Pope grovels to Muslims

[J-Mann]

The problem with the reaction is - how representative a picture are we getting?

Very unrepresentative o/c. Hell, even the Muslim Brotherhood have accepted his apology, and most Muslim organisations over here did so before he even made a public apology.

But clearly the actions of a few nutters in Palestine are representative of one sixth of the World's population...

And you never see that really widely reported either ... at least I haven't. The extremists get all the attention, for sure.

[MODU]

The problem with the reaction is - how representative a picture are we getting?

Very unrepresentative o/c. Hell, even the Muslim Brotherhood have accepted his apology, and most Muslim organisations over here did so before he even made a public apology.

But clearly the actions of a few nutters in Palestine are representative of one sixth of the World's population...

And you never see that really widely reported either ... at least I haven't. The extremists get all the attention, for sure.

Of course, since bad news sells.  Which would you rather spend two minutes on . . . some muslim burning a white sheet claiming it's the Pope, or a muslim sitting at a local cafe saying "Oh no, the Pope was just quoting a guy who has been dead for a few hundred years" with no real opinion one way or another on the issue beyond that?

(BTW . . . welcome back to the land of the living.)

[minionofmidas]

Not just "in a local cafe"... Ahmadinejad has attacked those not accepting the apology.

[Michael Z]

Fortunately, Christianity has moved beyond the type of fervour that so often grips the Muslim world. Humanity does not have to be self-loathing because of the sins of its past; we evolve, we grow and we move on, recognizing mistakes in our past and warning against them in the future ... ideally, anyway. I personally think it's a shame that a miniscule part of an academic lecture has been blown so far out of proportion and, in the process, making the very point the Pope was trying to make in the first place.

That's a good point. But the trouble I see is that someone as intelligent as Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, and someone who clearky knows his stuff about public relations and the media (bearing in mind that he was, basically, in charge of the Vatican's PR for a considerable amount of time), should have been able to tell that this sort of thing could be taken out of context and be seen as inflammatory. Plus it's a far cry from the decidedly recionciliatory tone chosen by his predecessor, so it was almost bound to attract attention.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Always difficult to tell; however, I haven't seen any prominent Muslims come forward to denounce the furor that is growing over this. Silence is acquiescence.
[/quote]

I think it's like Lewis said, sometimes the silence is only there because the media in our countries don't pick up what a lot of Muslims may be saying. It's always easier to show some guy burning an effigy or thrashing an embassy or whatnot (that aside, I think a lot of these people are simply going nuts because they've been living under repressive dictatorships for so long that any outlet is a good outlet, which is virtually what happened in the riots over the Danish cartoons - heck, if I was living under a theocratic/autocratic dictatorship and the government suddenly said "Hey guys, go all out and thrash/burn something!", I probably would) because it plays into our perception of what Islam is all about, but whether it corresponds to reality is another matter entirely.

Oh yeah, and welcome back.   Where the sodding heck have you been?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The problem with the reaction is - how representative a picture are we getting?

Very unrepresentative o/c. Hell, even the Muslim Brotherhood have accepted his apology, and most Muslim organisations over here did so before he even made a public apology.

But clearly the actions of a few nutters in Palestine are representative of one sixth of the World's population...

There was a cleric in Somalia who issued a fatwa saying it would now be morally justifiable for Muslims to kill every single Catholic in the world.

The funny thing is, that type of stuff EXACTLY proves the point. Do people honestly think threatening to kill people for calling your religion violent is going to make people think that it's peaceful?

[GMantis]

The problem with the reaction is - how representative a picture are we getting?

Very unrepresentative o/c. Hell, even the Muslim Brotherhood have accepted his apology, and most Muslim organisations over here did so before he even made a public apology.

But clearly the actions of a few nutters in Palestine are representative of one sixth of the World's population...

There was a cleric in Somalia who issued a fatwa saying it would now be morally justifiable for Muslims to kill every single Catholic in the world.

The funny thing is, that type of stuff EXACTLY proves the point. Do people honestly think threatening to kill people for calling your religion violent is going to make people think that it's peaceful?

The stange thing is why he bothered to issue a fatwa, he just could have pointed the relevant passage in the Koran.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Remember this?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Well, at least Ratzinger apoligized for his dumb comments.

Firstly, his name is Benedict the 16th.

Secondly, why should he have apologized for making a quote taken in context during an academic lecture?

Because he is a representative of the evilness and intollerance of the West and Christianity... particularly Catholicism.

Besides, anyone who declares Islam to be intollerent is only askign to be punished, right?

I am frankly trying to understand the ideological relativism of the Left. How, on the one hand, they can claim ... sickeningly, but correctly ... that a movie made of the murder of a sitting president is free speech, and must not be infringed; but on the other, demands remonstrances for incorrect speech such as the pope's university address (which, BTW, was given as a means to spur dialogue between the two religions).

It makes little sense to me, so I'm actually curious as to jfern's reply.

The pope is free to say whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to try to start the next Crusades.

[J-Mann]

The pope is free to say whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to try to start the next Crusades.

The saddest thing to me is that a one sentence quote from an emperor long dead that was to be taken in the wider context of a discussion on extremism, which, in turn, was to be taken in the wider context of a speech on faith and reason is the spark that sets extremist Muslims off.

Someone was not only looking for this in the speech, but blew it out of proportion as well.

Why should we let fear control what we say? The popularized Muslim reaction to a few words is the most frightening thing about this incident, but I'm not going to ignore their reaction simply because of potential reprisal.

[dazzleman]

Well, at least Ratzinger apoligized for his dumb comments.

Firstly, his name is Benedict the 16th.

Secondly, why should he have apologized for making a quote taken in context during an academic lecture?

Because he is a representative of the evilness and intollerance of the West and Christianity... particularly Catholicism.

Besides, anyone who declares Islam to be intollerent is only askign to be punished, right?

I am frankly trying to understand the ideological relativism of the Left. How, on the one hand, they can claim ... sickeningly, but correctly ... that a movie made of the murder of a sitting president is free speech, and must not be infringed; but on the other, demands remonstrances for incorrect speech such as the pope's university address (which, BTW, was given as a means to spur dialogue between the two religions).

It makes little sense to me, so I'm actually curious as to jfern's reply.

The pope is free to say whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to try to start the next Crusades.

It's the muslims who want to start the next Crusades, not the Christians.  You might just as well say Poland or Czechoslovakia started World War II.

[dazzleman]

The Pope's remarks were hypocritical. It's not like bad things never happened under Christianity. That aside, the Arabs were providing progress in fields like mathematics and astronomy whilst Europeans were busy disembowling and beheading each other in the middle ages.

So what you're saying is that what happened 500 years ago is more relevant and important than what is happening today?

You're falling into the classic liberal trap of using past injustice and/or indiscretion to justify more horrific behavior today by the supposed 'victims' of such past actions.

I think enough time has passed since the crusades that the muslims should f'ing get over it by name.  If they spent more time dealing with current problems rather than escaping into contrived fury over long-past events, maybe they'd find themselves in a better position today.

[Michael Z]

The Pope's remarks were hypocritical. It's not like bad things never happened under Christianity. That aside, the Arabs were providing progress in fields like mathematics and astronomy whilst Europeans were busy disembowling and beheading each other in the middle ages.

So what you're saying is that what happened 500 years ago is more relevant and important than what is happening today?

Not at all. Firstly, it was the Pope who drew the comparison with 500 years ago (bearing in mind he was quoting a Byzantine emperor). Secondly, I merely pointed out that the Pope's comparison was hypocritical because he seemed to insinuate that Mohammed gave the world nothing but "things only evil and inhuman" when at the same time as these words were spoken by Manuel II the Christians were doing some intolerable things to the Jews and anyone who didn't follow their religion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not justifying anything here, but I just don't see how the Pope's words can add anything to the current climate but more strife.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However, most of their problems (and anger) are in one way or another related to Western policies, and I'm not just speaking of the colonial era of yore, but what's happening right now in Iraq, Lebanon, etc.

[WMS]

The Pope's point was that violent conversion is unacceptable. Also, to quote the relevant sentence from Stratfor..."Clearly, the pope intended to make the point that Islam is currently engaged in violence on behalf of religion, and that it is driven by a view of God that engenders such belief."

Well...that is what is going on. Islam does not have to inherently be that way, but there is a very sizable faction within it that very much believes that. How much anti-Christian and anti-Jewish (and anti-Hindu, for that matter) venom spews forth in the Islamic world every day?

I have to admit, it's nice to see someone with such authority and influence point this out. And to those of you who are bitching about the Pope speaking out or causing a new Crusade or whatever...come on.

[dazzleman]

However, most of their problems (and anger) are in one way or another related to Western policies, and I'm not just speaking of the colonial era of yore, but what's happening right now in Iraq, Lebanon, etc.

Now there's where you're wrong, Mike.  What they are saying is making them angry is just a convenient excuse for their own failure to confront their own problems, and do anything to improve their own lives.  They find it so much easier to blame other people for their problems.  I don't buy into that whole line of thinking at all.  I'm surprised to see a smart guy like you swallowing that propaganda whole.

As far as your comment about not saying anything to add to the current strife, that is simply appeasement of evil.  Let me get this straight -- it's perfectly OK for muslims to advocate the extermination of Christians and Jews as well as mass violence against non-muslims, but nobody should say anything mildly critical of islam?  Why should we play the game by their rules?  You're just saying that they're the irrational lunatic that everybody should try to avoid angering.  Well, they're already angry, at a whole host of problems that are of their own making, but that they want to blame other people for.  Appeasing them will only make them attack us more.  There is no pacifying these people; they have to be confronted.  The pope said nothing wrong; if anything, what he said was mild.  The violent muslim reaction more than proves him right.

[??????????]

And it's not as if their anger is new either Dazzle. They have hated the west since the middle ages and have continually tried to conquer Europe well into the 1500s.

[dazzleman]

And it's not as if their anger is new either Dazzle. They have hated the west since the middle ages and have continually tried to conquer Europe well into the 1500s.

They keep updating their excuses, but you're pretty much right.  People who are unwilling or unable to get out of their own way are usually very angry, and looking for somebody else to blame is a great way of accepting any responsibility for improving your own situation.  We see it domestically and on the foreign stage.  Pathetic, really, and the encouragement of this thinking is very harmful.

[??????????]

And it's not as if their anger is new either Dazzle. They have hated the west since the middle ages and have continually tried to conquer Europe well into the 1500s.

They keep updating their excuses, but you're pretty much right.  People who are unwilling or unable to get out of their own way are usually very angry, and looking for somebody else to blame is a great way of accepting any responsibility for improving your own situation.  We see it domestically and on the foreign stage.  Pathetic, really, and the encouragement of this thinking is very harmful.

Nah, the excuses are pretty much the same. Divide, conquer, convert and kill anyone who disagrees. That's why I always describe Islam as the "religion of death".

[GMantis]

However, most of their problems (and anger) are in one way or another related to Western policies, and I'm not just speaking of the colonial era of yore, but what's happening right now in Iraq, Lebanon, etc.

Now there's where you're wrong, Mike.  What they are saying is making them angry is just a convenient excuse for their own failure to confront their own problems, and do anything to improve their own lives.  They find it so much easier to blame other people for their problems.  I don't buy into that whole line of thinking at all.  I'm surprised to see a smart guy like you swallowing that propaganda whole.

As far as your comment about not saying anything to add to the current strife, that is simply appeasement of evil.  Let me get this straight -- it's perfectly OK for muslims to advocate the extermination of Christians and Jews as well as mass violence against non-muslims, but nobody should say anything mildly critical of islam?  Why should we play the game by their rules?  You're just saying that they're the irrational lunatic that everybody should try to avoid angering.  Well, they're already angry, at a whole host of problems that are of their own making, but that they want to blame other people for.  Appeasing them will only make them attack us more.  There is no pacifying these people; they have to be confronted.  The pope said nothing wrong; if anything, what he said was mild.  The violent muslim reaction more than proves him right.

So what the westen powers have done in the middle east has nothing to do with the rise of radical Islam? You're more deluded than them if you believe this.

[dazzleman]

However, most of their problems (and anger) are in one way or another related to Western policies, and I'm not just speaking of the colonial era of yore, but what's happening right now in Iraq, Lebanon, etc.

Now there's where you're wrong, Mike.  What they are saying is making them angry is just a convenient excuse for their own failure to confront their own problems, and do anything to improve their own lives.  They find it so much easier to blame other people for their problems.  I don't buy into that whole line of thinking at all.  I'm surprised to see a smart guy like you swallowing that propaganda whole.

As far as your comment about not saying anything to add to the current strife, that is simply appeasement of evil.  Let me get this straight -- it's perfectly OK for muslims to advocate the extermination of Christians and Jews as well as mass violence against non-muslims, but nobody should say anything mildly critical of islam?  Why should we play the game by their rules?  You're just saying that they're the irrational lunatic that everybody should try to avoid angering.  Well, they're already angry, at a whole host of problems that are of their own making, but that they want to blame other people for.  Appeasing them will only make them attack us more.  There is no pacifying these people; they have to be confronted.  The pope said nothing wrong; if anything, what he said was mild.  The violent muslim reaction more than proves him right.

So what the westen powers have done in the middle east has nothing to do with the rise of radical Islam? You're more deluded than them if you believe this.

No, I don't believe what the western powers did in the middle east has nothing to do with the situation there now.

But I think that the middle east was on the skids before the western powers arrived, and that they wouldn't necessarily be better off if the western powers had never been involved there.

Their central problem is within themselves, and they're projecting it onto others.  Changes in our policies aren't going to improve their situation because they have no will to improve themselves.  They'd much rather blame others for their problems.  And they'd be doing that regardless of anything we did or didn't do.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The problem isn't islam the problem is the middle eastern civilization.

[phk]

I think that the Pope is just playing on Muslim anger and European xenophobia by making these statements.

He wants a Europe united along Christian (Catholic) lines and he knew full well that the Muslim reaction would enable him to do so.

[afleitch]

I think that the Pope is just playing on Muslim anger and European xenophobia by making these statements.

He wants a Europe united along Christian (Catholic) lines and he knew full well that the Muslim reaction would enable him to do so.

Utter nonsense. And I say that as stern critic of the Pope. It is not his fault that the collective Muslim victim mentality went into overdrive. The international reaction to the Pope;s comments, taken completely out of context is nothing short of disgusting.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

I really wouldn't mind a Final War to deal with the troublemakers once and for all.