Thursday, November 23, 2006

Time Magazine's Dhimmitude

This is one of my long posts, so be prepared for a lengthy read. All emphases are mine.

The day before Thanksgiving, the November 27, 2006 edition of Time Magazine arrived in my mailbox. Not wanting to spoil my appetite for the big feast, I decided to wait after Thanksgiving dinner to read this particular issue. But early on Thursday morning, as I was cruising the blogs over my first cup of coffee, I read this blog article by Pim's Ghost. She was all riled up:
...[I]t is their little timeline on pages 42-3 that really irked me the most....

The timeline in question is simply pathetic. It is biased, it is poorly worded (to show perhaps the bias?), it skips several centuries, and is careful in its treatment of the beginning of Islam. This bothers me, all of it. The other thing that bothers me is that if you are going to write a "History of Interaction", you should add more than a handful of questionable views of historical fact. Maybe this is why I could not find this in the online version, only the print copy. Therefore, let me reproduce it for you here:


589-632 Koran revealed to Muhammad; it shares stories with Judeo-Christian texts

711-718 Arabs conquer Spain, which becomes center of commerce and culture

1096-1291 Christian Europe launches the Crusades against Islam

1453 Ottoman Turks take Constantinople, capital of Orthodox Christianity

1492 King Ferdinand drives the Moors from Spain and next expels the Jews

1683 The Ottoman siege of Vienna fails, marking the end of its Islamic expansion

1965 The Vatican issues Nostra Aetate, which calls for interfaith discussion

2001 Pope John Paul II is first Pontiff to visit a mosque, in Damascus, Syria

Sept. 2006 Pope Benedict XVI links Islam to violence, igniting debate and protest

And that's it. That's the history of interaction. Never mind that it is merely belief that the Koran was "revealed" to Muhammad, a distinction usually not afforded to Christians or Jews, but instead given the common journalistic disclaimer "What Jews/Christians believe to be an event in their Faith in which.....". Note the conquest of Spain, simply put, but pleasantly wrapped up by the odd mention of the myth that it became a "center of commerce and culture" that somehow implies peace for the conquered. Then, oh heavens to Betsy, Christian Europe launches those darned Crusades! Why not mention the "interaction" that led to the call for the Crusades in the first place? Wouldn't want to anger guest writer Tariq Ramadan I suppose....

After some time of "European Christians" doing their Crusading against apparently placid Muslims, they somehow take Constantinople. No mention of how Turks come into Islam, nor of any Muslim activities that may have "ignited debate and protest" on the part of any non-Muslims. Skip to La Reqonquista, which was not glorious but involved "driving out", as of so much cattle. And note that the rotten Christian King also "next expels the Jews". Can't let that one slip, unlike the wholesale slaughter of the Jews of Granada in 1066. Am I being nit-picky? Pardon me, TIME. Skip quite a bit again to 1683, never mention the details of the Siege of Vienna, leave readers wondering just how anyone in Europe could have been hostile to the Ottomans while they've had a major city under siege and their failure brings "Islamic expansion to an end".
Being the trust-but-verify type, I turned immediately to pages 42-43. Sure enough! Pim's Ghost had exactly reproduced what Time passes off as "Christianity and Islam: A History of Interaction." Something else jumped out at me from Pim's Ghost's essay — the author of one of the commentaries which Time included in this edition. More on that author in a minute.

As long as I was thumbing through the magazine, I decided to read the lead story for myself. At that early hour with the first cup of coffee still in hand, what I read seemed to me to be blah, blah, blah. Then I came to the post-article commentaries in the "Viewpoints" section. The first viewpoint was "What the Pope Gets Right" by Father Richard John Newhaus. Excerpt:
By decrying the use of violence in the name of God, Benedict is challenging Muslims to confront hard truths....

Benedict XVI's journey to Istanbul, formerly Constantinople, is laden with the wounds of history both ancient and painfully contemporary. The Pope's controversial Sept. 12 lecture in Regensburg, Germany, quoted a 14th century exchange between a Byzantine Christian Emperor and a Muslim intellectual in which the Emperor made some distinctly uncomplimentary observations about Islam. The Pope admitted that the Emperor's statement was brusque. But his point in reaching so far back into history was to demonstrate that problems between the Christian West and Islam long precede today's "war on terrorism."

Although the West, and most notably Europe, may be less Christian today, Muslims still view it as the Christian West. For a thousand years, from the days of Muhammad in the 7th century, Islam enjoyed a run of triumphant conquest, interrupted only momentarily by the Christian Crusades. The time of conquest lasted until the failed siege of Vienna in 1683. After Vienna, and most dramatically under 19th and 20th century Western colonialism, Islam was sidelined from history--one of the main sources of the rage and resentment of today's jihadists.

The jihadists believe their time of resumed conquest has come. Through terrorism and the mass immigration of Muslims in Europe, the jihadists are pressing for the reversal of the military outcome of 1683. This is the context in which Benedict attempted to make a larger point at Regensburg....

The violent responses to the Pope's speech reflect the belief of jihadist groups, such as al-Qaeda, that their religion mandates the use of any means necessary, including suicide bombers and the mass killing of civilians, to bring about the world's submission to Islam. In an Oct. 12 "Open Letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI," 38 distinguished Islamic religious authorities, including Grand Muftis in Turkey, Egypt, Russia, Syria, Kosovo, Bosnia and Uzbekistan, wrote that "jihad ... means struggle, and specifically struggle in the way of God. This struggle may take many forms, including the use of force." The signers delicately criticized some acts of Muslim terrorism, such as the killing of a nun in Somalia, but failed to address the relationship between religion and politics in Islam, or whether the "maintenance of sovereignty" includes, as radical jihadists claim, the violent reconquest of Western lands that were once Muslim. Whether out of conviction or fear of being targeted by terrorists, the 38 did not frontally reject the linkage between violence and the advance of Islam....
Then I came to the second of the "Viewpoint" essays, "Where He's [the Pope] Still in the Dark" by Tariq Ramadan. Excerpt:
Since delivering the speech in which he quoted a 14th century Emperor who said the Prophet of Islam had given nothing positive to humanity and had commanded followers to use violence to spread their faith, Pope Benedict XVI has been subjected to bitter Muslim reaction around the world. Benedict has responded by saying he regretted the consequences of his misunderstood words, but he did not retract his statement--perhaps rightly so. After all, he had simply cited an ancient Emperor. It is Benedict's right to exercise his critical opinion without being expected to apologize for it--whether he's an ordinary Roman Catholic or the Pope.

But that doesn't mean he was right. Muslim attention has focused mainly on the lecture's association between violence and Islam, but the most important and disputable aspect of it was Benedict's reflection on what it means to be European....

As I have written before, this profoundly European Pope is inviting the people of his continent to become aware of the central, inescapable character of Christianity within their identity, or risk losing it. That may be a legitimate goal, but Benedict's narrow definition of European identity is deeply troubling and potentially dangerous....

What the West needs most today is not so much a dialogue with other civilizations but an honest dialogue with itself--one that acknowledges those traditions within Western civilization that are almost never recognized. Europe, in particular, must learn to reconcile itself with the diversity of its past in order to master the coming pluralism of its future....

Selective about its past, Europe is becoming blind to its present. The European continent has been home to a sizable population of Muslims for centuries. While visiting Turkey, the Pope must acknowledge that he is encountering not a potential threat but a mirror. Islam is already a European religion....

Rather than focus on differences, the true dialogue between the Pope and Islam, and between secularized societies and Islamic ones, should emphasize our common, universal values: mutual respect of human rights, basic freedoms, rule of law and democracy....
And who is this Tariq Ramadan? According to Time,
Tariq Ramadan, a research fellow at Oxford, is the author of several books on Islam, including To Be a European Muslim.
Before including Ramadan's commentary, did Time consider this information about Tariq Ramadan? Excerpt from the first article in the above link, an index to several articles at FrontPageMagazine:
The most vocal advocate of Wahhabism in France is Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss philosophy teacher who happens to be the grandson of Hassan Al Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Ramadan has been very active in France during the past ten years, spreading his extremist views and becoming the unofficial voice of French Islam. He has now become a "star," appearing constantly on French prime-time television.
Excerpt from the third article in the above index:
While claiming to be “against these acts of terror,” he immediately qualifies the reasonableness of those who advocate for terrorism against Israel. This position is taken straight from the American leftist playbook: “I’m personally opposed to suicide bombings, but I would never prevent someone from exercising their right to conduct one against the Zionist oppressors.”

Ramadan identifies these Western policies as the cause of the rise of extremist Islamic political groups and the source of the “us-and-them” worldview of the “four young” (and it should be noted – Muslim) 7/7 London suicide bombers.
Excerpt from the second article in the above index:
It’s not every day that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revokes a visa issued to a Swiss-national scholar scheduled to teach at one of America’s premier universities. But this has just happened, and it’s a good thing too.

The Swiss scholar is Tariq Ramadan. He is Islamist royalty – his maternal grandfather (Hasan al-Banna) founded the Muslim Brotherhood, probably the single most powerful Islamist institution of the twentieth century, in Egypt in 1928. Tariq is a Swiss citizen because his father (Sa‘id Ramadan), also a leading Islamist, fled from Egypt in 1954 following a crackdown on the brotherhood. Sa‘id reached Geneva in 1958, where Tariq was born in 1962.

Thanks to his pedigree and his talents, Tariq has emerged as a significant force in his own right. Symbolic of this, Time magazine in April named him one of the world’s top hundred scientists and thinkers. And so, when Notre Dame University went looking for a Henry R. Luce professor of religion, conflict and peacebuilding, it unsurprisingly settled on Ramadan....

Here are some reasons why Ramadan might have been kept out:

· He has praised the brutal Islamist policies of the Sudanese politician Hassan Al-Turabi. Turabi in turn called Ramadan the “future of Islam.”

· Ramadan was banned from entering France in 1996 on suspicion of having links with an Algerian Islamist who had recently initiated a terrorist campaign in Paris.

· Ahmed Brahim, an Algerian indicted for Al-Qaeda activities, had “routine contacts” with Ramadan, according to a Spanish judge (Baltasar Garzón) in 1999.

· Djamel Beghal, leader of a group accused of planning to attack the U.S. embassy in Paris, stated in his 2001 trial that he had studied with Ramadan.

· Along with nearly all Islamists, Ramadan has denied that there is “any certain proof” that Bin Laden was behind 9/11.

· He publicly refers to the Islamist atrocities of 9/11, Bali, and Madrid as “interventions,” minimizing them to the point of near-endorsement.

And here are other reasons, dug up by Jean-Charles Brisard, a former French intelligence officer doing work for some of the 9/11 families, as reported in Le Parisien:

· Intelligence agencies suspect that Ramadan (along with his brother Hani) coordinated a meeting at the Hôtel Penta in Geneva for Ayman al-Zawahiri (deputy head of Al-Qaeda) and Omar Abdel Rahman (the blind sheikh, now in a Minnesota prison).

· Ramadan’s address appears in a register of Al Taqwa Bank, an organization the State Department accuses of supporting Islamist terrorism.

Then there is the intriguing possibility, reported by Olivier Guitta, that Osama bin Laden studied with Tariq’s father in Geneva, suggesting that the future terrorist and the future scholar might have known each other.

Ramadan denies all ties to terrorism, but the pattern is clear. As Lee Smith writes in The American Prospect, he is a cold-blooded Islamist whose “cry of death to the West is a quieter and gentler jihad, but it’s still jihad.”
How sincere are Tariq Ramadan's efforts at interfaithing, the emphasis of his essay in Time? According to this October 13, 2006 article,
...One of Ramadan's interfaith partners, Fr. Christian Delorme, had this to say in 2001:
I am today convinced--and it took me time to understand it--that Tariq Ramadan's thinking and actions are dangerous. I believe he is not at all a man of dialogue. He knows how to charm his audience, but in reality, he wants a total separation between Muslims and other communities. I am convinced that Tariq Ramadan deeply hates the West.
For all his interfaith zeal, an examination of Ramadan's work fails to turn up any positive discussion of Christianity or Judaism. He calls Arabs "my brothers and sisters" while addressing all others as "madam," "sir," or without any honorific. When Ramadan faced off with Nicolas Sarkozy, the French interior minister and presidential hopeful, in 2004 on French TV, he repeatedly called the minister "Sarkozy" instead of the usual "Mr. Sarkozy" or, as the French say, monsieur le ministre. During this debate, Sarkozy pressed Ramadan to condemn the stoning of adulterers, a form of capital punishment endorsed by his brother, Hani Ramadan, head of the Islamic Center in Geneva. Tariq declined to go beyond his previous call for a moratorium on corporal punishment and the death penalty while Islamic scholars study the matter....
A great many adults and students read Time Magazine. The publication has untold impact upon its readers. Would that the rebuttal to Neuhaus's article "What the Pope Gets Right" been penned by someone without the disturbing connections alluded to in the above articles from FrontPageMagazine! Then, again, anti-dhimmitude from the mainstream media is too much to hope for.


At 11/23/2006 10:22 PM, Blogger City Troll said...

happy thanks giving

Lest we forget there is still humer in life

At 11/23/2006 10:23 PM, Blogger City Troll said...

Try This Enjoy

At 11/23/2006 10:32 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

City Troll,
Laughter--the best medicine.

Thanks for the link. I saw that clip many years ago, but had forgotten about it.

At 11/23/2006 10:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

AOW, as usual, a most thought provoking post. I'm currently working on one regarding islamofascism and I'll be sure to include some of your thoughts (fully credited of course) Again, great post and not one bit less than expected. Thanks.

At 11/23/2006 10:58 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

A compliment from you is high praise indeed!

I know that my post ran long, but I pared it down--believe it or not. There is a wealth of info on Tariq Ramadan, but Time didn't publish any of it. I'll be interested to see what appears in the Letters to the Editor over the next few weeks.

At 11/24/2006 12:14 AM, Blogger kuhnkat said...

Uhhhhhhhh, AOW, you SUBSCRIBE to that PROPAGANDA RAG?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I know we need to stay aware of what the enemy is doing, but, couldn't you read it at the library or borrow a copy from a Leftard???


At 11/24/2006 1:14 AM, Blogger (((Thought Criminal))) said...

I second Kuhnkat's comment.

Life magazine is for people who hate to read, while Time magazine is for people who hate to think.

At 11/24/2006 3:01 AM, Blogger Mark said...

An excellent and rightfully critical piece, Always. I, too, am subscribed to Time, and I, too, have read the articles on Islam in full. Like you, I was disturbed by them.

It is unduly critical of the Pope, especially the article by Tariq Ramadan. I thought that talking about the Pope as being "in the dark" about Islam was as absurd as it was insulting! He then went on to talk of the valuable contributions that Muslims had made to Europe. All those contributions, even if they were valuable, were hundreds of years ago! My question is: What have they contributed since then?

He also spoke as though Europe belonged to the Muslims living in Europe as much as to anyone else. It seems to have evaded this man that we Europeans have allowed all these Muslims in to our civilization to come and share what we have built up. They certainly were never allowed into Europe in order to destroy it!

In short, Time has come up with an assessment which we would expect. After all, isn't Time part of the Time Warner group, the group which also owns CNN? So can we really expect any better? Can we really expect a more critical analysis from them?

As far as I can see, the Pope understands Islam very well. He is also not really into interfaith dialogue as his predecessor was. This Pope is more into reciprocity, and reciprocity is exactly what I have been calling for for years, as I did so in my book

Like you, I was going to write something on this; but I decided to leave it alone because of the upcoming Papal visit to Turkey (I wanted for his trip to be over first). Now, in any case, you have done such a good job on it. Great analysis, Always, as usual.

At 11/24/2006 6:23 AM, Blogger David Schantz said...

Hope you still managed to have a great Thanksgiving after that read.Don't forget we have another important date coming up. December 15, Bill Of Rights Day. I've posted a message urging othersto take a little action on that.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

At 11/24/2006 7:09 AM, Blogger Epaminondas said...

Hey, it took a two week email blitz to get Newsweek to admit their characterization of Qaradawi as a 'preeminent moderate' was not accurate (and they did it only on line, not in print)...we have to recognize that worse than bias and PC, we are fighting.....



These writers are simply NOT subject experts.

At 11/24/2006 7:16 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Uhhhhhhhh, AOW, you SUBSCRIBE to that PROPAGANDA RAG?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Yeah, I know this comes as a shock. But I don't get to the library every week, and I don't personally know any leftards. I also subscribe for the very reason which Pim's Ghost mentioned: some of the material in the print edition is difficult or impossible to find online. And the subscription allows me access to all the archived editions.

Mr. Beamish,
Or for those who want to keep up with what the left passes off as thinking processes.

I thought that talking about the Pope as being "in the dark" about Islam was as absurd as it was insulting!

Implying that the Pope is in the dark and Tariq Ramadan is showing us the light?

He also spoke as though Europe belonged to the Muslims living in Europe as much as to anyone else.

In my research, I read a quote from Tariq Ramadan: "Islam is a religion of Europe." I suspect that what he meant was "Islam will be THE religion of Europe."

Hope you still managed to have a great Thanksgiving after that read.

I gorged myself on a meal I didn't have to cook, so my appetite wasn't spoiled after all.

Don't forget we have another important date coming up. December 15, Bill Of Rights Day.

Thank you for the reminder. I'll plan on putting something together for the special day.

At 11/24/2006 7:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess the Armenians and Assyrians just edured one of those interactions in World War One. This is as insane as white washing slavery. If a Southern apologist claimed that Blacks enjoyed slavery and Jim Crow one would pelt that clown with rotten veggies.

However Jihadist and Lefist bird brained poultry often come up with amazingly stupid lies. The history of indigenous minorities written by people like Fred Isaac, Bat Yeor and Nonie Darwash mean little as the bird brain relies upon Commie dupes who are visitors like Fanon or Chimpanzee. On rare times they will pull out the corpse of a mediocre Edward Said a confirmed leftist and Christian to justify their stupidity. The fact that Said was more like Ward Churchill than a genuine scholar is lost. Said just gave far left Marxist the Arab they wanted one that parroted every word of their stupidity.

The problems at Time start in Journalism Schools. It is illogical to assume that graduates of accademic gulags will display any type of higher thinking.

At 11/24/2006 8:19 AM, Blogger Sissy Willis said...

Wonderful, important post. I wrote in a similar vein about Time's cover article earlier this week:

"Suddenly, when he speaks, the whole world listens," gushes a breathless Time Mag, enthralled with its belated discovery of Papa Ratzi, the Pope who loves cats and Mozart. Long before Cardinal Ratzinger became Benedict XVI, the great student of history and human nature was warning the West of the gathering Eurabian storm. But only when Time notices the "hard-knuckle intellect with a taste for blunt talk and interreligious confrontation" is this voice in the wilderness "suddenly" heard . . ."

While Time Magazine slept

At 11/24/2006 9:16 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great article. I used to get Time, but I got sick of the left slant.

At 11/24/2006 9:38 AM, Blogger Brooke said...

Great read, AOW.

Time's leftist slant is so banal,that it crosses the line into humor sometimes, isn't it! I tried to read one in a doctor's office once, and couldn't help myself first rolling my eyes, and then laughing and snorting out loud in the waiting room! I got a few stares.

The scary part is, the average brain-dead leftard takes that mag serioiusly...

At 11/24/2006 10:38 AM, Blogger Kiddo said...

HAHA! The sad part (as I mention in the beginning of my less analytical piece on this) is that I only have been getting TIME because it was a free promotion when I bought my iPod. From the "Haditha" issue to this atrocity, I have been appalled and now I have called to make sure that no more trees are destroyed just to send me this propaganda. I can still see the online copies, though I will no doubt miss the interesting features such as the "timeline" that I faithfully reproduced.

I will definitely write them as well, and my blog partner plans to write another analysis of this article. I'm just happy that AOW was able to add her expertise regarding Tariq Ramadan to the analysis. I think with enough articles about their article and choice of editorial guest writers, they will take notice indeed.

Sissy, I look forward to reading your article as well.

At 11/24/2006 11:04 AM, Blogger Gayle said...

You subscribe to Times Ragazine for the same reason I subscribe to the New York Slimes. We have to keep our eyes on what these people are saying in order to expose them.

That was a bit long, but worth it, and you did a wonderful job on it, AOW.

I hope you also had a wonderful Thanksgiving!

At 11/24/2006 11:05 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Goodness, this is passing strange. We have one poster whining about Times "leftist slant" while AOW cites only articles from FrontPagemag, a known hangout of cranks.

So what does this boil down to. We have the Ottoman's who were an expansionist government, and this was certainly a unique quality in the world. At some point they must have even intimidated peaceful folk like Napolean (who has a lot more to answer for in Spain than muslims do).

Really, exceptionally shallow and it would be troublesome that it is being posted by a teacher except that a knowledge of history has become irrelevant in this age of propoganda.

I hope none of you ever pick up an issue of New York Review of Books, you'll pop a vessel.

Yes, and TIME disagrees with various fringe cases at Frontpagemag about Tariq Ramadan. Must mean that TIME is incorrect since folks here have a means to demonstrate FPM's authoratative position (i.e AOW's posters agree with the bigotry and shallow writing at FPM, some honorarium).

More shouts of "dhimmitude" and assorted silliness.

kuhncat, can you give me your address? I'd like to send you a complementary subscription to World Socialist Review so that you can catch a clue about what constitutes a "leftist" publication. I have some sympathy for folks who read FPM and consider themselves informed but I don't understand why they want to continue to be shallow and ignorant.

At 11/24/2006 11:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Lets see how does this writer leave out Islamocolonialism, Jim Crow, Slavery, Ethnocide, Genocide and Janissary theft of children. The fact that Comwads perpetrated every one of these crimes is revealing. Tarik Ramalamdingdong is a well known Jihadist with some pedigree.

You seem to fret about Amrican versions of these crime but say zero about their Islamic and Marxist coralaries. Life is more complicated than Fanon or Chimpanzee.

At 11/24/2006 12:01 PM, Blogger kuhnkat said...

Little Che Suck the Fascist Greenie MORON is so far left himself he does not know what RIGHT IS!!!


I defy him, and any others who care to give it a shot, to provide proof that MUSLIMS or ARABS created all the so called light and advancement that occurred under the domination of Islam!!!!!

MOST of the contributions during these periods were made by SUBJUGATED peoples. Please don't help the bad guys by repeating this propaganda!!!


Little Che SUCK, go ahead and whine about us calling these left leaning pieces of trash biased. You even think Fox News is RIGHT WING!!!


You probably think Bill O'Reilly is a GREAT RIGHT WING LEADER!!!



Remember the idea from the Book, there is none so blind as he who will not see??


Little Che Suck the Fascist Greenie MORON has gotten his propaganda enemas from his handlers early for the Christmas Holiday Season!!


At 11/24/2006 12:02 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...


For your elucidation, The Beak. Notice how Beak carefully straw mans. Muslim cultures have behaved atrociously and I guess by extension we are to believe they are unique in that.

To support his arguments he cites events that happened even earlier than our giving smallpox infested blankets to native Americans. How many inductees are you talking about, Beak? 6,000 or so? A ather small number considering the size of the Ottoman empire.

It' also interesting that westerners, Africans and orientals have committed every crime on your list. Must say something about mankind, no?

Also take note that I said nothing about "American versions" of your list.

What are "coralaries"? Is that like eating too much Thanksgiving pie?

Beak, get lucid and lose the exceptionalism.

At 11/24/2006 1:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Lose the denial. The Islamocolonial
land theft and wholesale human rights violations are fact. How do the worlds worst colonialist and second worst human rights violatore become opressed.

Who oppressed whom for 1400 years?
How much real estate and Judenfrei territory will appease the accolytes of class genocide? Speaking of exceptionalism only Marxism could add to the misery of Egypt. Making an econimic basket case worse is a genuine feat. Stand up and be proud of the class genocide and starvation.

At 11/24/2006 2:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ducky the abductions of Janisaries was far more than 6,000. For a person who screams when 2 Pseudostinian women purposely walk into a firefight this is hypocrisy.

FYI it was the English who gave the small pox infected blankets. This is one of the cannards Dr Yeagley deals with. 1400 years of Islamo brutality against Jews is a fact. Oh wait Jim Crow is evil but 1400 years of Islamo Jim Crow is peachy. Buy a clue Duncy, nor was this mistreatment all ancient.

At 11/24/2006 3:26 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

All of this bantering about the pope and Islam is giving me a headache. These are the concise reasons why I do not pay homage to organized religion.

Sorry, no sidepicking here. The pope is just as screwed up as Islam - both proponents of religion.

When God returns, he's gonna be pissed off - that's about all I can say. I hope he puts both Islam and the pope on the end of a tight rope.

At 11/24/2006 4:37 PM, Blogger (((Thought Criminal))) said...

Aw well, fuck! France had an expansionist empire at one time, so its okay that Caliph Umar did 1000 years prior to that.

Shit, somebody done done somebody wrong somewhere sometime, so let's not judge anything anybody ever does. Let's all pretend this is "intellectual."

Ducky, c'mon. Give us a hope that you know what thinking feels like.


At 11/24/2006 5:45 PM, Blogger Obob said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 11/24/2006 5:48 PM, Blogger Obob said...

As much as I would like to join in on the ducky bashing, I believe his form of intellectual s & m, it is an easy target. History has taught us it is written by the victors. Hence the perpetual whining of the left/liberals. They have consistantly been on the intellectual losing side of history. Can you really think of one example that listening to someone from the left/liberals tell us how to properly fight evil and it would lead to victory?

didn't think so

At 11/24/2006 5:59 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Duck mentioned that I relied on information from FPM. I did so as a matter of convenience because a Google Search of "Tariq Ramadan" yields a multitute of hits. Probably the sources I'm using below won't be any more satisfactory to a leftist because, as Diana West editorialized,

The media love a martyr. And I don't mean "martyr" in the context of modern-day jihad. I mean the sort from our pre-Islamic consciousness, the long-suffering "victim" of "witch hunts" and moralizing of a singularly "right-wing" and "puritanical" kind. Such martyrdom never dims -- and I'm thinking, say, of Alger Hiss, or, on a different level, Bill Clinton. It beams on in perpetuity, alight with liberal pieties projected by a media culture that, in turn, basks in reflected martyrdom.

Tariq Ramadan, a Eurabian intellectual with a string of associates linked to terrorism, is becoming just such a media martyr.

In Tariq Ramadan's own words in an October 1 editorial he wrote for the Washington Post:

...I do not stop short of criticizing regimes from Muslim countries. Indeed, the United States is not the only country that rejects me; I am also barred from Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and even my native Egypt.

Note that Mr. Ramadan doesn't say why hs was banned from certain Islamic nations.

According to the Washington Times,

Mr. Ramadan's activities do not stop in Europe. In 1995, when the Algerian Armed Islamist Movement (AIM) perpetrated several terrorist attacks in Paris, French Interior Minister Jean Louis Debre barred Mr. Ramadan at that time from France -- based on his links to AIM. Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and his native Egypt also bar Mr. Ramadan from crossing their boarders. He is denied entrance to those countries, not for supporting Hamas or because he carries peaceful messages. They keep him out because of his links to and influence on radical Muslim groups.

I also found the following, also from the Washington Times:

...Mr. Ramadan speaks the language of Europe's intellectual left. A frequent lecturer in U.S. universities, his brilliantly articulate perorations mesmerize his liberal fans. "Only Islam can achieve the synthesis between Christianity and humanism, and fill the spiritual void that afflicts the West." All good people are implicitly Muslims, he maintains, "because true humanism is founded in Koranic revelations."

"Today the Muslims who live in the West must unite themselves to the revolution of the anti-establishment groups from the moment when the neoliberal capitalist system becomes, for Islam, a theater of war," is another thunderclap that says "jihad" to his detractors and sweet reasonableness to his fans.

Marxism failed because it slavishly followed the dictates of a bunch of aging klutzes in Moscow, according to the Ramadan school. Islam, he says, can now bring forth a body of values that would form the embodiment of this universal vocation.

This, in turn, would replace the values of Western civilization. Islam-centric thinking thus replaces Eurocentric rearview mirror nostalgia for what was once a great civilization....

At 11/24/2006 6:02 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

O Bob,
Can you really think of one example that listening to someone from the left/liberals tell us how to properly fight evil and it would lead to victory?

Maybe Duck will fly by to post his rebuttal. We'll see....

At 11/24/2006 6:11 PM, Blogger (((Thought Criminal))) said...

Can you really think of one example that listening to someone from the left/liberals tell us how to properly fight evil and it would lead to victory?

Heck, I can't think of an example of a leftist statement that didn't lead me to believe the speaker was suffering from some sort of brain deteriorating disease or substance abuse problem.

At 11/24/2006 6:25 PM, Blogger kevin said...

I linked this one nice work!

At 11/24/2006 8:03 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Mr. Beamish,
Heck, I can't think of an example of a leftist statement that didn't lead me to believe the speaker was suffering from some sort of brain deteriorating disease or substance abuse problem.

I guess it's just in a teacher's nature to keep trying to assist the thinking processes. ;)

At 11/24/2006 11:17 PM, Blogger (((Thought Criminal))) said...


You have the patience required of the teaching profession.

But I don't believe Ducky is educable. I mean, he's 55 years old and still believes in the efficacy of whining.

At 11/25/2006 12:38 AM, Blogger kuhnkat said...


Would you like to tell us which WESTERN countries CURRENTLY engage in slavery??


You are a FREAKIN' FREAK of Greenie FASCISM!!!!

At 11/25/2006 1:51 AM, Blogger Kiddo said...

Duck missed the entire point. The problem with the article in TIME was the LACK OF KNOWLEDGE that went into it! Ducky, I agree, people SHOULD know their history! That's what's appalling about a magazine with the audience of TIME publishing such dreck! I realize that the most popular magazines are hardly the most intellectual. I even picked up "People" the other day to get all angried up over George Clooney beating out Hugh Laurie (I'm weird, OK?). Still, read the TIME article and I think that even YOU will be horrified at the presentation, not to mention introducing a guest writer like Ramadan as if he has no objectionable past.

Ducky, if you can't take my analysis, then my blog partner's may please you once it is written. His academic credentials should please you, and an examination of this by a Linguistic Anthropologist/Historian might be more your cup of tea. But boy, does it have to be a holiday weekend to get one to write for your blog it would seem.....though a more worthy use of time (no pun intended) than you hovering about the comments sections.

At 11/25/2006 7:15 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Pim's Ghost,
Duck missed the entire point. The problem with the article in TIME was the LACK OF KNOWLEDGE that went into it!

Yes, so I chose to ignore Duck's snide remarks to the effect that he expects better of a teacerh.

This wasn't a posting about the history of Islam, but rather a criticism of Time for having used Tariq Ramadan to criticize the Pope.

I'm still seething over that timeline in the magazine. The article to which the timeline was attached ran more than two pages, the breadth used for that timeline, so the paring down wasn't for the sake of space but rather to put the history of Islam in the best possible light. In fact, I've seen Time do more extensive timelines for many other topics less important.

Shoot me a reminder email when your partner's analysis is posted.

At 11/25/2006 7:23 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

From this source:

Jacques Jomier has efficiently summed up the goal that drives Tariq Ramadan: "His problem is not the modernization of Islam, but the islamification of modernity" ("Esprit et Vie," February 17, 2000).

Obviously, Time did not pick up on--or chose to ignore--that important subtlety.

At 11/25/2006 5:15 PM, Blogger Elmers Brother said...

duhkkky like a midget at a urinal you better stay on your toes


Post a Comment

<< Home