where I'm coming from otherwise, nor why. Also, if you wish to discuss with me, I would suggest that you keep your insults to a minimum. I am not overly keen on discussing anything with anyone when insults are slung around. I'm a little too old for that sort of childish banter now. To me, an intellectual discussion precludes insulting one's opponents. But the politically correct do it all the time. In fact, they seem to thrive on it.
"There has to be dialogue if there is to be peace in the world and between people of different faiths. If this wasn't such an urgent and critical matter, Mark's arrogance and self-importance would be diverting; even amusing. But his manner and refusal to discuss his position with anyone who doesn't share it, means that he forfeits his case."
First of all, I should like to explain that I dislike rudeness in all its forms. That includes verbal abuse! Ad hominem attacks are not valid forms of argument, and intelligent and mature people don't use them. You know the kind of thing: One can't find any way of refuting the argument, so one resorts to attacking the person instead.
Now if you can refrain from posting rude comments, then I should be willing, even delighted, to exchange ideas with you. I still say, however, that to understand where I am coming from on this most important subject, it would help to have read my book. Still...
You say there has to be dialogue with Muslims if we want peace. Under normal circumstances, I would agree with you wholeheartedly. But your comment reveals an ignorance of the true nature of Islam! Don't you know that Muslims are not interested in having dialogue with infidels? Don't you know that Islam is a supremacist 'religion'? Don't you know that the Koran, 'Allah's revelation', is considered by Muslims to be the prefection of religion for man for all time? Don't you know that Muslims cannot compromise with the 'words of Allah'? Don't you know that it is a stated aim of Muslims to bring their prophet's message to all parts of the world; and more, to Islamize the whole wide world? It is their Allah-given duty to do so. Didn't you know that? And don't you know that jihad is the tolls for achieving this stated aim? HOW DO YOU ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE WITH A PEOPLE SO OBSESSED WITH THEIR OWN IMPORTANCE? HOW DO YOU ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE WITH A PEOPLE WHO ARE SO UNCOMPROMISING? HOW DO YOU ENGAGE IN DIALOGUE WITH A PEOPLE WHO THINK YOU ARE INFERIOR, AND WHO THINK YOU ARE IN A STATE OF BACKWARDNESS? I would say it's a rather futile exercise, wouldn't you?
Muslims talk of religious freedom in Islam. There is no such religious freedom. It exists only in theory. Prophet Muhammad stated that there is no compulsion in religion; but then he told Muslims to go out and saly and kill and maim the infidels wherever they be found! Talk about speaking with forked tongue!
I should like to give you a quotation from Bat Ye'or's excellent book, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude. It goes quite a way to answer your original question about the treatment of Jews. Here it is:
"The Koran forbids forced conversions. However, the wars and the requirements of Islamic domination over he conquered lands and populations relegated this principle of religious tolerance to the realm of theory. At no period in history was it respected. The jihad, or rather the alternative forced on the Peoples of the Book -- namely, payment of tribute and submission to Islamic law or the massacre and enslavement of survivors -- is, in its very terms, a contravention of the principle of religious freedom. The constant aggression by Muslim armies against the dar al-harb, the razzias on non-Muslim populations condemned to slavery for their religion, the piracy of the seas in order to ransom travelers, the regional deportations of the conquered, the destructions of towns and villages -- all these recurrent acts of aggression in a compulsory jihad, repeated over the centuries, constituted permanent violations of religious freedom."
Yet another quote from Bat Ye'or's scholarly book:
"The Christian resistance had its martyrs in Andalusia, under Abd al-Rahman II (822 - 52); his successor, Muhammad I, yielded to the ulama of Cordova and obliged some of his Christian officials to convert so as to keep their positions. Religious disturbabces continued in the province of Elvira in 889, and in 891 Seville and its surrounding areas were drenched in blood by the massacre of thousands of Spaniards -- Christian and muwallads. At Granada in 1066, the whole Jewish community, numbering about three thousand, were annihilated.
In the Maghreb, where endemic anarchy prevailed, sources mention the massacre in 1033 of five to six thousand Jews in Fez. The Almohad persecutions in the Maghreb and Muslim Spain (1130 - 1212) eliminated Christianity there. In Tunis in 1159:
'The Jews and the Christians who live in this town had the choice of Islamism or death; one part became Muslim and the remainder were execued.'
As these crypto-Jews practiced Judaism in secret, the Almohad inquisitors removed the children from their families and entrusted them to Muslim educators..."
Need I go on? Is this the tolerant 'religion' you wish to have dialogue with? Are thee the sort of people you think that any meaningful dialogue will ever be possible? Is this a people with whom we shall be able to have what Zapatero called a "culural alliance'? I doubt it, don't you?
I shall await your response.
The few mistakes, 'typos', are mine. Please forgive them.
Hello. I've just found this debate and thought I'd add something. If you want to talk about history, have you heard of the Spanish Inquisition and the hundreds thousands of innocent Christians, non-Catholics pursued and murdered, many burned to death in public, in the name of the Catholic religion? What about Henry XIII's purge of Catholics in England so that he could marry again? I don't think religous violence is restricted to the Islam religion, do you? I think any kind of violence carried out in the name of a God is despicable. Isn't it more important for us to try to learn from the mistakes and barbaric acts carried out by ALL religions in the past - and present - and to try something different? Like talking to eachother. Like addressing world poverty.
"If you want to talk about history, have you heard of the Spanish Inquisition and the hundreds [of] thousands of innocent Christians, non-Catholics pursued and murdered, many burned to death in public, in the name of the Catholic religion?"
I presume this is a rhetorical question. It is, isn't it?
It wasn't I who wished to talk about history, it was the other person posting the comment about the treatment of Jews.
I am well aware that "religious violence" is not restricted to Islam in history; but today, it seems to be pretty restricted to it. We don't see Christians beheading Muslims in the name of Christianity. Nor do we see crusades against Muslims because we consider them to be infidels. Westerners have become more enlightened. Not that I would suggest that we are perfect. Far from it.
But there is one huge difference here between the 'Christian' West and the Muslim world: Muslims believe that the Koran contains Allah's revelation -- something which is immutable in their eyes, precisely because they believe the words come from Allah. This makes the whole thing non-negotiable. You have to understand this. It is key to understanding their way of thinking.
The other thing to note is that, in historical terms, the atrocities you write of were perpetrated in spite of the teachings of Jesus, not because of them. In Islam, this is quite different. The Koran is replete with exhortations to kill the infidel in Allah's name, to cleanse the world and thereby Islamize it.
You speak of talking to each other. Fine words! I refer you to my earlier comment on this. How do you talk to people who wish to take you over? To people who are imbued with the notion that they are God's chosen people? To people who are imbued with the notion that they will one day inherit the world? Could we speak to the Nazis in the Thirties? Neville Chamberlain thought so; but didn't get very far! Do we never learn from history?
I needn't remind you that Islam picked this fight. It was Muslims who attacked the Twin Towers. It was Muslims who have launched many other attacks since, witness Spain's recent tragedy.
It is high time that the West jolt itself out of its reveries. Your Pollyanna attitudes, I'm sorry to say, will do nothing to secure our free and enlightened way of life from these fanatics.
Eliminating world poverty, whilst a very worthwhile goal, has little to do with the problems we are experiencing with Islam. Osama bin Laden, for example, is an extremely rich man. Looking at poverty as a cause of current problems is a fashionable concept in liberal circles, I know; but it is an argument which doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
By the way, I still look forward to receiving a response to my earlier posting. I'm sure the other person who posted the diatribes will get round to it sometime soon.
I have come back to your website many times since I last posted a comment in order to see if you have had the ability to counter my arguments. Alas, each time I have visited, I have been disappointed! No such counter arguments have been found.
From this, I think I may conclude that it is a question of 'game, set and match' to me! Or, put rather more formerly: Q.E.D. I'm sure that even you must know what that means: quod erat demonstrandum. The case has been proven.
I have to conclude this because you have been quite unable to come up with any counter arguments. You have been unable to disprove the points I have raised.
I don't know where you went to school, and I don't know where, if at all, you went to university. What I do know is this: You haven't been taught the logical fallacies. The one logical fallacy you seem ever ready to use is this one: Argumentum ad hominem, especially argumentum ad hominem abusive! In other words, if you can't top the opponent, call him names instead. Zap him!
This is a very low form of argument. Indeed, it is not really an argument at all. It is not at all logical, and with intelligent people, it is certainly not effective. It puts YOU in a bad light! Not ME!
Interestingly, you had the audacity to tell me that I don't know how to argue logically! Clearly, you must really have been speaking about yourself! What have you been smoking?
Before you speak to anyone else about arguing logically, I would suggest that you study the logical fallacies. There are many of them. Studying them should keep you quiet for a little while. As you don't wish to read my book -- and I don't blame for that, for I discern that you do not wish to be confused by the facts! -- you should be able to find some time to study them.
By the way, when you have a blogging possibility on your website, it would improve matters if you didn't engage in tampering with the order of the comments posted! Each time I come to your website, I see that changes have been made somewhere along the line. I sometimes don't even know whether I am discussing with the same person! For sometimes the English is good; yet at other times, the English leaves much to be desired.
Moreover, I should like to add that from your postings, you come over as being very young. Are you, perhaps, a twenty-something? Your postings display extreme naïveté.
I don't know where you are running this little website from -- your back bedroom, maybe? -- but you would certainly improve it if you didn't try, as the webmaster/webmistress to do all things. Let other people do the posting if you find it impossible to refrain from insulting your visitors.
Sir / Madame, I have forgotten more about the true nature of Islam than you appear ever to have learnt. Though, sometimes, I believe you might well be a Muslim in disguise, since I cannot find any other reason for your illogical defence of a religion which attacked Spain only so recently.
May God be with you! With your spirit! And with you!
That should read:
May God be with you! With your spirit! And with your website!
As an American I am upset with Zapatero's obivious weakness and desire to appease other European nation(Germany/France) As a person who's parents immigrated here from Spain, I am embrassed for the 46% of Spaniards who voted for the PP party of Spain (Aznar's party). Spain the European country which had the only sucessful crusade, has decided to follow Germany, France into anti-american liberal European politics . When SPAIN was a world power and people forget it had CONQUERED large parts of Europe/ ITALY is a prime example(Kingdom of the two Siciles) 300 years/The low countries (Holland/Belgium/Denmark/parts of Greece(duchy of Athens)large parts of modern day Germany/Austria (Hapsberg corridor)as well as large parts of border disputes areas with France. Not to mention extensive global empire in Americas and Asia. To a point I worry that Spain following Zapatero's policy of allowing almost free immigration, Spain will lose it's culture(that what make it beautiful) and become a country full of Muslims like France/Germany/England/Italy/Greece. As an American I also don't see Spain as an Enemy/it's too small/ to make a difference now/ Europe together/ The EU by definition is an anti-american institution. I travel to Europe often and see the jeaslousy that Europeans have against the USA and Americans. England government may follow us like a colony, but the English people do not like our policies nor do they like Americans, and as for the rest Europeans the same, some worst some better. Let them learn how to deal with the Muslims, after a short time they will realize that the Americans are right
As an American, I want everyone here to know that not EVERY one of us gringos has been converted to the paranoid, pro-war, love-it-or-leave-it, yellow-ribbon-up-my-ass camp, quite yet. I think it's ridiculous to insinuate that Zapatero is an "appeaser". Let's be honest: Americans are a pretty ignorant, anti-scientific, racist, superstitious, xenophobic bunch of people, for the most part. We are especially angry at France and Spain (notice the conspicuous lack of anger towards Germany, the most publicly anti-war state) because these are white, wealthy countries that opposed us (in front of all the "colonies", too). In other words, we can't bomb those two countries into submission, or smear them as "Islamicist" (read "dirty, brown-skinned, and un-Christian). So we whine about them and wonder publicly why they're so "weak". This only highlights America's breathtaking lack of historical knowledge concerning the rest of the Earth. Wasn't Spain the ONLY Christian, "western" country that spent 700 years fighting Islam militarily? And haven't they spent 40 years getting hit constantly with terrorist bombs from ETA? Most Americans don't know these things. Our media is mostly corporate, and we know more about Britney Spears pubic hairs than we do about, say, unemployment, or American poverty. Condemn us for being stupid, but be patient with us when our behavior reflects our ignorance. Ignorance is not a crime. At least, not yet. Give Alberto Gonzalez a couple of weeks to figure out how to legalize torture, and then I'll get back to you on that one.
I'm from the United States, and I support Zapatero. I support his withdrawing of troops from Iraq, I support his immigration policy, I support his gay marraige policy, and I support his investigation of former Prime Minister Aznar's involvement in the attempted coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. He has accomplished much in a short amount of time.
It is crucial that Spaniards continue to support Zapatero's work. Zapatero may not be improving the economy in Spain, but he is creating social change at the global level. It takes a lot of courage to say no to the U.S., to withdraw troops from Iraq, and to know that there will be hefty political and economic repercussions. Prime ministers of countries who have far more political and economic power haven't done as much as Zapatero has to say no to the war in Iraq.
This is a very dark time for us _estadounidenses_. We are battling to preserve our rights. Millions of us oppose the war, but we cannot stop the war machine. At a time like this, Zapatero's progressive and socially responsible policies give me hope. Zapatero provides the antidote to the injustices that Bush has perpetrated.
I lived in Spain for three months and I feel there is more democracy in Spain than there is in the U.S. I was impressed that the youth were so involved in political activities. They turned out in great numbers to vote for Zapatero. I was impressed that the people of Spain could think and vote with level heads after a tragic event as the 3/11 bombing. I was impressed that 3/11 didn't lead to even more violence. Spanish people did not call for vengeance. Instead, they saw through Aznar's deception. Not only did Aznar betray the Spanish people, who did not support the war in Iraq, by involving Spanish troops, he attempted to exploit the 3/11 bombing to slander ETA. Kudos to the Spanish people for voting for Zapatero, a candidate who promised to withdraw troops from Iraq.
I was also impressed that the worker's unions would express their opposition to public policy with such strength and that _futbol_ fans would express strong political opinions in support of regional independence. But, most of all, I was impressed that the quality of life was better in Spain than in the U.S. Even in economically-depressed areas, people put their family and friends before work. Spain: Don't ever give up your values, and your socially responsible policies for a better economy. It would be a mistake.
Bravo to Zapatero and his supporters.
You can not and never will able to negotiate or reach a consensus compromise with moslems.
There faith is rooted against agains democrazy and freedom.
Islam is a religion of war and hatred to anything western , so, Zapateros Cultural alliance will back fire in no distant time, you can never appease them, think of what happened in Madrid, London and what was prevented in Canada, give them freedom and understanding and they will plan to eliminate you, because you are nothing but an "Infidel".
A stich in time saves nine.
Post a Comment
<< Home