A Coren Clip: Panel in Agreement on Muslim Riots

I posted on this the other day, but I still wanted to discuss the panel discussion on ‘The Michael Coren Show’. Here is the clip of the segment thanks to SDAMatt2.

Like I said, much of what was said I discussed in my last blog post. The panel is in agreement on who is to blame and who isn’t to blame. They also raise the point about why we are even in Afghanistan after this betrayal by President Hamid Karzai who used Terry Jones’ actions to score political points with Muslim radicals, as well as the brutal murder of those who are there trying to help the Afghan people. I could spend hours writing for and against our mission there, but this isn’t the point of this post.

What I want to point out is that both John Downs and Laura Babcock have apparently changed their minds on Islam. Instead of relying on political correctness, they both seem to have taken into account that this religion is far more violent than others. While it is remarkable that neither of them didn’t simply blame the Florida pastor and free speech, as Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has done, they also didn’t try to defend this barbarism through an ill-conceived moral equivalency as they have in the past. Let’s not forget that this is the same John Downs who blamed humans for the September 11th attacks.

Maybe John’s new beard has provided him the ability to reach rational conclusions without resorting to politically correct talking points. If any good is to come from the brutal riots still going on in the Middle East it’s that many on the left, formerly staunch defenders of Islam, are giving up on defending the indefensible. The evidence is so overwhelming at this point that no rational person can excuse this violence as the work of a few extremists. Once again, I am not saying that all Muslims are violent extremists, but let’s stop pretending that these radicals are fringe elements.

If those like John Downs and Laura Babcock really wish to educate themselves on the nature of Islam, Pajamas Media’s Hege Storhaug’s recent column is a definite must read (hat-tip Blazing Cat Fur). In order to combat this barbarism, we not only have to acknowledge it, but educate ourselves on it. It’s a shame that these lessons are only being learned now after so many have been murderer in the name of this “religion of peace.”

An Islamic Reformation? Lorne Gunter on the Qur’an Burning

I have to say I am perplexed by all this nonsense I have been reading and hearing for those who would blame Paster Terry Jones for the deaths of U.N. staffers and guards in Mazar-i-Sharif. Instead of placing the blame solely on those responsible, those like Lindsey Graham believe freedom of speech should be restricted because of what Islamic radicals might do. The problem with this idea is that it assumes that such provocative actions, like Qur’an burnings, are reasons for this violence. They aren’t. They are just excuses to fan the flames of Western hatred.

While Ed Morrissey’s post is probably one of, if not the best piece I have read on this story, I do want my modest readership to give Lorne Gunter’s column on this a look.

…What Terry Jones is not – for all his sins – is a murderer. That designation belongs to the Muslim extremists who, in retaliation for his Koran-burning stunt – have rioted for three days in Afghanistan and killed a total of 24 people so far, including seven international staff of the UN in Mazar-i-Sharif in the northern part of the country.

Jones may have conceived that a deadly reaction would occur in the Muslim world when he fired up the grill and tossed a Koran on it. He may even have desired it. And for that and for his narcissistic incitements now and in the past, no doubt the God he purports to represent will consign Jones to hell when his time comes.

But there has been a tendency in the West to blame Jones for the deaths that have occurred since news of his crass act got out. Those murders, though, hang solely on those who committed them. The deaths say as much about the state of Islam in the developing world and about the development of Afghanistan as they do about Jones and his vainglorious attention seeking…

The first point I would like to raise is that, just because Terry Jones is detestable, it doesn’t mean that he is a murderer. The truth is that Qur’an burning is far from a rarity stories like this would have you believe. Videos of others doing this around the world can be easily found online. Do I support burning scripture? Of course not. Aside from being extremely offensive, it’s pointless since doing so paints those who set the religious texts on fire, not those who murder in response, as the extremists. Mind you, I also don’t see the point in spending money to buy a copy of the Qur’an, let alone the matches used to start the fire.

The second point I want to raise is something I find troubling. The naive belief that somehow Islam as a faith can be separating from Islam as a political movement.

…After 9/11, my colleague, Jonathan Kay, and I wrote a series of editorials for the Post arguing that what the Muslim world needed most was a Reformation in which verbal attacks on Muhammad and the faith were not taken as direct insults and defilements. An intellectual separation of church and state would be a good idea, too. Such enlightenment transformations had, over time, ended the crusades and most of the big religious wars among Christians and between Christianity and other faiths.

But because much of Islam has not gone through a similar evolution, the publication of Danish cartoons of Muhammad or false reports of a Koran flushing at Guantanamo Bay detention camp (both in 2005) or last month’s Koran burning by Terry Jones set off deadly spasms of protest in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia and elsewhere…

This idea wrongly assumes that the Protestant Reformation was in response to differences between scripture and Catholic teachings and traditions. Having actually studied the period in question, having read the personal writings of Martin Luther from the time he published the Ninety-Five Theses, religion was simply an excuse for what was predominantly a political movement. Luther was just the most successful critic in a long line of critics who believed that Catholic Church was sinful. The reason he escaped the fate of his predecessors is because of his political support. Luther’s criticisms, most notably his belief that man was defined through faith alone, the key point of contention between Catholics and Protestants to this day, was the excuse European royalty needed to turn the masses against the Church to seize political power and wealth the Vatican had amassed.

Am I saying that the Catholic Church, let alone Christianity, didn’t need the Reformation? Of course not. The Church and its leadership had become corrupt, concerning themselves with politics and riches instead of doing the work of God. The difference is that there wasn’t a shift in Catholic teachings, nor was there a significant shift in the religious beliefs in Europe because to the Reformation as the differences between the Christian faiths, for the most part, are fairly minor. Even Martin Luther had to revise many of his beliefs on Christianity, most notably the belief that man was defined through faith alone as it contradicted in the Book of James (James 2:24 “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only”).

The political landscape of Europe had changed, but that was pretty much it. To suggest that an event similar in Islam would somehow reform the religion and do away with Sharia, a key tenet of Islam, is laughable. One might as well ask Christians and Jews to ignore the Ten Commandments. Am I saying that Islam doesn’t need to be reformed? Of course not, but one would have to be incredibly naive to believe that the problems the world is facing because of Islam has to do with a few corrupt leaders. Andrew C. McCarthy made it clear in a recent piece that these problems lay with Islam itself.

If you have been reared in a culture that worships suicide bombers, that dehumanizes Jews as the children of monkeys and pigs, and that insists Israel is not merely the enemy but does not have a right to exist. And these positions, it bears emphasizing, do not represent some fringe Islam of al-Qaeda terrorists who have purportedly hijacked an otherwise peaceful religion. This is mainstream Islam, the sorts of things you would hear in a classroom at al-Azhar University or a television show on al-Jazeera — the place where, according to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, people turn for “real news,” the place where Muslim Brotherhood guru Yusuf Qaradawi lionizes suicide bombers in his popular weekly program, Sharia and Life.

Just because the vast majority of Muslims aren’t violent, that doesn’t mean they don’t condone the actions of jihadists. Contrary to what Gunter and others would believe, a Reformation-type movement wouldn’t be enough to fix these problems in Islam.

What Terry Jones’ burning of the Qur’an have revealed the dark nature of Islam. This barbarism has been going on for centuries, long before the Florida pastor took a lit match to the Islamic holy book, and this savagery will continue long after he and his congregation are a footnote in history. These religious teachings, contrary to what those like Lorne Gunter would believe, are just as much to blame for the deaths of the U.N. workers as those who carried out these horrific murders.

Sarkozy Speaks: Multiculturalism Has Failed in France

Here’s the video of French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s opinion that multiculturalism has failed in France. Thanks goes to Eeyore at Vlad Tepes for the clip.

There is a correction on the translation provided in the video. At 3:52 Sarkozy actually says, “We are a laïque country” (kind of secularism).

German Chancellor Angela Merkel was the first European leader to admit multiculturalism failed, and British Prime Minister David Cameron said the same last week. For those who keep demanding that North America follow Europe’s example, what do you have to say about this? I would definitely support Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper if he wanted to make similar statements about multiculturalism in Canada. I don’t think President Barack Obama has the courage to make such a statement, but I doubt that would be a problem for a Republican successor. John Sexton is right, it is about time that America, as well as Canada, take this step.

When we talk about the failure of multiculturalism, we aren’t talking about the failure of people to accept others of different cultures. Canada is accepting to a fault in this regard. What we are talking about is the failure of others to accept the culture of the country they are moving to. A growing problem with an increasingly intolerant Muslim community that is unwilling to be part of Western society. For example, we saw this kind of intolerance recently when a dozen Muslim families demanded that Winnipeg’s Louis Riel School Division allow their children excused from compulsory elementary school music and coed physical education programs for religious and cultural reasons. Here’s the discussion on ‘The Michael Coren Show’ concerning this story via SDAMatt2.

I’ll end this post with two more videos. The first is another clip from ‘The Michael Coren Show’ with Wednesday’s panel discussing David Cameron’s belief that multiculturalism has failed in the United Kingdom. The second is from British writer Pat Condell. Though I don’t agree with much he has to say, especially his ignorant and downright hateful statements on Christianity, I do think he make a good point in his latest video concerning the British Prime Minister’s comments.

and…

Quick Post: Michael Medved Interviews Walid Shoebat on the Muslim Brotherhood

I touched on an interview Walid Shoebat did with Larry Elder in a post I did yesterday, but The Right Scoop has another interview with the former Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) militant by Michael Medved. A definite must listen for my modest readership.

Maybe Barack Obama should have given this a listen before green-lighting the Muslim Brotherhood’s participation in any upcoming election (hat-tip Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey). If anyone wanted further proof that he doesn’t know what he’s doing, there it is. As for those “peaceful protesters,” while it might have started out that way, Scott Baker at The Blaze has a post up about a CNN report which shows exactly why the Obama administration and others shouldn’t endorse open and free elections in Egypt (hat-tip Weasel Zippers). Here’s a quote from one of those interviewed.

All the people hate him. He’s supporting Israel! Israel is our enemy. We don’t like him…Israel and America supported him. We hate them all!

And we trust that these people will elect a government that not only is peaceful and tolerant, but maintains good relations with Israel? I don’t think so.

Instead of pretending that the Muslim Brotherhood is a peaceful organization, that somehow it will bring out a Western-style democracy in Egypt, let’s be honest with what is going on. This is a replay of what happened during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, and anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant or dishonest, the latter being a tenet of Islam…

Don’t Forget That Al Jazeera is Part of The Muslim Brotherhood

With all the news coming out about the riots in Egypt, it is best to know which sources to trust. While many would like to believe that Al Jazeera, the international news network headquartered in Doha, Qatar, is a reliable news network, the truth is that they aren’t. The fact is that those who are well versed in Middle Eastern affairs know that they are little more then a source of propaganda for the Muslim Brotherhood. Does it surprise anyone that the Egyptian authority would shut down their Cairo bureau?

Many might be skeptical. A dictatorship, on the brink of collapse, shuts down a news network that is critical of them? That doesn’t seem out of the ordinary. Many will ignore this and point to the fact the Egyptian authority has also shut down the internet in an attempt to control the flow of information. This isn’t, however, the first time Egypt or any other Middle Eastern country has tried to crack down on Al Jazeera, so that point is moot. To many Middle Eastern leaders, including those who are on friendlier terms with the West, the news network is a threat. Zvi Mazel from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs has more on this.

…Having vainly tried threats, diplomatic pressure, and closing down its offices, Arab countries made a last, collective effort to curb Al Jazeera’s broadcasts. In February 2008 Egypt and Saudi Arabia convened in Cairo an extraordinary meeting of the ministers of information of all members of the Arab League. The purpose of that meeting was to impose a series of restrictions on all satellite channels in the Arab world. The proposed rules, which were supposed to be applied in all Arab countries, included a sweeping prohibition against insulting a country’s leaders or impugning its religious and national symbols. Infringement of the rules would give countries the right to freeze or cancel the offending network’s permit to operate. The rules would have made it possible for the regime to stop the broadcasts at will without having to resort to a court decision. However, Qatar and Lebanon refused to endorse the agreement and it never came into effect. So Al Jazeera keeps on being a threat to Arab regimes…

It isn’t just Arab regimes though, Zvi also points to the news organization’s campaign against Israel.

…Al Jazeera leads an all-out war against Israel in which there is no room for true reporting. The purpose is to bring all Arabs to support the Palestinians and, more specifically, Hamas, which is, after all, the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brothers. No efforts are spared to present the Palestinians as the ultimate victims. Hamas representatives are warmly received by news anchors and commentators and they receive far more air time than the Palestinian Authority – a fact often bemoaned by Yasser Arafat who tried vainly to change it.

In the course of the Second Lebanon War in 2006, Al Jazeera behaved as a Hizbullah spokesman in all but name. It broadcasted all Hizbullah communiqués without bothering to check them, as well as footage from Hizbullah’s satellite network, Al Manar, which was deliberately distorting the facts and grossly exaggerating the actual damage. At no time did Al Jazeera take into consideration what Israel had to say about the situation on the ground.

During the Gaza war, a senior Al Jazeera reporter stationed himself at Shifa Hospital, from where he broadcast a stream of carefully selected horror pictures. Once again, they were accepted unreservedly and used to show what was purported to be the endless killing of civilians and especially children…

At this point I would imagine many readers are scratching their heads. A news organization is supposed to question authority right? It isn’t supposed to play favourites, whether they are tyrant Arab regimes or the democratic state of Israel, so this isn’t anything ground shaking right? Yes, but there’s more.

It isn’t just the content of their broadcasts, but those putting together the information to be put out. Zvi makes mention of this early on, citing a piece by Egyptian Maamun Fendi.

The Egyptian Maamun Fendi wrote in Asharq Alawsat that some 50 percent of the network’s personnel belong to the Muslim Brothers. He believes that Qatar, by embracing the Brothers while hosting American bases, has found the perfect formula against retaliation by Arab leaders and attacks by Islamic extremists. Al Jazeera has become a weapon in the hands of an ambitious emir who may be driven by the Muslim Brothers and who is threatening the stability of the Middle East.

It isn’t just one Israeli source that is saying this. After a five minute Google search, there are many articles outlining this connection with many more sources. Take for example this post from Steven Stalinsky of The New York Sun.

One of the most prolific Arab scholars and columnists, Mamoun Fandy, wrote in the London-based Arabic daily Asharq Al-Awsat about the movement’s relationship with Al-Jazeera on January 22. “The Muslim Brotherhood has at its disposal media that transcends borders, from newspapers to satellite channels, which have taken over the minds of millions … throughout the entire Arab world,” he wrote.

Calling Al-Jazeera “the Muslim Brotherhood channel,” Mr. Fandy discussed the network’s activity in the Middle East. “Al-Jazeera … is already propagandizing for the organization. … If you watch a debate program presented on Al-Jazeera … you will be amazed at the supreme effort … to defend the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Pierre Akel, founder and editor of a prominent Arabic reformist Web site, Metransparent.com, summed it up on February 9, 2006, “When it comes to satellite television in the region, Al-Jazeera is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.”

A Tunisian intellectual and director of the Netherlands–based Center for Promoting Democracy in the Arab World, Khaled Shawkat, wrote about the connection between Al-Jazeera and the Muslim Brotherhood in an article for the progressive Arabic Web site Elaph.com on July 29. “Al-Jazeera has been hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood organization,” he wrote.

In an article in Metransparent on December 22, 2004, the Arab reformist Abu Khawla also discussed the Muslim Brotherhood’s connection to Al-Jazeera. In addition, he wrote about the channel’s religious authority, Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who as a member of the organization left Egypt 45 years ago, seeking asylum in Qatar. “Arabs turn nowadays to satellite TV channels, especially Al-Jazeera … a tool of communications that is so far completely monopolized by fundamentalists,” Mr. Khawla wrote. “In the case of Al-Jazeera, preacher Al-Qaradawi (a leading figure of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood) is one of its most influential founding members. And fundamentalists are in charge of its news programs and talk shows.”

The always eloquent Youssef Ibrahim wrote about Sheik Qaradawi and Al-Jazeera in his New York Sun column on Monday: “One of the most eminent leaders of the Ikhwan movement, who appears weekly on Al-Jazeera’s ‘Sharia and Life’ program, is Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. He has specifically ruled that Americans in Iraq and Israelis everywhere should be targeted by suicide bombers, who will be considered martyrs and heroes.” Mr. Ibrahim also noted that Sheik Qaradawi “ranks among the top 10 leaders of the Ikhwan’s international ruling councils.”

This connection between Al Jazeera and the Muslim Brotherhood is not only confirmed by Jihadwatch.org, but Walid Shoebat, a former Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) militant who converted to Christianity and has become one of the more outspoken critics of Islam, stated the very same thing this morning on ‘The Larry Elder Show’. Shoebat also made the point that the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t just control Al Jazeera, but many other Arab news outlets, including newspaper publications and radio stations. They are just one part of a larger propaganda organization.

So why is this apparently poorly kept secret still a secret? I would imagine it has to do with our own media perception of not only Al Jazeera, but the Muslim Brotherhood itself. If it isn’t those like Sam Donaldson, who recently praised Al Jazeera, it is it apologists like Reza Aslan at The Daily Beast who are being dishonest about the terrorist organization. This failure by the mainstream media only goes to give credibility to both groups, further undermining the West and its allies in the Middle East.

While many don’t trust tradition media outlets, Al Jazeera isn’t simply a biased news source, it’s a propaganda outlet for the Muslim Brotherhood. This isn’t hyperbole, its fact. They’re just another part of a terrorist campaign, manufacturing news at the discretion of the worst of Islamic fundamentalists organizations.