Muslims riot over Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks
As if they really needed an excuse. Puh-leeze. Methinks these folks live to be offended and will seek any reason whatsoever to riot. They certainly do not give a good impression to non-Muslims with such prima donna behavior.
From the New York Times:
Some of the strongest words came from Turkey, possibly putting in jeopardy Benedict’s scheduled visit there in November.
“I do not think any good will come from the visit to the Muslim world of a person who has such ideas about Islam’s prophet,” Ali Bardakoglu, a cleric who is head of the Turkish government’s directorate of religious affairs, said in a television interview there. “He should first of all replace the grudge in his heart with moral values and respect for the other.”
Muslim leaders in Pakistan, Morocco and Kuwait, in addition to some in Germany and France, also criticized the pope’s remarks, with many demanding an apology or clarification. The extent of any anger about the speech may become clearer on Friday, the Muslim day of prayer in which grievances are often vented publicly.
Yeah, okay. Try being a Christian living in Turkey and you’ll quickly see just what kind of “moral values and respect for the other” they receive from Muslims. Perhaps Mr. Bardakoglu should learn something from Someone his faith at least acknowledges as a prophet:
“Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own? How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me remove that splinter in your eye,’ when you do not even notice the wooden beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! Remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter in your brother’s eye.” (Luke 5:41-42 NAB)
Muslihoon has a good post giving more of the context of the Holy Father’s speech. Just for the record: I believe the emperor was right and these folks are only giving credence to his remarks.
Hat tip: Gateway Pundit
24 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
From the NYT article:
“[The Pope] quoted a 14th Century Byzantine emperor as saying, ‘Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.’”
It’s quoted in a context that suggests it’s one of the things that Muslims were insulted by.
Like I had occasion to say elsewhere today: It’s not an insult, it’s a fair observation (at least the “sword” part). If Muslims feel hurt by it, they should take stock of their compatriots and leaders and change what’s wrong in their behavior.
Comment by Calarato — September 15, 2006 @ 9:24 pm - September 15, 2006
Incidentally, the quote is from the Eastern Orthodox Emperor Paleologos II of Constantinople, three centuries after the split between the Eastern Orthodox (Greek/Russian) Church and the Western Orthodox (Catholic) Church in 1056. It was also quoted not 100 years before the Muslim jihad of Constantinople in 1453.
Nonetheless, how anyone could be upset over a pontiff giving a QUOTE from a historical church figure only serves to remind everyone how truthful the saying is. Remember, people scream the loudest when the truth hits too close to home.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — September 15, 2006 @ 9:43 pm - September 15, 2006
In other words, “How dare you call us violent! Just for that we’re gonna break stuff and burn you in effigy! And it’s all your fault!”
Comment by Synova — September 15, 2006 @ 10:10 pm - September 15, 2006
Muslims, much like Liberals, can’t handle the truth.
Comment by republichick — September 15, 2006 @ 11:26 pm - September 15, 2006
Someone needs to tell the Muslims that even the Catholics stopped listening to the pope decades, if not centuries, ago…..
Comment by Well? — September 16, 2006 @ 12:09 am - September 16, 2006
Ironic how every time Muslims react, they prove the original point.
Comment by rightwingprof — September 16, 2006 @ 7:23 am - September 16, 2006
‘credence’, please
Miss Grundy
Comment by Miss Grundy — September 16, 2006 @ 9:14 am - September 16, 2006
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.ph p?showtopic=92303&st=0
^ good thread on it from lesters hq
Comment by lester — September 16, 2006 @ 10:40 am - September 16, 2006
I don’t disagree with the spirt of the quote, but the Pope needs a refreasher course (or perhaps an introductory course, lol) on dealing with the mass media. He doesn’t need to fan the flames when there is already a fire.
Comment by Chase — September 16, 2006 @ 11:34 am - September 16, 2006
Excuse me? So are these protestors warning the Pope to behave like a dhimmi, or else? That’s what it sounds like to me.
Don’t forget that many Christians in the West have been willing, even eager, to accept such limits on free speech — witness the chastened reaction to the Mohammad Cartoon Rage riots, in which Church officials, government leaders, and others solemnly pontificated against “insults to religious figures.” (I have yet to see any Christians go to the streets and ignite riots when crucifixes have been dipped in urine.)
But it wasn’t really a question of blasphemy then, and it isn’t a question of insult now. It is a question of whether non-Muslims will submit to Muslim standards and restrictions on their speech, thought, and behavior. Unfortunately, this seems to be the case for the pontiff.
Not, however, for me. I WILL NOT SUBMIT.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — September 16, 2006 @ 12:12 pm - September 16, 2006
One of our secular-leftie artists should publicly dip an image of Mohammed in urine… if they want my support. (I.e., if they want to force me to admire their consistency and their basic point in doing it to crucifixes, etc.)
Comment by Calarato — September 16, 2006 @ 12:51 pm - September 16, 2006
Cal, that will happen when pigs fly.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — September 16, 2006 @ 1:18 pm - September 16, 2006
My, my! Aren’t these Moslems touchy!
Comment by Shawmut — September 16, 2006 @ 1:23 pm - September 16, 2006
I think that the flames need to be fanned.
Same with the Danish cartoons. The *mistake* was in acting like reasonable people would find something about them insulting. This is what it’s like in the adult world, polite people do their best not to offend, but acting like all offense is your fault is a pathology, not a politeness. Adult people understand that sometimes they are *not* responsible for other people’s upsets.
It is not *reasonable* to put the blame for the upset on Pope Benedict. And I wish he had just said, “You’re proving my point” instead of saying “I’m sorry you’re offended,” because even if it wasn’t an actual apology, it still sounds like he was forced to make one.
And the Danish cartoons was handled all wrong too. If people react violently to a piture of their prophet with a bomb in his turban, then *that* is *truth* and should not be compromised.
So fan the flames? Yeah, until we can finally get it *right*. The Pope and some cartoonists aren’t denegrating Muhammad, his followers are.
Comment by Synova — September 16, 2006 @ 7:08 pm - September 16, 2006
Honestly, I would not be surprised if a fatwa (basically asking for someone to be assassinated) is issued for Pope Benedict because of his comments.
All of these events (1st WTC attack, the Cole, the embassies, 9/11, 3/11, 7/7, the cartoons, the transatlantic flights, now this) are skirmishes in a war between civilizations.
I hope we are on the winning side.
Comment by ShermanStreet — September 16, 2006 @ 9:29 pm - September 16, 2006
I seldom agree with a pope but I applaud Benedict XVI for not apologizing. He spoke the truth and it’s just too bad that Muslims are offended by the truth.
Many of the Muslim leaders condemning the pope’s words seem deaf, dumb and blind when innocents are murdered by Muslims in the name of Islam.
Comment by Trace Phelps — September 16, 2006 @ 9:30 pm - September 16, 2006
ShermanStreet,
A war of civilizations, as you call it, presumes that Muslims are civilized, which they are not.
Comment by Chase — September 17, 2006 @ 1:13 am - September 17, 2006
If islamofascists decry the pope’s quotation of a HISTORICAL EVENT, and demand (read: whine) for an apology, it should be given to them – on one condition:
The pontiff should renounce his statement only if Muslims will renounce the rest of the statement. That is, the true fact that Islam approves of spreading the faith by the sword.
Sounds fair enough to me. Let’s see if those who call us “infidels” are civilized enough to renounce violence towards themselves and towards us.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — September 17, 2006 @ 9:34 pm - September 17, 2006
Peter in ## 2 and 18 is pretty much on the money, but there area few issues.
Preliminarily, the translation (re #1) from the NYTimes of what the pope said isn’t bad, but it isn’t particularly good, either. What the pope said in Regensburg was
“Zeig mir doch, was Mohammed Neues gebracht hat und da wirst du nur Schlechtes und Inhumanes finden wie dies, dass er vorgeschrieben hat, den Glauben, den er predigte, durch das Schwert zu verbreiten.”
That translates to
Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only the bad and the inhumane, such as his prescription to spread by the sword the faith he preached.
Note the differences between this from the NYTimes’s translation. “Schlechtes” does not translate to “evil,” “Uebel” does. “Inhumanes” does not translate to “inhuman,” “Unmenschlich” does. And “vorschreiben” (for which “vorgeschrieben” is the past participle) does not translate to “command,” Befehl does. Bit of a difference.
Regarding Peter’s comments, it is true that the pope’s Zitat (citation) at Regensburg (Germany) derived from remarks by Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaeologus, but it should be remembered that, after the Arabs had, by the time that he made the remarks, over-run more than a bit of territory that had been controlled by Constantinople. Manuel II went to western Europe to ask for aid to defend his domain. This was, indeed, after the Eastern Orthodox/Roman Catholic split (and the Romans controlled Western Europe), but he requested aid from the West anyway. He received no aid from the West. I suspect, but cannot prove, that the pope’s Zitat was a repetition of Manuel II’s stump speech asking for assistance from the western Europeans. If this suspicion is correct, that would more than suggest that Manuel II meant the Zitat more for public relations purposes by the Byzantines than as something that should be taken as a reflection of historical reality.
And, so, I suspect, but also cannot prove, that the Arabs and other Muslims took the pope’s Zitat in Regensburg, Germany, as a call for Western Europeans to oppose Muslims. It is that that leads me to believe that Muslims in the Near East and elsewhere were up in arms about the pope’s Zitat.
On what may be more interesting regarding the pope’s Zitat at Regensburg, that the pope gave it at all seems to suggest that he has something of a tin ear to politics regarding religion and state. Why religion? Because, as head of the RCCi (Roman Catholic Church, Inc.) he is obviously a renouned religious figure. Why state? Because, he is head of state of the Vatican, an independent (or quasi-independent) entity. From what I can tell, he should not have ruffled feathers, such as he did, in his speech in Regensburg. He should have test-marketed it first, by first having several of his underlings go out and say the same thing, and seeing what the reaction from the “opposition” was.
NB: We’ve just returned from Munich, where the pope’s visit was all the media all the time. There were two interesting aspect (in addition to the above). One, he complained about the fact that the “Glauebiger” (the believers) didn’t seem to be a numerous as they had been in past years and decades, even in nominally RC Bavaria. (No surprise. But note that Germany has a “Kirchensteuer” which obligates members of a church to pay a tax to support the church. So, fewer members, less tax money to the churches.) And he complained about the “mangel” of persons wanting to enter the priesthood. Virtually nobody–at least in western Europe–wants to enter the priesthood. (Again, no surprise.) Just to report–you decide.
Comment by raj — September 18, 2006 @ 4:04 am - September 18, 2006
raj- have you read justin raimondo and charlie featherstones columns on this? at antiwar and lewrockwell respectively. they analyze and defend the popes statement
Comment by lester — September 18, 2006 @ 4:54 pm - September 18, 2006
Let’s see here…
The leader of a church that has killed MILLIONS of non-Catholic people during the Spanish Inquisition, the persecution of the Protestant church, the Crusades, and the burning to the stake of ANYONE accused of every “sin” from witchcraft to…er…homosexuality (never forget WHY we are called “faggots”!) turns right around and accuses another religion that has butchered MILLIONS in the name of their “Allah” of being hateful and violent…
THIS…is the definition of IRONY!
Comment by Jeffrey Williams — September 20, 2006 @ 9:36 pm - September 20, 2006
No Jeffrey, it’s a demostration of your religious bigotry in full tilt mode. Spin it between centuries if you care to… the Pope has it right.
Why is it that so many GayLeft men have such an animus toward religion? Is it because you resist control? Is it that you abhor restraint? Or is it a sociopathology in your psyche that drives you to hate anything which demands personal accountability?
Comment by Michigan-Matt — September 21, 2006 @ 2:52 pm - September 21, 2006
Dear Michigan-Matt,
I am in NO WAY a “religious bigot”. What I was commenting on was how strange it is for the Pope to criticize a religion for being so hateful, while his own church is guilty of violence against humanity, some of which is continuing in his condemnation of gay people like us, and he doesn’t even KNOW ME! Just like YOU are condemning ME by accusing this proud gay Republican of being from the “gayleft” when I am probably MORE “red-state” than anyone else here!
I just have a problem with hypocrites in the church, whether they be from the left or right wing, that try to use religion to take shots at their political enemies.
Jesus NEVER acted like THAT!
Comment by Jeffrey Williams — September 25, 2006 @ 11:42 am - September 25, 2006
Oh, and by the way, MM…
I am all for personal accountability.
I was just wondering when you’re going to start using some of it YOURSELF on your own MOUTH the next time you accuse me, a hard-core conservative, of being a “limp-wristed leftist” just because I submit a statement that doesn’t go in perfect sync with your ideology.
Apparently “fundies” come in shades of PINK, too!
Comment by Jeffrey Williams — September 25, 2006 @ 4:25 pm - September 25, 2006