Skip to comments.The roots of anti-Muslim bigotry (Boston Globe)
Posted on 04/04/2011 8:57:53 AM PDT by reaganaut1
... [P]ervasive negative attitudes toward Islam go far deeper into the American psyche even than these manifestations suggest, for contempt toward the religion of Mohammed is a foundational pillar of Western civilization. That it is unacknowledged only makes it more pernicious.
European Christian imagination jelled as European, as Christian, and as imagination around the mythic 732 triumph of Charles Martel over infidel Muslim forces in a battle near Poitiers, France. That may seem like an eternity ago and a world away, but still-powerful attitudes that show up in suspicions of widespread Muslim radicalization were generated then. In epoch-shaping chansons de geste celebrating Charles Martel, Islam was portrayed as nothing less than the anti-Christ. So resonant was its defeat, that Charles Martel was empowered as the effective founder of cohesive European social structures, with his lineage (through his grandson Charlemagne) extending even to present-day royalty.
Edward Gibbon famously shuddered at the thought that, but for Charles Martel, the Koran would be taught to the circumcised at Oxford instead of the New Testament. (It seems not to have occurred to Gibbon that, had the Poitiers battle gone the other way, Oxford, which dates to 1167, might have been founded years earlier by, say, disciples of the great Muslim scholar Avicenna, who died in 1037.) From early on, Western civilization understood itself positively against the negative foil of Islam, a polarity that was institutionalized during the decisive centuries of the Crusades. That Christendom failed to liberate the Holy Land from infidel control only made permanent the fear and hatred of Islam.
Meanwhile, as is always true of bigotry, Europeans knew very little about actual Muslims.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Christians failed to read the Bible and tried to do the job Jesus will do all by himself.
We Learned all we need to know about Muslims and Islam on 9-11.
Well, I am a little bit down on them for 9/11, beheadings and stonings, but maybe that is just me? LOL
And here I thought the muslims showed their true colors as a result of the Crusades.
All I know is that since the fall of the NAZIs, Islam is the Biggest Crazy on the planet.
The roots, so to speak, are embedded in their civilization destroying past!
Funny, but I was never taught much about Islam. But in later years I observed their vicious treatment of others and the hideous treatment of their own women. So if you call a rational decision to oppose viciousness, cruelty and stone-age ignorance “bigotry” then so be it. I still oppose it.
This is an apologists puff-peace and just another chance for a Boston metrosexual to simply cry “Racist!” and “bigot!”
We surveyed Islam in Catholic high school religion class, in 1964. My impression was that is was presented as just another religion, that claimed to complete Christianity. In other words, Islam stood in relation to Christianity approximately were Christianity stood with respect to Judaism. It was not presented as in the least negative, simply another false religion like Hinduism or Lutherans, who needed to become Catholics.
Really, thsi is the best line...
“(The power of such individual dignity can be seen in Arab streets today.)”
To be willfully blind of the type of “civilization” the satanic suicide cult of mad mo has created especially in contrast to that of the civilized world, is impressive in it's very difficulty.
I, and many of us, are unable to ignore reality to this extent. And it's not just some parlor trick either- this takes amazing effort, training (in universities of course), and determination.
Bravo! Jim Carrol, you're a more skilled (self)-illusionist than most of us could ever hope to be!!!
James Carroll is an embittered former Catholic priest who is a radical leftist.
London Bus attack
Spanish train attack
American embassy attack, Beirut
Beslan school attack
American Embassy attack, Tanzania
I could go on, literally with more pictures and events than FR has the bandwidth to include, but there is no need. The point is clear. The roots of Western caution have nothing to do with Charles Martel or with bigotry and everything to do with common sense and direct, personal experience.
Boy, what a load of drek.
The Boston Globe’s readers are doing a pretty fine job of debunking it themselves, in the comments section.
I'll let others jump in as I must run some errands, but I shall return.
What is obvious is that either this loon is naive beyond description--and knows 0 about the "Religion of (Rest In) Pieces, the psychotic, murdering, pedarast, "Profit," (Moo-Ham-Ud)--or is a "bought and paid for" shill for the Moose-limb Bruder-Hood, all things Islamist and a dangerous, pro Jihadist, Taqiyya-practicing tool!
Where do they find these people?
Well, here's a couple of points:
Much of the muslims' so called scientific enlightenment was the remnant Byzantine Empire-- loot from slaughter.
The roots of America's animosity goes back to the Barbary Pirates.
I think the Europeans on the Iberian peninsula probably knew quite a bit about 'actual' muslims -- what with being invaded, conquered and oppressed by them...
One man’s ‘bigotry’ is another man’s preservation.
“Meanwhile, as is always true of bigotry, Europeans knew very little about actual Muslims.”
Yeah, but what they know, they don’t like.
An American minister burns the Koran and Muslims murder people in retribution.
In Muslim Nations Christians and Jews are persecuted, their Churches burned and they have been slaughtered. Where is the outrage? Muslims are establishing a different standard. We have to watch what we say or there will be violence. Persecution carnage and murder are staples of their religion.
Yes there are a few quiet but brave voices in America, but there are atrocities committed every day. Can we hear them?
Sometimes, what someone calls "bigotry" is simply a set of generalizations based on an overwhelming preponderance of factual evidence. In this case, the generalizations can be summarized in one, over-arching concept: Islam.
The roots of my mohammedan contempt is based in their history from the birth of the brigand pedo-bear “profit” until the last suicide bombing.
As a previous signature line read. “Islam, bringing you only the best of the 6th century for 1400 years.”
Read Lee Harris' outstanding work to get a sense of why and how the West's days may be numbered. We are our own worst enemy unless we face up to the hard choices necessary to remain free and prosperous.
If anyone is still having trouble wrapping their minds around the fact that Western civilization does in fact have mortal and existential enemies, take a quick turn through Lee Harris' Civilization and Its Enemies
Islam is not so much a religion as it is a supremacist, totalitarian political ideology (no separation of church and state here, eh?), a destructive meme impervious to moderation or change, and with a narrowly circumscribed set of rituals that define every aspect of its followers lives. As for 'tolerance', here's a quote from the Muslim Brotherhood and their mission in the U.S, calling for...
"...a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Gods religion is made victorious over all other religions."
Speaking to the 'religion of peace," assertion that we hear from Muslims and ignorant (yes, ignorant) Westerners, when Muslims assert that Islam is a religion of peace they are not engaging in al taqqiya, they are actually making an assertion in good faith.
The problem lies in the fact that Islam has, from the Western point of view, a defective concept of peace. In semitic languages like Arabic, the consonants are the root of the word: islam = submission, and salam = peace have the same root, slm.
The only concept of peace in Islamic jurisprudence is the peace between the conqueror and the conquered, between master and slave. There is no concept of a negotiated peace between nations in Islamic law (and note that law is the defining property of Islamtheir clerics are jurists, schools of Quranic interpretation are called fiqh, a legalistic term)Muslims may negotiate a hudna or armistice of limited duration with non-Muslim, but not a definitive enduring peace.
In that regard, Islam was, is and will be a serial murderer of entire cultures and peoples. This is what Islam has done throughout its entire 1400 year history. This is what it has done whenever it has finally gotten the upper hand in whatever culture is has opposed. This is what has been inextricably interwoven into the 'DNA' of its operating system. Those whom Islam does not destroy, it enslaves, diminishes and impoverishes. Islam strives for the conversion, enslavement or death of all who do not conform to its sadistic and cruel vision of Mankind. Islam cannot be reformed in the light of our Western values of humanity and freedom. Were that so, it would no longer be Islam. For its psychopathic and cruel misogyny alone, Islam is an abomination and worthy only of extinction.
Finally, here's a wakeup call that will chill you to the core. And if anyone from the West is still defending Islam after this, then they deserve what Islam has in store for them: dhimmitude, slavery and death.
Liberals aren’t stupid. Many of them are very smart, their track record proves it.
None of them, however, are wise.
I would agree there are a lot of intelligent liberals. But every single one of them is a lunatic and delusional.
Say they don’t know very much well here is an introduction of what a Muslim is..Mohammads and Islams anti-Black racism.
I couldn't get past the first sentence.
When Christians are being sentenced to death for converting Christianity, when raped 14 year olds are beaten to death, when 7 year olds have their clitorises hacked off, when when are imprisoned behind walls and clothed in black tents....... then I conclude this is a cruel, barbaric, uncivilized, and culturally despicable and depraved economic, political, and religious belief system. And....I refuse to call it a “religion”.
True self-loathing is carrying a guilt trip from the Early Middle Ages.
Islam took Christian nations by conquest, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa, Spain, most of Asia Minor and southern France. They have been doing so since their government was founded by Mohamed. Their countries are founded on violence and conquest. Their “Holy Book” tells them to do so.
If you assert the negative you have just proved the positive.
If you deny the existence of bigotry you are yourself a bigot.
Acknowledging that this ancient current runs silent and deep below the ocean of our history is the start of getting free of it.
But like all intellectual tyranny, the way to salvation is available, just repent of your bigotry, and accept the new catechism unquestioningly.
Invective is fun and we do it here all the time, but it isn’t taken seriously. And I don’t take this article seriously, so decided not to read it as soon as I see the flag: “Bigotry.”
He’s changing the topic, using a red herring to distract people from the real issue: the really bad things muslims do every day. It’s an informal, genetic fallacy>ad hominem: `poisoning the well.” Instead of arguing the issue, he wants you tripping over yourself apologizing or being outraged.
It’s also guilt by association and the good ol `Hitler card.’
I don’t remember the author’s name but he insulted anyone outraged by 9-11—and that’s just about every American alive at the time—and everything that has happened since. He can behave and argue the matter rationally or he can fail to pound sand in a rat-hole. I expect as usual with these types he will choose the latter.
Many of the comments at the Globe website are excellent. Very few agree with him.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
"Back in 1784, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson had to decide whether to appease or stand up to armed Middle Eastern pirates. Sound familiar?
.... The Middle East, a term coined by Alfred Thayer Mahan, one of McCains boyhood idols, is where both American warfare and American diplomacy began in the late 18th century, as our infant republic faced its first post-Revolutionary struggle against the evocatively named Barbary States of the Ottoman Empire.
The regencies of Tripoli, Tunis, and Algiers (future homes of Muammar Qaddafi, Yasser Arafat, and the Islamic Salvation Front, respectively) had been hosting and sponsoring Islamic piracy since the Middle Ages. Scimitar-wielding corsairs would regularly interrupt the flow of trade and traffic along the coasts of North Africa, seizing European vessels and taking their crews into bondage. Cervantes wrote his first play, in the 16th century, about the dread corsairs, and by the 18th, the American colonies had a minor seagoing presence in the Mediterranean protected by the redoubtable British Navy. But the Crown was reluctant to war against so petty an antagonist, preferring to pay tribute to the Barbary States instead, as a shopkeeper would protection money to the mafia. After the U.S. broke away from England and became its own nation, however, the geopolitical dynamics changed, as did the American equanimity with doing business with pirates.
In 1784, corsairs attacked the Betsy, a 300-ton brig that had sailed from Boston to Tenerife Island, about 100 miles off the North African coast, selling her new-made citizens as chattel on the markets of Morocco. The U.S. was not free of its own moral taint of slavery, of course, but it would be impossible to hasten the industrial development that would eventually render the agrarian-plantation economy obsolete if merchant ships could not be assured of safe conduct near the Turkish Porte. Other vessels, such as the Dauphin and Maria, were also seized, this time by Algiers, and the horrifying experiences of their captive passengers relayed back home were the cause for outrage. James Leander Cathcart described the dungeon in which he was being kept as perfectly dark where the slaves sleep four tiers deep many nearly naked, and few with anything more than an old tattered blanket to cover them in the depth of winter.
In response, Thomas Jefferson, then the Minister to France, suggested a multilateral approach of what we would now term deterrence. He asked that Spain, Portugal, Naples, Denmark, Sweden and France enter into a coalition with America to dissuade the regencies from their criminal assaults on life, liberty and the pursuit of international commerce. As Michael Oren, in his magisterial history Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East: 1776 to Present relates, By deterring, rather than appeasing, Barbary, the United States would preserve its economy and send an unambiguous message to potentially hostile powers. Jefferson thought it would impress Europe if America could do what Europe had failed to do for centuries and beat back the persistent thuggery of Islamists. It will procure us respect, said the author of the Declaration of Independence. And respect is a safeguard to interest.
This sober judgment fused the cold calculations of latter-day realism with the morality behind revolutionary interventionism: not only would America protect its citizens from plunder and foreign slaveholding; it would ensure that other countries under Christendom were similarly protected.
Though Jefferson found a stalwart Continental ally in a former one, the Marquis de Lafayette, France squelched the idea of a NATO made of buckshot and cannon. While waiting for funds that would never come from Congress for the construction of a 150-gun navy, the sage of Monticello resigned himself to further diplomacy with the enemy. In 1785, he dispatched John Lamb, a Connecticut businessman, to secure the release of hostages in Algiers, held by its dynastic sovereign Hassan Dey. Lamb failed ignominiously.
At the same time, John Adams, then minister to England, agreed to receive the pasha of Tripoli, Abd al-Rahman al-Ajar, in his London quarters to discuss a possible peace deal. Adams described his interlocutor as a man who looked all pestilence and war, a suspicion that was soon confirmed by the pashas demand of 30,000 guineas for his statelet, plus a 3,000 guinea gratuity for himself. He also did Adams the favor of estimating what it would cost the U.S. to broker a similar deal with Tunis, Morocco and Algiers the total price for blackmail would be about $1 million, or a tenth the annual budget of the United States.
Adams was incensed. It would be more proper to write [of his meeting with Abd al-Rahman] for the New York Theatre, he thundered. He agreed with Jefferson that a military response was increasingly likely, but Adams doubted his countrys economic ability to sustain it. For the short term, he thought it better to offer one Gift of two hundred Thousand Pounds rather than forfeit a Million annually in trade revenue, which the pirates were sure to disrupt. Not long thereafter, Jefferson joined him in London to prevent the universal and horrible War and reach an accord with the refractory envoy from Tripoli. Both gentlemen of the Enlightenment, and comrades in revolution, affirmed Americas desire for peace, its respect for all nations, and suggested a treaty of lasting friendship with the regency. Abd al-Rahman listened well, but his reply was one that would shock modern ears less than it did those of the two Founding Fathers:
It was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged [the Muslims] authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon wheoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
Though a period of paying tribute and douceurs (or softeners expensive trickets and toys) to Islamic pirates would continue, the words of Abd al-Rahman Adams were chilling enough to leave Adams and Jefferson in no doubt as to the sanguinary and messianic nature of their adversary. An angel sent on this business, lamented Jefferson, could have done nothing to placate such men. He called them sea dogs and a pettifogging nest of robbers. The episode preceded further acts of piracy against American vessels and the imprisonment and sale of its crews and passengers, and was enough to get Jefferson to overlook his wariness of federalism and agree to a Constitution with a strong central government capable of building and keeping a powerful navy. Adams, as it turned out, was more worried that American opinion wouldnt rally for war, or accept its dire consequences. But the Philadelphia convention that drafted our national covenant in 1787 was hastened, and its welter of opinions unified, by the Barbary question. As the historian Thomas Bailey wrote, In an indirect sense, the brutal Dey of Algiers was a Founding Father of the Constitution.
Barbary Pirates torture western prisoners
America still sued for peace. The Betsys release had been negotiated, albeit abjectly, and to the accompaniment of Americas first diplomatic accord, the Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Ship-Signals, signed with Morocco in 1786. But no sooner was the ship let go and its captives freed than it was recaptured by Tunis and renamed the Mashuda. Also, Washington at one point found itself spending 20% of its annual revenue in paying blackmail to a loose confederation of terrorists on the high seas. Under Jeffersons presidency, the first era of American military predominance was inaugurated, with men like William Bainbridge, William Eaton and the Byronic swashbuckler Stephen Decatur, becoming folk heroes.
....Santayana got it backwards, in fact: even those who remember history are still doomed to repeat it."
Oh, and that ‘invention of the zero’ thingy? Stolen from the Dravidian culture by the ‘religion of peace’ whilst in the process of committing literal and cultural genocide.
Bigots??? You want to talk about bigots??
Do you really want to go there?
Christians will be burned in the Fire. 5:72
Whoever says Muhammad was black must be killed (Ash-Shifa, Tr. Aisha Abdarrahman, 2004)
Ahmad ibn Abi Sulayman, the companion of Sahnun said, “Anyone who says that the Prophet was black should be killed. (ibid, p.375)
In one Hadith, Mohammed referred to Blacks as Raisn Heads (Sahih Al Bukhary vol. 1, no. 662 and vol. 9, no. 256), and as pug nosed slaves in Sahih Moslem vol. 9 pages 46 and 47.
Christians are wrong about the Trinity. For that they will have a painful doom. 5:73
Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to the rich and greedy Christian monks and Jewish rabbis.9:34
Jesus was not the Son of God. Those who say he was (Christians) are going to hell. 19:35-37
Scourge adulteresses with 100 stripes. Do not show them any pity. Have a party of believers watch the punishment. 24:2
Those who die fighting for Allah will go to heaven. 3:195
Those who make war with Allah and his messenger will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. That is how they will be treated in this world, and in the next they will have an awful doom. 5:33
The transgressors will roast in the Fire and be forced to drink boiling liquids followed by ice cold drinks. 38:55-9
HOW’S THAT FOR A DEBUNKING???
Brighten your day
Phoebe the hummers babies get ready to leave
the nest. (live cam)
By the way, I thought Jim Carroll died in September of 2009.
“...Those are people who died, died
Those are people who died, died
They were all my friends, and they DIED!”
Charles Martel defending his homeland and his faith was the start of ‘bigotry’? I guess he should have just rolled over and surrender.
For the first time since he was banned, I miss the nasty, uber-liberal troll, Jamese(777). He lectured me on the need to respect Islam, and told me flat out Christianity is not superior to Islam in any way whatsoever. I would have enjoyed pinging him to this thread.
I take it back. I don’t really miss him. He was a blight on FR. Good riddance, Troll-bot.
I’m guessing the author figures, if he’s nice to the muzzies, they’ll kill him last.
Hey writer. Have you EVER heard of the atrocities and ignorance of the Ottoman Empire.
He is comfortable in dhimmitude.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.