I wonder how Jon Stewart, himself a Jew, felt on “The Daily Show” when they were running that clip from a meeting of various Muslim reps worldwide, where a speaker was talking about how Jews were secretly running the world and were manipulating others into doing their fighting for them. A speech that, according to Stewart, received a standing ovation (“Indicating,” he noted, “that the other speeches must have really suuuuuucked.”) I mean, you joke about it, but geez. It just underscores once again the fundamental problem Israel faces in trying to negotiate with people whose long-term goal is its eradication, and America’s problem in the eyes of the Muslim world since we’re allies of Israel.
PAD
• 
At best, I can think of parallels; I can’t imagine what it’s like myself. It’s probably like a gay person listening to people debate the Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage before the House for the last few months, or how an innocent defendant feels in a trial he’s losing, or perhaps even like a situation you penned in Young Justice; young heroes listening to all the news sources paint them as uncontrollable beasts in need of constant monitoring.
I imagine a sense of impotent rage; a desire to speak directly to your accusers as a captive audience and explain, in purely analytical terms, exactly how they are wrong, but knowing you’ll not have the opportunity, or that even if you do it’s unlikely your words will really be heard as anything other than the ravings of the desperate.
Jon Stewart’s lucky in that regard; he may not get to tell them to their faces that Jews are alright people, but he does get to go on national television and show us just how ignorant the other perspective is.
OK, well, maybe I can imagine what it’s like.
It’s pretty much a guarantee that a person is full of sh*t when they speak in absolutes. All gays are this. All jews do that. Country X is evil.
I’m Canadian. My country is often perceived as full of boring, polite, maple syrup eating people who say ‘Eh’ all the time. That’s the stereotype. There are a billion or more out there for any conceivable race, creed, country or whatever point of contention you can name.
It is very easy to go with the stereotype. Much, much harder to get the real story. That’s why I like the Daily Show. They poke holes in the usual lines of BS out there. Fake news so good it often trumps the real stuff.
yeah, it was all pretty outlandish and unsettling. At first I just giggled when I read the headline, but then reading the story and the followup a couple of days later, and seeing that it’s one of those absolutely mad racists that doesn’t immediately COME OFF as one but hides it behind a veil of ‘reason’… that had me worried. Still, this is what I had to say:
That whole Gulf War/Sept. 11/Aphganistan/Iraq thing? That wasn’t an oil interests/fanatic Islam soup gone amok; it was me, Richard Lewis and Rabbi Jacob Frendlheinz just having a bit of fun on a Yom Kippur. Nyaaahhh.
I’m Canadian. My country is often perceived as full of boring, polite, maple syrup eating people who say ‘Eh’ all the time. That’s the stereotype. There are a billion or more out there for any conceivable race, creed, country or whatever point of contention you can name.
Funny, I thought Canada was a country of with a bunch of mind controlled sleeper agents (disguised as standup comedians, actors, and occasionally directors and such) that crossed the border and will one day arise and topple the American Government.
Or maybe that was the plan anyway, till we shifted At least 1 tenth of our TV/Movie industry to Vancouver in order to hault the invasion.
us vs them
thats what it all comes down to the root of all evil as long as we rank one group of people above another group of people all were gonna’ get is lot’s of bloody history!
in this situration Israel is obbsesed with protecting it’s people/teritory from real & percieved destruction that and is quiete prepared to kill & destroy anyone or any country that get’s in it’s way. hence it’s actions fuel the hatred and provide the justification that allows evil men to manipulate the uneducated & the faithful into fighting the evil infidels be they christian, muslim or in this case jewish.
this is pretty much the underlying theme tune to world history it’s about time someone killed the composer …but eh that would be god.
Being Jewish myself, the most frustrating thing I found about the whole thing, was that after there was international outcry over the comment, the Malaysian prime minister said, “See, that proves it. Jews really DO run the world. Why else would there be such an outcry?”
So we’re dámņëd either way. Either we say “Please everyone, be silent about hateful propaganda”, or we get accused of being the kingpins of the world.
I just wanna know, if I’m ruling the world, why am I living in an 800/month 1 bedroom apartment on the South Shore of Long Island? Can’t I at least get something in Great Neck?
Um…not all Palestinians have a long-term goal to eradicate the Israeli people. Not sure if you were making a generalization there or talking about specific individuals.
One of the things I’ve never understood about anti-Semitism is this obsession with a secret cabal of Jews controlling the world. What’s even more puzzling is how pervasive this belief is. I can’t tell you how often I’ve heard someone make a intelligent and articulate argument critical of the policies of Israel only to ruin it by adding, “but you’ll never here that because the Jews control the media.” That reinforces the view that people who are critical of Israel are all anti-Semites.
I don’t mean to sound bigoted, and it is very clear that Jews do not rule the world (Paul Wolfowitz aside), but the media does have a fairly large concentration of Jewish people, and has for a long time. Samuel Goldwyn. Meyer. The Warners. Mel Brooks, William Shatner, Kurt Douglas. Hëll, listen to Adam Sandler’s Hanukkah Song for crying out loud. The entire comic book medium was founded by, and for a long time maintained by, Jewish people. Stanley Lieber (Stan Lee), Jacob Kirbowitz (Jack Kirby), and many others.
Do Jews control media? No. I would imagine it rests mostly in the hands of rich gentiles. But given the number of Jews who participate in the media, it is understandable that some people, especially idiots with an ax to grind, could misinterpret participation in the media as domination of the media.
As far as the bigoted comments of the Muslims above: I must say I am surprised that Malaysia, which probably has a negligable Jewish population, would produce such a bigoted man. Malaysia has racial problesm aplenty, mostly agianst the Chinese, who tend to control businesses and the media, and are officially discriminated against by the government.
As far as Isreal is concerned, there are many valid reasons for questioning its behavior as a nation (invasion of Lebanon, occupation of the West Bank, building settlements on conquered land, etc.), but resorting to anti-Semitism merely detracts from the argument and gives amunition to Isrealis who think the only cause of the problem is that the world hates Jews.
The rant is ended, let the flaming begin.
Ben (who is not Jewish, but has a Jewish name)
Little personal history:
My mother’s Jewish (though not observant), my father was brought up Baptist (and likewise isn’t remotely observant). I was brought up essentially agnostic. Nevertheless, I went to an Episcopalian private school in the New Orleans area.
In our district – we had another school, a secular private school, that was held in higher regard (probably accurately). This school had a reasonably large Jewish population, including (before I was born) my mother’s little sister.
I played football in high school. I wasn’t particularly good (my senior year I was the only senior not to get all-district, and I never had even a distant shot at it) but I played. And every year, when the game with the other school came around, I’d get to see anti-Semitism on parade. And every year, we’d get killed (no shock, Peyton Manning was the QB for the other team).
And every year, I’d be almost glad we lost. I never felt like we deserved to win.
Incidentally, aside from accidentally running into one of my friends in a restaurant, I haven’t had anything to do with my school in years. I’d be happy if I never see any of them again.
I know what it’s like. It takes a hëll of a lot not to become bitter sometimes.
“But given the number of Jews who participate in the media, it is understandable that some people, especially idiots with an ax to grind, could misinterpret participation in the media as domination of the media.”
Especially because all them Jews think and act the same, of course, which means that one Jew in a position of power is just like another. (I know -you- weren’t saying that. But this Jews-in-high-places trope is all too common and needs debunking).
“I must say I am surprised that Malaysia, which probably has a negligable Jewish population, would produce such a bigoted man.”
You should read more about the history of anti-Semitism. Poland, now, is quite bereft of Jews, and yet you find hatred of the Chosen quite frequently there. England was absent of Jews for centuries, and yet the Blood Libel was common there. You don’t need to have an ethnic group present to make bogeymen out of them; it probably helps that they’re not there.
But if someone points out similar anti-semitism in the anti-war movement (like here: http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=8677_Terror_Supporters_in_DC ), he gets called a troll.
Ben Hunt said As far as the bigoted comments of the Muslims above: I must say I am surprised that Malaysia, which probably has a negligable Jewish population, would produce such a bigoted man. Malaysia has racial problesm aplenty, mostly agianst the Chinese, who tend to control businesses and the media, and are officially discriminated against by the government.
Why is it hard to imagine that Malaysia could produce a bigoted man if Malaysia has racial problems? Doesn’t the notion of having racial problems indicate that bigotry is inherent? (Technically, Malaysia’s problems are ethnic, not racial–the difference between Malays and Chinese is more akin to the English and Irish, rather than US Caucasians and African-Americans, but I digress…)
As for the anti-Jewish attitudes in the Muslim world, this is NOT a new concept. Muhammad seems to have had mixed feelings about Jews in general–most Jews he encountered were traders and businessmen whom he admired, unfortunately, the Jews of Medina (where Muhammad had received shelter) opted not to convert to Islam, and were thought to have conspired with some enemies of Muhammad (this is not known for a fact, but when was religion ever concerned with the facts?).
Of course, when certain Christian groups (such as the Catholic sect that Mel Gibson’s father belongs to, and most of the Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson ilk in their early days) make anti-Jewish comments or hold anti-Jewish sentiments, such outrageous comments are almost immediately diluted in the media as being “outside mainstream Christianity”. (Heck, when Pat Buchanan made similar anti-Jewish statements during his Republican Presidential candidacy, his views were quickly described by the Republican Party as being “outside the mainstream of the Republican Party.) Yet when Islamic leaders (of either the secular or religious community) make such statements, they’re taken as representing the view of all Muslims. It doesn’t really help that the leaders of Israel seem more intent on reviving the borders of some Biblical Israel beyond simply a secure Israel; also, the very nature of Israel being established *as* a Jewish state doesn’t help matter. Many Muslims find it difficult to accept the idea that simply being a Jew doesn’t automatically mean being pro-Israel (then, of course, the fact that most non-Israeli Jews seem to be publicly pro-Israel makes the notion of neutral-to-Israel or anti-Israel Jews seem to be a fiction).
As Malaysian Prime Minister Matathir has noted, he was publicly rebuked by Bush for those anti-Jewish (and also some anti-West–curiosity begs why are these being given less “airtime”) comments, yet one of Bush’s own top generals (Lt Gen Boykin, who just happens to also be the deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence) made anti-Islamic statements and the most that’s been made of it by the administration is that the man was exercising his right of free speech–granted, there IS an “internal investigation” of his speeches underway, but what exactly needs investigating?
Joseph said:It doesn’t really help that the leaders of Israel seem more intent on reviving the borders of some Biblical Israel beyond simply a secure Israel; also, the very nature of Israel being established *as* a Jewish state doesn’t help matter. Many Muslims find it difficult to accept the idea that simply being a Jew doesn’t automatically mean being pro-Israel (then, of course, the fact that most non-Israeli Jews seem to be publicly pro-Israel makes the notion of neutral-to-Israel or anti-Israel Jews seem to be a fiction).
Isn’t it time to add a ‘quote’ function here?
Anyway: Nobody in posession of anything that even remotely resembles of a functioning brain thinks of a biblical Israel (Judea). That would go from Aphganistan through Egypt, or something like that…
And I doubt many Anti-Israel Jews exist. If they do, they’re stupid. I’m one of those Israelis that has never had anything but severe criticism towards my country’s actions, my politics are considered treason by too many and (apparently) I have been under some sort of investigation by the Shabak for making inflammatory comments in public forums.
But the one thing I’ve never been and never will be is Anti-Israel. That would mean (not even imply, but MEAN) that I don’t think Israel has a right to even exist.
As for Israel being a Jewish state – I agree. When I tried to changed my nationality from ‘Jewish’ to ‘Israeli’, I got laughed at again and again by the ministry’s employees. It’s way past time to stop making this severe racial distinction; they can put in another sub-section that reads ‘religion’ if it’s THAT important to them, and make sure ‘secular’ is one of the options. But if you were born in Israel, you should be ‘Israeli’.
Me, I like Harlan Ellison’s comments — made back on July 19, 1982 — on this: “If it [The Great International Zionist Jewish Communist Money Making Conspiracy] actually exists, [it] annoys the hëll out of me. Someone out there is a kike with twice his/her allotment, because I sure as šhìŧ ain’t got mine yet. I work much too hard to make ends meet, like the rest of you, and if the Great IZJCM Conspiracy do, in fact, exist, I’d appreciate the Comptroller getting in touch with me so we can straighten out this egregious oversight.”
Well, obviously it is inaccurate for anti-Israeli activists to speak in absolutes, but it is very important to understand that anti-Israeli, and even anti-Zionist, beliefs are not identical to antisemitism. In fact, the large majority of those expressing anti-Israeli opinions recently are Arabs or closely related to Arabs – the last time I checked, Arabs were Semitic in origin.
This is not so much in response to this particular line of comment, but to the general tenor of Mr. David’s statements over a period of time. I am convinced that opposition to many aspects of Israeli foreign and domestic policy is merely good common sense, rather than a tendency to want to reenact the Holocaust.
A serious tension in consideration of the existence of Israel in its present form is that it purports, and many if not most Israelis wish, to be not only a democracy but also a Jewish state. Obviously, very foreseeable population trends could make this entirely impossible. There are other states – “Islamic Republics” which give at least lip service to the idea of being democratic and religious states. As far as I can tell, all or most of them are notably unsuccessful at being both. In its defense, Israel very frequently comes much closer to acting in good faith than they do, but it may have an impossible task. While Israel is usually an excellent friend to the United States, it is easy to see why many opponents of its policies feel that it has far more access to American media and political sources than do Islamists, Palestinians and other Moslems.
I’d imagine the Jews hearing about the Jewish Conspiracy from the Malaysian PM probably felt like the Muslims who heard U.S. General Boykin saying — in full dress uniform, in a church — saying the war on terrorism was Judeo-Christian values vs. Satan. What’s scarier is the total lack of any sort of punishment, or even rebuke, by the administration. One of the best things the Bush administration did was to stress, early on, that this was not a war against Muslims or Islam. Apparently, with support for the war vanishing on a daily basis, unity is more important than tolerance.
That could be what’s most scary about the comments: They came from the leaders. Every country has its people blaming various groups for the world’s problems: the Jews, the Muslims, the athiests, the Christains, the blacks, the whites, the gays, the women, the men, the liberals, the convervatives, the Japanese, the Chinese, etc. In America, that’s part of free speech.
But when the people in power, those who make the laws, start chiming in that a certain group is evil, or controlling everything, things get scary. That’s when official harassment and the stripping of rights begins.
It is pretty rough, having to see that religion gets dragged into all sorts of situations that it has no business being in, but for almost everyone in the western world (UK, USA, Canada, most of Europe) its very obvious that a person/culture’s religous leanings don’t define them as a person, or their culture as one of a specific type. However not everyone in the world sees things that way. In several societies I know of in the Middle East the religion is the main aspect of the society’s culture, it’s the rules by which they live, it’s the guide they follow in everything. To them it’s just as incredible (and offensive in some eyes) that we focus so much on individuality and personal code; that their devotion to a strict and ubiquitous religious/social code is to us. For all that we think embracing personal freedoms is the best way for a person to live their life, perhaps we need to start accepting that our way isnt the only way. And that we just need to give people who believe differently space and time to come to the same conclusion about us. It sounds like an idiotic thing to say when your country is at war and there have been attacks and terror attempts all over the world, and not at all practical but it is kind of the truth. Anyway, what does this have to do with the Jon Stewart news thing? Just trying to show that the reason folks get so worked up about things isnt always going to be a reason you can understand or interpret on your own terms. I think anti-semitism thought/ideas is, frankly, a waste of anybody’s time and completely unfounded – but for people who see the very core of their existence threatened by people who (so far as they can see) define themselves and their own wee community within a larger commuity by their religion too – it’s something specific to fight against. Westerners keep getting called ‘infidels’ by the aggressive muslim movements, we even define them as ‘muslim movements’ not by a country or idea specific name like british or communist, but by their religious affiliation. religion is in the core of this – everybody admits as much. it doesnt make anything that’s been done justifiable to me, but it makes me realize how deep the issues here run and how much work and time will be needed to fix things up once everyone runs out of steam.
But remember, there havent exactly been nice precidents set by judeo-christian people in the Middle East in the past. The Palestinian way of life has been destroyed by the goings-on in their own native land that they were never given a chance to control. It doesnt matter if it was intentional or not, it happened. Over the years many western governments have taken advantage of people and resources in the region for their own gain. And lets not forget the Crusades. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that ‘it’s in the past’ or ‘forget and forgive’ should be or are a part of the mindset of the people who were wronged.
Not everybody values the same ideas we do, and if we really believe we’re capable of making the world a fair and independant place we need to respect that fact and think hard about where to go from here.
hope this helped
sna (scotland,UK)
An extensive article on the topic: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/031103/usnews/3anti.htm
and for the record, I agree with Harlan Ellison: I’m unemployed and would like my share from the secret cabal.
If I may digress a bit (and if I can’t do that here, where can I?) I’d just like to note that hearing exiting Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed’s comments made me once again think that William Shakespeare knew everything. Becuase it certainly struck me that Mahathir, like so many leaders do and have done, followed the Shakespearean King Henry IV’s deathbed advice to his son:
Be it thy course to busy giddy minds
With foreign quarrels; that action, hence borne out,
May waste the memory of the former days.
But, as I say, I digress…
I can’t say that this is the same level of feeling, but I’ve got a parallel no one’s yet mentioned yet:
Anyone else remember the first President Bush saying emphatically that “atheists are not Americans. This is a Christian nation”?
I sure as hëll do (if you’ll pardon the irony of the expression).
Unfortunately, no faith is particularly exempt from idiots who claim to speak on its behalf: for every Prime Minister Mahathir (sp?) talking about the Great Jewish Conspiracy (and any such conspiracy that isn’t paying Harlan properly is doomed before it begins), there’s a General Boykin talking about how the US is guaranteed victory in all of its various wars because “my God is bigger than their God.”
Doesn’t help when these people are in positions of power in their respective countries, though. Pretty frickin’ scary, actually.
TWL
Most pathetic qoute from Malaysian PM.
Mohamad added that the Jews “invented Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so that they can enjoy equal rights with others.”
To me this is far worse than the old Jews rule the world barb.
At the risk of typing yet another stupid statement, let me clarify my views. I do not begrudge the existence of the state of Isreal. Isreal is a state that strives to be, and usually succeeds, a democracy. It is a homeland for a people who have been oppressed and sinned against for years. The problem occurs when they fancy themselves a “Jewish” state rather than simply a state where Jews can live and thrive. Excluding other ethnic groups is problamatic and demographically impossible. Do the Jews have a right to defend themselves? Absolutely, just so long as they acknowlege that Isreal does not always have clean hands when dealing with Arabs.
As far as Jess Nevins comments are concerned: I did not intend for my comment on people in the media to suggest that they all have one point of view, and I apologive if anything I typed offended anyone. Incidently, Jess: I’m a big fan or your annotations. Any plans for more Golden Age bios?
Ben Hunt
Tim Lynch: Unfortunately, no faith is particularly exempt from idiots who claim to speak on its behalf: for every Prime Minister Mahathir (sp?) talking about the Great Jewish Conspiracy (and any such conspiracy that isn’t paying Harlan properly is doomed before it begins), there’s a General Boykin talking about how the US is guaranteed victory in all of its various wars because “my God is bigger than their God.”
At the risk of offending those who, unlike me, are not atheists, I sometimes wonder whether religion is the ultimate example of Male Answer Syndrome.
Nuke’em from orbit. It’s the only way we can be sure.
To Ben from New Orleans:
What School did you go to? I went to St. Martins.
For some reason, people have been abnormally obsessed with hierarchies for years upon years. Anti-Semitism started in Europe because Christians had this annoying habit of remembering that Judas was a Jew and forgetting that pretty much everyone else in the Bible was Jewish up until that point. For some reason, people will find any reason to believe they’re better than someone else. On a different note, this topic reminds me of a joke:
Two unemployed Jews are sitting on a bench in the early days of the German Third Reich (before everything got really bad with the camps and everything). One is reading one of the very Anti-Semitic newsletters that was published then. The other asks him “How can you read that thing. It’s all filth.” The other just points at one of the headlines. “Look, ‘Jews control Washington'”. Then he points to another “And over here, Jews control Moscow. For five minutes a day, I am somebody”.
Sorry if that was in bad taste.
I too need to speak to who’s ever in charge of the Conspiracy…clearly they don’t have my address as I sure ain’t getting my cut.
Published on Thursday, October 23, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
The Essence of Duplicity: The Reaction to Mahathir’s Comments on Jews
by Ahmed Nassef
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad’s speech to the opening session of Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) on October 16th has sparked outraged condemnations from around the world for its anti-Semitism.
“The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them,” Mahathir said in the most widely quoted excerpt.
He continued elsewhere in the speech: “They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power.”
Enraged pronouncements quickly followed.
“His unacceptable comments hinder all our efforts to further interethnic and religious harmony, and have no place in a decent world,” European leaders meeting in Brussels said in a statement.
On Monday, U.S. President George W. Bush reportedly told the Malaysian Prime Minister at an Asia-Pacific summit in Bangkok that they both attended that his comments were “wrong and divisive” and that his speech “stands squarely against what I believe.”
However, for many Muslims around the globe, these kinds of holier-than-thou recriminations are either overly simplistic or just plain disingenuous.
Anti-Semitism in the Muslim World
Any discussion of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world would fall short if it did not consider the import of two realities.
The first is that Muslims have not borne the same kind of societal culpability and guilt that Europeans and North Americans have over their relations with Jews. Muslims have not sustained traditions of blood libel accusations or holocaust against Jews. Muslim countries have also not benefited from decades of media-sponsored sensitivity and political correctness training over how to refer to Jews (although one wonders whether these efforts have only served to sublimate still prevalent anti-Semitic feelings in the West).
The second reality is that for the majority of Arabs and Muslims, most knowledge of Jews comes through the reported actions of the self-proclaimed representative of world Jewry, the State of Israel. A steady dose of dispossession, massacres, home demolitions, invasions and cross-border incursions, mixed in with thirty-six years of military occupation, have shaped common perceptions in the region of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and its expansion into a Jewish/Muslim clash. (A sad extension of this has been the increasing currency in some quarters of the vilest anti-Jewish stereotypes borrowed from across the Mediterranean.)
Mahathir’s Blunder
Although Jews did not “invent” the concepts Mahathir mentions, they have played important roles in conceiving some of them and making others integral parts of liberal European and Western culture. But Muslims should not be as generous as Mahathir was (although generosity may not have been his intention)–respect for “human rights” is not solely a European or Jewish concept, for example. All people (whether European, Arab, Asian, African, etc.) naturally give a high value for human rights, although the cultural expressions and nuances may vary. The fact that so many live under despots and tyrants is not a reflection of people’s consent, but more of the realities of brutal power and exploitation.
As far as his claim that Jews have used these concepts to gain control of powerful countries, this makes the process sound much more devious than it really is.
Why should it be surprising when a highly educated minority group takes advantage of something like “human rights?” They’d better. That’s like being surprised over US Muslims taking advantage of US civil liberties or the Bill of Rights to defend themselves these days against state-sponsored discrimination and harassment. For any minority, especially given the dark Jewish experience in Europe, this is just a matter of survival.
Would it come as a surprise to anyone if, twenty years from now, we found a sudden increase in the number of Muslim American civil rights lawyers?
Another issue that has been used to spread contempt and hostility toward our Jewish brothers and sisters is the prominent role played by Jews in shaping public policy. Although Jews do occupy powerful positions of influence in the Bush administration, what matters about people like Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle is not the fact that they are Jewish, but that they are right-wing, staunchly pro-Israel ideologues. The same is true of the many non-Jewish architects of the President’s foreign policy. In fact, they are no different from some of the Muslims, like Amir Taheri, Mansoor Ijaz and Ahmed Chalabi, who are supporting the same project with equal vigor.
The only conspiracy in play here has nothing to do with Jews or Muslims–it is the age-old one about power, exploitation and greed.
But with an administration that has been so dismissive toward Arabs and Muslims, condemning Mahathir’s speech while explaining away anti-Muslim remarks by General William Boykin made the same week rings especially hollow.
Mahathir was wrong–not for stating the obvious, that Jews exert a powerful influence on the world stage–but for repeating the old European suggestion of a Jewish conspiracy.
“We also know that not all non-Muslims are against us. Some are well disposed towards us,” He said. “Some even see our enemies as their enemies. Even among the Jews there are many who do not approve of what the Israelis are doing.” He must have known that inserting his claims about Jews in his wide-ranging speech would hinder his message reaching the many in the West that are “well disposed.”
The Speech Not Reported in the West
But Mahathir’s speech, taken as a whole, included a plea for tolerance and unity among Muslims, for stepping away from dogmatism and violence-including suicide bombings–and toward a common vision that is worthy of the Prophet Muhammad’s message.
“Over the last 1,400 years the interpreters of Islam, the learned ones, the ulamas have interpreted and reinterpreted the single Islamic religion brought by Prophet Muhammad S.A.W, so differently that now we have a thousand religions which are often so much at odds with one another that we often fight and kill each other,” Mahathir proclaimed in the speech.
“Islam is not wrong but the interpretations by our scholars, who are not prophets even though they may be very learned, can be wrong. We have a need to go back to the fundamental teachings of Islam to find out whether we are indeed believing in and practising the Islam that the Prophet preached. It cannot be that we are all practising the correct and true Islam when our beliefs are so different from one another.”
It is this kind of sentiment that has resonated so much with many Muslims around the globe.
But when his speech is met with such hostility by people who are all too ready to target Muslims on the basis of their faith and their cultures, it is no wonder that Muslims and Arabs would rush to his defense. In a web poll on Al Jazeera’s Arabic website over the weekend, 95% of over 56,000 voters supported Mahathir’s remarks.
Knee-jerk reactions and condemnations by the “international community” (defined primarily as Europe and the US, since even staunch US allies like Afghan President Hamid Karzai defended Mahathir) serve only to illustrate a perceived double standard.
So now, we have fallen once again for the “you are with us or with the terrorists” nonsense. There is no middle ground permitted. And of course Muslims are on the wrong side. How can they give a standing ovation to Mahathir? How can they be such rabid anti-Semites? Perhaps it is a sign of the inferiority of their (Semitic?) culture (to recall Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi comments two years ago) or that our god is bigger (according to General William Boykin).
A more reasoned response to Mahathir, one that categorically condemns and corrects some of his speech’s claims about Jews while affirming the importance of the overall message, is what’s needed.
Ahmed Nassef is editor-in-chief of MuslimWakeUp.com, a progressive Muslim online magazine. He can be reached at anassef@muslimwakeup.com
I am jewish and i want to put the record straight. Its ridiculous to think that jews run the entire world. at best we only run the very small part not run by time warner and disney.
As a Catholic (of the non-practicing variety), I don’t think it’s fair for me to pontificate too much on this subject, but let me add an additional element to this discussion. The US government rebukes the above comments from Malaysian Prime Minister Matathir. At the same time, a four-star general, one of the top officers in the US military espouses his own religious beliefs, sounding for all the world as though he’s trying to kick-start the Crusades. Those comments were bade enough, but he made them while in uniform, thus implying that he’s actually speaking on behalf of his government.
So let’s say I’m a free-thinking Iraqi, who’s maybe trying to give America the benefit of the doubt. Thanks to the burgeoning sales of satellite dishes, I can now watch broadcasts from CNN or MSNBC or Fox News. And what do I see? A tape of the aforementioned general talking about my God was more powerful than their god and nonsense like that. So as a Muslim, how do I feel about that?
Incidentally, as recently as Bush’s press conference earlier this morning, the president managed to side-step discussion about that fire and brimstone-spouting general once again. I think he half-heartedly mentioned some sort of investigation, meaning sweet nothing will ever happen. And we don’t understand why so many Muslims hate us. As far as Prime Minister Matathir is concerned, people who live in glass White Houses shouldn’t throw stones, however hateful those remarks actually are.
Y’know, I always thought an interesting plot for a thriller would be a journalist who discovers *a* Jewish conspiracy. The dilemma is that he doesn’t even know if he should try to expose it. For one thing, he knows that if he tries to get the story out, he will be labeled a paranoid anti-Semite. More importantly, his greatest fear is that the *real* anti-Semites will use this one conspiracy which happens to be run by Jews as *the* Conspiracy that has been used as an excuse for hatred for decades.
Part of this was inspired by the response to Columbine. Obviously the vast, *vast* majority of kids who were or felt like misfits in high school will never do anything like what happened there but now those poor kids who never fit in in the first place were (and probably still are) being viewed as potential mass murderers. It was like hating them just because they were different was now justified.
I just think it would be an interesting moral quandry to explore.
“Anyone else remember the first President Bush saying emphatically that “atheists are not Americans. This is a Christian nation”? “
This among other comments from Bush, coupled with his disregard for the first ammendment are the main reasons why this country terrifies me at the moment. It’s bad enough that we have someone so closed-minded as our president, but no one stops them, atleast not around here (southern US).
“It is pretty rough, having to see that religion gets dragged into all sorts of situations that it has no business being in, but for almost everyone in the western world (UK, USA, Canada, most of Europe) its very obvious that a person/culture’s religous leanings don’t define them as a person, or their culture as one of a specific type.”
Is that really true? Does almost everyone here think that way? I can honestly say that where I live unless your baptist, you don’t mention your religion. They’ll tolerate Catholics, but other than that it’s a joke. Lord save ya if you’re a Wiccan, Atheist, or a democrat.
I hate sterotyping, hate it, hate it. And besides, aren’t there more Muslims than Jews?? So, how can they rule the world if they are out numbered??? As far as political views go, I side with our allies on the war on terror. As long as there are terrorist groups in the West Bank the PALS will never have a state of their own and that’s a shame, really.
The Daily Show is something to take with a grain of salt.
Sometimes their humor is over the top. 🙂
I think it’s sad that not only can a person of such supposed “importance” (this guy just wants his 15 minutes now that he’s leaving office), he’s quite ignorant of world history.
But then, Hitler tried to claim that the USSR (thus, all Communism to follow) was a “Great Jewish Conspiracy” as well.
Too bad China isn’t knocking on this guy’s door asking what Jews have to do with their gov’t. 🙂
I know this will get me in trouble,but here are some of my thoughts on the issue:
1.Israel is only 1/10 of 1% of the land mass of the middle east and the only democracy. Yet, in the opinion of muslims who control the other 99% that is too much. I’m sick of hearing pundits talking about how Israel needs to give up more land. If all Israel had was one square foot that would be too much for some people.
2. General Boykin has a right to free speech. So what he was in uniform? People go to church, get married, and say their religious vows in uniform all the time. The uniform is part of who he is. He has earned it. If you don’t like what he says, fine, say so, but don’t dare say he doesn’t have a RIGHT to say what’s on his mind, no matter what kind of clothes he is wearing. Whether you like what he says or not.
3. For those you who love to point out all those killed in the name of religion, the sword cuts both ways. It was atheists like Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and Hitler who are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions. Far more than any religious crusade ever did.
“Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.”(Alber t Einstein, 1879–1955)
General Boykin has a right to free speech. So what he was in uniform? …If you don’t like what he says, fine, say so, but don’t dare say he doesn’t have a RIGHT to say what’s on his mind, no matter what kind of clothes he is wearing. Whether you like what he says or not.
Whoa… hold up a second here. Yeah, sure, Boykin has a right to free speech. I think the problem most people have with Boykin’s comments are that he made them in uniform, and thus with the implication that his statement represented that of the military as opposed to just one member of the military. Yes, I certainly realize that Boykin doesn’t speak for every person in the armed forces, but as a highly-placed officer within the current war efforts of this country in the Middle East, he should realize that whenever he’s wearing that uniform, he ought to watch what he says.
It’s like when John Rocker made an ášš of himself by talking racist smack in Sports Illustrated… suddenly, one loudmouth appears to be speaking for the whole team, and the whole team is impugned by and smeared with that one loudmouth’s statements by association. Yes, while the rest of the team were not a bunch of racists, nobody wants to be associated with someone else saying something stupid just because they happen to wear the same uniform.
As an officer, and as part of the active war efforts in the Middle East, he has a duty to uphold the best of what America is. “My God is bigger than your God” is NOT the best of what America is.
The OTHER John Byrne
Thank you J.B. for responding to Rocky’s previous post, about General Boykin’s comments while in uniform. Of course he has the right to say whatever he wants to say, but if he’s wearing a uniform that represents part of a greater religious, political or governmental organization, his comments can therefore be construed as representative of that group. If a Catholic priest publicly advocates gay rights while wearing cassock and collar, he’s going to bring down the wrath of an awful lot of angry church-goers. If a uniformed cop does an interview supporting lethal respnse to quell peaceful demonstration, he’s probably going to get called on the carpet within 24 hours by his superiors. I know, both of those examples are a bit over-dramatic, but the point I’m trying to make is that wearing the uniform carries with it a certain amount of responsibility. Yes, the general has the right to speak his piece, but as John D. Rockefeller once said, ‘Every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty.’
“For those you who love to point out all those killed in the name of religion, the sword cuts both ways. It was atheists like Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and Hitler who are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions. Far more than any religious crusade ever did.”
Whoa…dude, i think the point was that we all should have the right to our beliefs man… it shouldn’t matter if we’re atheist, baptist, agnostic or catholic… can’t we all just get along?
Ra!
Was thinking about this earlier today when I was watching RKO 281, the movie about the making of Citizen Kane and the battle that followed due to Hearst trying to get the picture destroyed. There were a couple of scenes that really struck me as… as something.
The first was just after Hearst gets wind of the movie. he goes to see some movie company owner and is telling him that he wants the picture stopped, then says something like, “You and the other studio heads should come play golf with me at the club. You know, Warner and (whoever else). Oh wait, I forgot. You can’t come to that club because you’re all Jews. I’d almost forgotten. Would be a shame for everyone else to suddenly remember that fact…”
And then twice more in the picture the fact that all (or most) of these men are Jewish is held over their heads, exposure of this knowledge threatened, etc, to force them to make the movie go away. And I kept sitting there thinking, What the heck is the deal here? Why would it matter that they were Jewish?
But this was pre-WWII and things have changed since then. Apparently not enough. I sometimes forget, being part black and part middle eastern, that discrimination and racism aren’t (and haven’t been) limited to people of my race(s).
Sadly, Dr. M was just playing to the crowd. He might as well have said, “Anyone here… love Allah??”, sending the crowd into a frenzied applause.
Jews, Muslims and Christians have so much in common, moreso than they have differences, I believe. It’s sad that religion is more a divider than uniter. Catholic vs. Protestant, Sunni vs. Shi’ite, on and on into infinity.
I’m atheist myself, but I understand religion and the need to believe in a higher power. What I don’t understand such horrible behaviour among supposedly pious people.
I’m an American born Jew now living in Israel since the mid-1980’s, and being quite a comics reader myself, I’ve often wondered, most interestingly of all, why any anti-semites or racists would ever want to buy and read anything that could’ve been Jewish-developed in any way. In other words, if we were to refer to comics, why would they want to bother about reading Superman, for starters, created by Siegel and Shuster, two Jewish mid-westerners from Ohio? Or, why would they want to read Spider-Man, where Stan the Man Lee is the Jewish author from New York?
In fact, considering that say, the X-Men used a couple of templates from real life such as the Etzel movement and Jabotinsky with the team and its mentor serving as the metaphors for such inspirations, and Jack Kirby, whom I read was quite a proud Jew who no doubt studied Israel’s interiors well enough, why would anyone who’s an anti-Israelist want to read or support such a book in any way? It just doesn’t make any sense.
Given that the leading themes of many DC and Marvel comics are about helping people in dire need, and that of course being those who’re genuinely persecuted, why any racist would ever want to bother about such books is only so hard for me to understand. Let me point out that just about every comic book that was worked on during the Golden, Silver, and Bronze Ages had some kind of Jewish involvement on it, and since the Bronze Age, even more black and Latino involvement, so it’s even harder than ever for me to understand why people who’re racist against minorities ever wanted to bother about such books. Even today, there’s more than enough presence by all of these minority groups, including Asians, of course, yet it would seem as if racists who’ve bought and read comics still continue to do so, regardless of whether the persecuted minorities they’re opposed to are working on the books or not.
To put it this way, it almost makes me wonder if it’s possible to laugh out loud at any of these racists who do this, who actually bother to stick around and read comic books regardless of who the authors are or were. But at the same time, sadly, it’s a pity to know that these evil entities till this day, are unmoved by the messages of positivity promoted by such comics, and are instead, influenced by the villains of the stories.
I’m glad most people have Mahathir Muhammud’s number. He’s a very powerful person, influencing not only his own country but the rest of the world, among other ways through the World Muslim Conference, or whatever it’s called. And when a powerful man is a kook –or talks like one– that’s dangerous for everybody. Now, I believe that he really believes in a lot of what he said. Now that brings me to an earlier post by one Jason who quotes an Arab spokesman named Ahmed Nassef. Jason needs to study history–history in general and Arab and Jewish history in particular. Unlike the self-serving fairy tale served up by the “progressive Muslim” Nassef, in real history Arabs made war on others and each other, raided non-Muslims [Kaffirs, kufar] to take slaves, oppressed Jews and Christian subject peoples [like the Copts of Egypt] in their own countries, etc. It is very offensive to see how even a “progressive” Arab denies anything today viewed as unfavorable in the Arab and Muslim past. Of course, Arabs were wronging the Jews way back in Roman times, when Arab auxiliary troops helped the Romans conquer rebellious Judea and destroy the Temple of Jerusalem (see the Roman historian Tacitus, The Histories, V:1). Well, OK, that was long ago. Then, according to some historical interpretations [Patricia Crone in Hagarism] Jews helped the Arab conquests of the 7th century, since they hated the Byzantine empire that oppressed Jews. But after Arab-Muslim rule was consolidated, the Arabs turned against their former allies. Jews [an religio-ethnic group] were subject to severe oppression, exploitation and discrimination as dhimmis in Muslim society, internal aliens, third class citizens, along with Christian peoples such as Copts, Maronites, Assyrians, etc.]. More recently, in the 1930s and 1940s, most Arab nationalists, including Nasser and Arafat’s cousin, Amin el-Husseini, the British-appointed mufti of Jerusalem, were vocally pro-Nazi. Husseini spent most of the war in the Nazi domain, recruiting Arab and Muslim support for Hitler and encouraging the Holocaust, the massacre of Serbs, etc. During WWI, the Muslim Ottoman empire, governed by Turks, Arabs, and other Muslims, massacred the Armenians, with the German and Austrian allies of the Ottoman state giving assistance. So I would appreciate it if Jason would ask dear Ahmed Nassef just how a “progressive Muslim” confronts the real history, not the invented history of the Arabs. Of course, I could go on with Arab wrongs against Jews and others but that would be tedious. So let’s all go out and study real history, not the fake fables that are favored by the CIA and State Dept and our lovely Saudi friends and the fake humanitarian organizations and much of the media, etc.
Ahem. I think that a lot of people on this weblog might be very interested in an important quote from an article written by the legendary Martin Luther King in Saturday Review back in the 1960’s:
“And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is antisemitism. The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just ‘anti-Zionist’!”
— Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend,” Saturday Review_XLVII (Aug. 1967), p. 76.
You see that? Mr. Frawley, if you’re reading this, your argument is well-meaning, but as someone who knows and has studied these things, I’d appreciate it if you were to bear in mind that anti-Zionist, anti-Israeli, and anti-semitic sentiments are exactly the same thing, as even the legendary Martin Luther King pointed out in his time. Bless that wonderful man indeed. 🙂
I’d imagine the Jews hearing about the Jewish Conspiracy from the Malaysian PM probably felt like the Muslims who heard U.S. General Boykin saying — in full dress uniform, in a church — saying the war on terrorism was Judeo-Christian values vs. Satan.
He said that terrorists were evil. Oh the humanity. Mahathir Muhammud said that Jews were “the enemy” and Muslims had to band together to defeat them. See the difference?
granted, there IS an “internal investigation” of his speeches underway, but what exactly needs investigating?
How about what was actually said? I’ve just seen wild hyperbole.
So let’s say I’m a free-thinking Iraqi, who’s maybe trying to give America the benefit of the doubt. Thanks to the burgeoning sales of satellite dishes, I can now watch broadcasts from CNN or MSNBC or Fox News. And what do I see? A tape of the aforementioned general talking about my God was more powerful than their god and nonsense like that. So as a Muslim, how do I feel about that?
Ann Coulter usually goes too far, but she went far enough (to quote Mickey Kaus) when called this line of reasoning idiotic. You actually think moderate muslims suddenly become radicalized after reading a newspaper article?
Yes, the general has the right to speak his piece, but as John D. Rockefeller once said, ‘Every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty.’
Wonder how come nobody mentioned this about the Dixie Chicks?
Yes, the general has the right to speak his piece, but as John D. Rockefeller once said, ‘Every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty.’
Wonder how come nobody mentioned this about the Dixie Chicks?
Probably because the Dixie Chicks were talking about a man, and not a God.
The OTHER John Byrne
To be a little less glib about it, there’s a BIG difference in stating your opinions about a mere mortal’s on-the-job performance, and saying “my God’s bigger than your God.”
And correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t most of the Dixie Chicks’ detractors the ones making the very same claim that ‘people in their position shouldn’t be making comments like that?’ Again, there’s a big difference between an entertainer stating an opinion and a civic leader stating an opinion. That’s two totally different standards, and attempting to compare one to the other is mixing apples and oranges.
Personalities can say whatever they want; that’s why they’re personalities. Leaders must be held– and hold themselves to– a much higher standard.
tOJB
I had no problem with the Dixie chicks stating their views. I think, however, that they were upset over the reaction some of their fans had over their comments. For some reason celebrities who came out against the war in Iraq felt that they should not be critiqued for their loud opinions. Most celebrities are used to being ooed and awed by the press and looked at glowingly. The hardest they are ever pressed usually concerns what they are going to wear to the oscars. Most celebrities think they are showing courage when they and all their friends attack the president. I don’t care what they do, but if you are going to make public statements just be ready to defend you opinion, and don’t whine about it. I think real courage was when a man like Charlton Heston was the only hollywood entertainer who had the guts to march with Dr. Martin Luther King. At that time many in hollywood worried more about their image and couldn’t handle public scrutiny. I guess they still can’t.
As far as this thing that leaders must be held to a higher standars. Well, who’s standard? If you think what he said was crap what are you worried about? that God might answer his prayer? If he does his job, what does it matter what he does in his private life? Wasn’t he in church saying these things? I think its okay for him to wear his uniform to church, just as much if he were a muslim, or jewish, or universalist, in their respective places of worship. He can pray the way he wants to pray. I don’t care. If he does a good job, that is all that matters. I think it is very scary when people want others to be fired for practicing/believing their religion.
As far as this thing that leaders must be held to a higher standars. Well, who’s standard?
Well, how about the people who came before them? You didn’t see people like Reagan or Schwartzkoph making such incendiary public statements.
If you think what he said was crap what are you worried about? that God might answer his prayer?
I worry that a man with such obviously anti-Arab beliefs is in a position to influence policy in the Middle East. In the best case, America is supposed to be promoting peace in the Middle East. In the worst, we’re supposed to be keeping the peace by force of arms. At least, that’s what we’re attempting to do in Iraq right now. Is it wise for our leaders to talk about how our God is bigger than theirs, especially when religious beliefs make up a huge part of the Iraqi national identity?
Interesting tidbit: Many of the senior analysts at the CIA were caught totally unawares by the fall of the Soviet Union, because their fundamentalist Christian beliefs kept them from thinking it could ever happen. Obviously, Russia was the evil empire, and it was meant to fight the battle of Armageddon against the US.
Fast forward to now… here’s a senior military man who’s publicly stated that the Christian God is better than the Muslim God. See why I worry?
I think its okay for him to wear his uniform to church, just as much if he were a muslim, or jewish, or universalist, in their respective places of worship.
There’s nothing wrong with wearing your colors into a place of worship. However, when you give a speech about what your government is doing in the Middle East, you cross the line from being a mere member of the congregation to become someone who’s preaching to it. Seperation of church and state aside, there is the potential to be viewed as speaking for the State, and not as a member of the Church. I think that’s where a lot of the controversy comes from, because it’s very hard to deliniate whether Boykin was speaking as a member of his congregation, or a member of the military. And that’s precisely why he shouldn’t have done it… to NOT generate said controversy.
If he does a good job, that is all that matters.
So it doesn’t matter what lengths he goes to to get the job done?
I think it is very scary when people want others to be fired for practicing/believing their religion.
I think it’s very scary when one person claims their religion is superior to another.
tOJB