Looking at Ourselves

Three seemingly unconnected events - Pope Benedict XVI's speech angering Muslims, the three Republican Senators opposing rigorous interrogation of terrorists, and the United Nations speeches by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - and our reactions to them say much about the state of Western and American society today. Thomas Sowell connects the three events in a way that should give pause to those who doubt the seriousness of the threats our nation faces.

First, media coverage and reaction to the Pope's speech has focused on criticizing him for driving a wedge between Christianity and Islam, trashing the inter-faith dialogue of his predecessor, or for uttering words that he should have known would cause outrage and violence. Very little coverage has focused on or criticized the obvious - that criticism of Muslim violence cause more Muslim violence. It is not the responsibility of Westerners nor Christians to censor themselves to prevent others from reacting to their free speech with violence. The condemnation lies solely with those Muslims that reacted to Pope Benedict's speech with violence or threats of violence.

Second, self-indulgence lies at the heart of opposition to President Bush's efforts to vigorously interrogate terrorist suspects. The feel-good rhetoric of not wanting our soldiers (of whom I am one) to be subject to harsh treatment from terrorists is misleading and false. We already know how our soldiers and civilians are treated by the enemy. Extending Geneva Convention protections to terrorists who are not signatories to the Conventions does not protect our soldiers. Sowell makes the point that moral one-upmanship is dangerous in a struggle for our society.

Lastly, when leaders of states are condemning the United States and the West, we should not be asking how to placate our critics. We should be asking how to defeat them. If we are not ready to oppose them now, we will be forced to oppose them later and then it may be too late.

In Defense of the Pope...

Thankfully, at least some journalists have the honesty and courage needed to come forward and defend the comments of Pope Benedict XVI regarding the Islamic propensity towards violence:

William Rees-Mogg of The Times of London,

Michelle Malkin,

Mary Katharine Ham does a comprehensive analysis of the Pope's remarks and subsequent pressured "apologies",

David Warren, writing in The Ottawa Citizen,

And miracle of all miracles, London's The Sunday Times has taken an official stance in an editorial that Pope Benedict should continue to explore the theme that violence and reasonable religion are incompatible.

It is heartening that at least some journalists and newspapers are defending Pope Benedict. There should be more. Any journalist who believes in freedom of speech, any academic that believes in academic freedom, and any politician who cares about the serious problems of Islamist violence should do so as well.

Angry Muslims Upset at the Pope

What better way to demonstrate that you belong to a "Religion of Peace" than to riot and burn effigies of the Pope?

Admittedly, I am no big fan of Islam but I am at least willing to buy the argument that the majority of Muslims are peaceful, decent people. However it is increasingly difficult to hold this politically correct opinion when any perceived slight against Islam is met with angry demonstrations, calls for personal apologies, burning effigies, attacks on churches, murder, and warnings of more violence.

I continue to be disgusted with these displays of anger that should not be tolerated in a civilized society, much less a civilized religion. Muslims continue to assert Islam is a peaceful religion, the revealed truth of God, and that the West should not fear Islam, but if any discussion of Islam which includes any criticism, no matter how remote, cannot be openly held without fear of retaliation, then maybe we should.

What is it with Middle Easterners' Sensitivity Levels?

I have before mentioned the Muslim problem of not being able to laugh at themselves but sometimes they take their face-saving efforts to ridiculous levels. The latest slight to Muslim and Middle Eastern sensibilities is the new Sacha Baron Cohen movie, "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan." Borat is a fictional Kazakh journalist made popular in Cohen's "Da Ali G Show" and loathed by the Kazakh government, which has previously removed the Borat website from Kazakhstan's official .kz domain.

The latest protest against the Borat character is expected to be brought up in upcoming discussions between President Bush and Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev. It astounds the mind that the Kazakhs would make such a big deal out of this. Not only will they waste President Bush's time on such a trivial matter, the Kazakh government plans to buy television air time to show educational pieces about the "real" Kazakhstan in order to save the country's reputation. Wasting millions to prevent embarrassment by a fictional movie character says more about that country's leaders than it does about a made-up journalist.

Five Years. What Do Our Enemies Say?

The Middle East Media Research Institute does an invaluable job of translating Arabic, Farsi, and Turkish media, schoolbooks, and mosque sermons into English so that we do not have to rely on the mainstream Western media that is so quick to censor politically incorrect information. They have recently released this collection of documents and video recording the Arab and Iranian reactions to the horrific events of September 11, 2001. I urge you to watch the film, if only to remind you of what we are facing.

Canadians Blame US for 9/11...

This report astounds me. I know many Canadians take a dim view of US cultural influence as well as US policy, but it must be sheer animosity towards America that 77 percent of Quebecers and 57 percent of Ontarians would blame the United States and not Islamic extremism for the most deadly attacks on American soil.

It is not US policy, domestic or foreign, that is responsible for terrorism. It may upset fundamentalist Muslims that we favor a religious tolerance that their brand of Islam forbids, but it is they who are entirely responsible for terrorist attacks, whether here in the United States, in Toronto, London, Madrid, Bali, Jerusalem, or Baghdad. It is high time for Westerners to stop blaming themselves for a problem rooted in the religious hatred of extremist Islam.

I am tempted to quote the South Park movie regarding Canada, but shall refrain from doing so in the interest of keeping my site free from profanity.