A peace forum says:
They pointed out that Muslims have been portrayed unfavourably in the Western media and many of them are also upset by what they perceive to be “uneven-handed” Middle East policies from Western countries, such as the United States.
I doubt that Muslims need unfavourable portrayal by “Western media” to give non-Muslims a negative perception of them. Muslims are more than capable of doing that for themselves.
While other panellists pointed out that some politicians around the world have “manipulated” religion for political gains, widening the rift between different faiths, another panellist, Mr Yang Razali Kassim, a Senior Fellow with the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, highlighted the Singapore government’s sensitive approach towards religious issues.
Yes, in particular, Islamist regimes in the Middle East trying their damn best to rile up the Muslim community so as to distract the common people from their glaring ineptitude and corruption. Why, despite their possession of oil and natural resources, is the wealth concentrated in the hands of the ruling elite?
“Singapore is getting closer to Middle Eastern countries and it’s not just for economic reasons. It is also a signal that Singapore is not following the US blindly (in terms of foreign policy),” Mr Kassim said.
A very crucial point must be made: there are reasons independent of the US why we should be sceptical and critical of segments of the Muslim community who continue to advocate violence and coercion.
Another thing to think about: did the Pope really apologise? This article in Today makes it seem like he did, when actually, he did not. What he said was more along the lines of “I’m sorry you misunderstood me”, rather than “I’m sorry for what I said”. Even more importantly, why should the Pope apologise? Did he say anything which is factually incorrect or logically invalid?
TODAYonline - Pope’s lesson for local Catholics
TODAYonline - Forum probes causes of Muslim anger
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pope Benedict XVI Islam controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
7 Comments
If you subscribe to the view (and rightly so) that “Islamist regimes in the Middle East trying their damn best to rile up the Muslim community so as to distract the common people from their glaring ineptitude and corruption”…. then deriling Muslims in general (the common people) in Western media is unhelpful to say the least.
The Western media does need to make a distinction between the Muslim people and dictators in the Middle East. But what you miss in your diatribe is that the Iranian President is not a dictator unlike the Saudi regime. The latter, by the way, continues to fool the common Muslim people thanks to the regime’s good friend - the one ,the only, the United States!
Sure looks like your bias is misplaced dude!
Anon:
Hmm, so you consider an election in which candidates have to be approved and vetted by a Grand Ayatollah to be democratic and not dictatorial? hmmm…
With great respect to the Muslim community, I disagree on the issue of speech. I find it offensive that some Muslims think that people should not be allowed to say certain things if it offends them. Does that mean I should go rampaging in the streets because of that?
And I have never thought that the US should be excused in any way for their cosiness with House of Saud. When I mentioned corruption and repression of the common people, I was specifically thinking of Saudi Arabia.
I’m trying to think of instances where Muslims insulted Christians about their religion, and what the Christians thought…
Oh, what if somebody said to you, “you know this auntie from next door, not me, she called your mother a (insert perjorative noun here).” It’s alright, isn’t it? Because he’s reporting a fact. Never mind that he’s reporting it in front of a rolling camera there’s a worldwide audience…
Han:
The issue or democracy and dictatorial are not pure dichotomies. And there is indeed a case to be made that Iran is much more democratic and open than Saudi Arabia.
I agree with you that we should not be stopped from saying certain things just because it offends Muslims. But along the same lines, we should allow for Muslims to have their say - whether it is about Israel’s brutal offensive against Lebanon or its repressive policies in Palestine or the blatant support that the U.S. gives Israel…
More in my next comment….
You ask, did the Pope say anything ‘factually incorrect or logically invalid’? No, he did not…
.. but the fact remains that the Pope chose to quote someone who linked Islam and violence in a context that is hardly relevant today. Note that the Pope’s comments were not an off-the-cuff remark. It was a pre-prepared speech and one can argue that the Pope deliberately used this quotation. To what purpose, I dont know but I think it is pointless to discuss a Byzantine emperor in today’s environment.
I leave you with an edtorial from IHT, think it will give you some insight into why Pope’s use of the quote was unwarranted… http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/24/opinion/edlag.php
Anon:
Thank you for that link. It was an interesting and thought-provoking read.
Coincidentally, have you read this on Today?
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/145003.asp
I found it to be a very interesting and compelling opinion piece.