The Wall Street Journal
By MELIK KAYLAN
September 18, 2006; Page A18
Pope Benedict XVI recently cited a Byzantine-era critique of Islam, and the usual hubbub of outrage ensued. Various self-appointed and official Islamic spokesmen (they're always men), including the head of Turkey's religious affairs directorate (why does Turkey have one?), responded sharply in the name of their faith. One might argue that a confident, evolved religion welcomes all kinds of open debate. Or one might intone gravely that the West continues to mishandle its relations with the umma -- the sphere of active Muslim believers -- with the implied assumption that there is such a unified entity of tens of millions, and that they all feel outrage in the same way at the same time. Islamist polemicists, in particular, cherish the archaic umma concept, evoking, as it does, a premodern utopia of monolithic harmony.
Many in the West buy the notion, with its familiar en bloc echoes of the proletariat. But should the rest of us believe them? Do we insult Muslims by buying into it, too, or insult them the more by considering it antiquated and bogus?
The Cross and the Crescent
(The Clash of Faiths in an Age of Secularism)
The Beach Lecture, Newbold College, Bracknell
September 18th 2006
I must begin this lecture by thanking the College for the invitation to give this yearâ€™s Beach Lecture. I am so grateful to Dr.David Trim for his considerable administrative help in making this possible. It is for Eileen and myself a joy to meet Dr Beach again, whom we have known over the years and whose commitment to ecumenical co-operation is well known.
The subject I have chosen: The Cross and the Crescent emerges from my keen interest in developing healthy relationships with Islamic scholars and leaders, as well as from my many visits to Muslim countries ever since I took up office as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1991. In retirement I continue to work in the field of inter-faith collaboration.
In 1942 Dr. William Temple in a famous phrase described ecumenical relations as the â€˜great new fact of our timeâ€™. I wonder how he would describe the relationships between faiths today, and particularly the relationship of Islamic countries and the West? For myself I would say of this relationship that it is the most dangerous, most important and potentially cataclysmic issue of our day. This lecture attempts to describe why this is so, and to suggest some ways that we might be able to strengthen links between this close neighbour, in religious terms, and overcome the hostilities that are driving the West and Middle East apart.
Thirteen years ago Professor Samuel Huntington makes his own position very clear. According to him we are witnessing in our time a â€˜clash of civilisationsâ€™. His own conclusion shocked many:
â€œIslamâ€™s borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their powerâ€.
The problem with statements like that- indeed, the most dangerous aspect- is that they run the risk of becoming self-fulfilling prophecies; that is, if enough people believe the thesis, a clash becomes more likely. A seriously disturbing feature of Huntingtonâ€™s thesis is the assumption that the clash will arise not from extremists on the margins of Islam but from the very being, the heart of Islam. Once that assumption is believed then the ineluctable conclusion is reached- no dialogue is possible; a state of war exists between two quite different civilisations.
The Wall Street Journal
What a Load of Armitage!
By VICTORIA TOENSING
September 15, 2006; Page A12
Richard Armitage has finally emerged from the cover-my-backside closet, "apologizing" on CBS for keeping quiet for almost three years about being the original source for Robert Novak's July 14, 2003 column stating that Joe Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, worked for the CIA and had suggested him for a mission to Niger. He disingenuously blames his silence on Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's non-legally based request -- any witness is free to talk about his or her testimony -- not to discuss the matter.
Put aside hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer funds squandered on the investigation, New York Times reporter Judith Miller's 85 days in jail, the angst and legal fees of scores of witnesses, the White House held siege to a criminal investigation while fighting the war on terror, Karl Rove's reputation maligned, and "Scooter" Libby's resignation and indictment. By his silence, Mr. Armitage is responsible for one of the most factually distorted investigations in history.
The New York Sun
U.S. Politicians Should Focus On Tehran, Netanyahu Says
BY DANIEL FREEDMAN - Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 8, 2006
NEW YORK - Benjamin Netanyahu, as part of an American tour repositioning himself for a return to the Israeli premiership, told an audience in New York yesterday that President Bush is preparing to ditch the United Nations to take on Iran alone and that American politicians of all parties would do well to stop squabbling about Iraq and join the president in focusing on threat from Tehran.
The former prime minister, who leads the right of center Likud Party in opposition to the current government, went on to tell lunch guests of the Hudson Institute that another war between Hezbollah and Israel is inevitable and that a shift in Israeli politics is about to take place with his return to power and a return to the principles that guided thinking in Jerusalem until the Oslo Accords.
The Washington Times
Bill and Dick, Osama and Sandy
By Michael F. Scheuer
Published July 5, 2006
With one credible September 11 movie, "United 93," under our belts, it will be interesting to see whether ABC-TV will complete the September 11 Commission's whitewashing of the pre-September 11 failure of U.S. intelligence-community leaders in its forthcoming mini-series based on Richard Clarke's memoir, "Against All Enemies."
Media teasers about the mini-series have said that Mr. Clarke -- the former "terrorism czar" -- and a senior FBI officer, the late John O'Neill, will be the heroes of the saga. If true, and if ABC's fact-checkers are not diligent in verifying Mr. Clarke's stories and claims, the mini-series will be the September 11 commission's dream come true: The Bush administration will be blamed for September 11, the feckless moral cowardice of the Clinton administration will be disguised and Mr. Clarke and Mr. O'Neill -- in my view, two principal authors of September 11 -- will be beatified.
New York Post
ISLAM-HATERS: AN ENEMY WITHIN
By RALPH PETERS
September 7, 2006 -- ISLAMIST fanatics attacked us and yearn to destroy us. The Muslim civilization of the Middle East has failed comprehensively and will continue to generate violence. The only way to deal with faith-poisoned terrorists is to kill them.
And the world's only hope for long-term peace is for moderate Muslims - by far the majority around the globe - to recapture their own faith.
But a rotten core of American extremists is out to make it harder for them.
JOE WILSON: THE END OF AN ERROR
by Ann Coulter
September 6, 2006
As National Public Radio described the story behind Joe Wilson's amusingly titled book, "The Politics of Truth: Inside blah blah blah blah, A Diplomat's Memoir" (available on the $1 table in fine bookstores everywhere), in May 2004:
"Last July Wilson wrote an op-ed piece in The New York Times saying that this particular intelligence regarding Iraq was false. A week later, columnist Robert Novak revealed that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative."
This is like saying: "John Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan; Reagan later died." Every word of that is true, but what it implies â€” that Hinckley killed Reagan â€” is false.
In the exact same way, the grand White House conspiracy promoted by Wilson and the mainstream media cites chronological events to prove causation.
David G. Dalin
Copyright (c) 2005 First Things 155 (August/September 2005): 14-16.
In his 2004 book The Return of Anti-Semitism, Gabriel Schoenfeld declared that â€œthe ancient and modern strands of anti-Semitismâ€ have been â€œsuccessfully fused todayâ€ in the Muslim world, â€œand from there the hatred of Jews receives its main propulsion outward.â€ In the 2003 Never Again? The Threat of the New Anti-Semitism, Abraham Foxman added, â€œVirulent anti-Semitism is widespread throughout the Arab Middle East. . . . Anti-Semitism is tolerated or openly endorsed by Arab governments, disseminated by the Arab media, taught in [Muslim] schools and universities, and preached in mosques. No segment of [Islamic] society is free of its taint.â€ And in the 1999 Semites and Anti-Semites, Bernard Lewis concluded, â€œClassical anti-Semitism is an essential part of Arab intellectual life at the present time.â€
It is possible to trace modern Islamic anti-Semitism back along a number of different historical and intellectual threads, but, no matter which one you choose, they all seem to pass, at one point or another, through the hands of one figureâ€”Hitlerâ€™s mufti, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the viciously anti-Semitic grand mufti of Jerusalem and the leader of Muslim fundamentalists in Palestine, who resided in Berlin as a welcome guest of the Nazis throughout the years of the Holocaust.
The Washington Times
Donkey see, monkey do
By Robert Goldberg
Published August 29, 2006
Last week, Sen. George Allen personally apologized to a staff member of his Democrat opponent, James Webb, for calling him a "macaca." This was the latest in a string of public apologies for what has been described as a racial slur aimed at individual who is of Indian descent.
The moral outrage pouring from the media and Democrats was heartwarming. It was reassuring to see that such expressions of bigotry by any party, politician or political organization (or movie actor) will not be tolerated.
So no doubt the media and the Left will soon turn their attention to the vicious anti-Semitism the followers and members of a political organization that donates millions to Democratic candidates and uses the Web to whip up support for its policies.
I am referring to Moveon.org; an entity that claims it is merely the vehicle of "real Americans â€” from carpenters to stay-at-home moms to business leaders â€” we work together to realize the progressive vision of our country's founders." To the extent that Moveon.org is a reflection of its membership, it is also a reflection of the opinions and sentiments it shares about its fellow Americans and citizens of the world. And boy do the Moveon folks hate Jews.
The Weekly Standard
The resistance to globalization runs deep.
by Ralph Peters
09/04/2006, Volume 011, Issue 47
Globalization is real, but its power to improve the lot of humankind has been madly oversold. Globalization enthralls and binds together a new aristocracy--the golden crust on the human loaf--but the remaining billions, who lack the culture and confidence to benefit from "one world," have begun to erect barricades against the internationalization of their affairs. And, from Peshawar to Paris, those manning the barricades increasingly turn violent over perceived threats to their accustomed patterns of life. If globalization represents a liberal worldview, renewed localism is a manifestation of reactionary fears, resurgent faiths, and the iron grip of tradition. Except in the commercial sphere, bet on the localists to prevail.