• Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in

    From a425couple@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 13 19:58:17 2023
    XPost: soc.history.war.misc

    Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
    the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
    From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
    around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
    of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
    These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
    Then things headed differently.

    As Goodreads says,"Hailed in The New York Times Book Review as
    "the doyen of Middle Eastern studies," Bernard Lewis is one of
    the West's foremost authorities on Islamic history and culture.
    In this striking volume, he offers an incisive look at the historical relationship between the Middle East and Europe."

    About partitions
    This is from Bernard Lewis's book "What went wrong, the clash between
    Islam and modernity in the Middle East" on page 36,
    "the Muslim jurists discuss discuss at some lengths whether it is
    permissible for a Muslim to live in another non-Muslim country… The
    general consensus of the classical jurists is no. It is not possible
    for a Muslim to live a good Muslim life in an infidel land. You must
    leave home and go to some Muslim country. An even harder case was posed
    by the reconquest of Spain. If a Muslim land is conquered by the
    Christians may they stay under a Christian rule? The answer was again
    no, they may not stay the Morrocan all watch Rassie considering the case
    of Spain posed with turned out to be a purely hypothetical question if
    the Christian government is tolerant and allows them to practice their
    religion may they then stay his answer was there in that case it is all
    a more important for them to leave because under a tolerant government
    the danger of apostasy is greater.


    Citations for easy reference.

    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ... https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
    East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com.
    Publisher: ‎Harper Perennial (January 1, 2003)
    Returns: Eligible for Return, Refund or Replac...
    Rating: 4.2 · ‎199 reviews · ‎$18.89 · ‎Free delivery

    What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ... https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
    What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
    East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
    Rating: 4.4 · ‎226 reviews · ‎$13.72 · ‎In stock

    Lewis, Bernard.What Went Wrong : The Clash between Islam ... https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu › cgi › viewcontent
    by C Lamb · 2008 — Lamb, Connie (2008) "Lewis, Bernard. What Went Wrong:
    The Clash between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East. Nasr, Seyyed. Hossein.

    What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam & Modernity in ... https://www.goodreads.com › book › show
    After reading `What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity
    in the Middle East', I was impressed with Mr. Lewis' level of detail and clarity of ...
    Rating: 3.5 · ‎3,512 votes


    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ... https://books.google.com › History › Middle East › General
    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
    East. Front Cover. Bernard Lewis. HarperCollins, 2002 - History - 208
    pages.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to All on Tue Feb 14 21:17:40 2023
    On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 7:58:19 PM UTC-8, a425couple wrote:
    Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
    the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
    From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
    around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
    of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
    These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
    Then things headed differently.

    As Goodreads says,"Hailed in The New York Times Book Review as
    "the doyen of Middle Eastern studies," Bernard Lewis is one of
    the West's foremost authorities on Islamic history and culture.
    In this striking volume, he offers an incisive look at the historical relationship between the Middle East and Europe."

    About partitions
    This is from Bernard Lewis's book "What went wrong, the clash between
    Islam and modernity in the Middle East" on page 36,
    "the Muslim jurists discuss discuss at some lengths whether it is permissible for a Muslim to live in another non-Muslim country… The general consensus of the classical jurists is no. It is not possible
    for a Muslim to live a good Muslim life in an infidel land. You must
    leave home and go to some Muslim country. An even harder case was posed
    by the reconquest of Spain. If a Muslim land is conquered by the
    Christians may they stay under a Christian rule? The answer was again
    no, they may not stay the Morrocan all watch Rassie considering the case
    of Spain posed with turned out to be a purely hypothetical question if
    the Christian government is tolerant and allows them to practice their religion may they then stay his answer was there in that case it is all
    a more important for them to leave because under a tolerant government
    the danger of apostasy is greater.


    Citations for easy reference.

    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ... https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
    East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com.
    Publisher: ‎Harper Perennial (January 1, 2003)
    Returns: Eligible for Return, Refund or Replac...
    Rating: 4.2 · ‎199 reviews · ‎$18.89 · ‎Free delivery

    What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ... https://www.amazon.com › What-Went-Wrong-Betwee...
    What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
    East [Lewis, Bernard] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Rating: 4.4 · ‎226 reviews · ‎$13.72 · ‎In stock

    Lewis, Bernard.What Went Wrong : The Clash between Islam ... https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu › cgi › viewcontent
    by C Lamb · 2008 — Lamb, Connie (2008) "Lewis, Bernard. What Went Wrong: The Clash between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East. Nasr, Seyyed. Hossein.

    What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam & Modernity in ... https://www.goodreads.com › book › show
    After reading `What Went Wrong? : The Clash Between Islam and Modernity
    in the Middle East', I was impressed with Mr. Lewis' level of detail and clarity of ...
    Rating: 3.5 · ‎3,512 votes


    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity ... https://books.google.com › History › Middle East › General
    What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle
    East. Front Cover. Bernard Lewis. HarperCollins, 2002 - History - 208
    pages.

    https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/e75AHvR1vKQ

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Wed Feb 15 10:41:27 2023
    On 2/14/23 21:17, gggg gggg wrote:
    On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 7:58:19 PM UTC-8, a425couple wrote:
    Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
    the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
    From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
    around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
    of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
    These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
    Then things headed differently.

    As Goodreads says,"Hailed in The New York Times Book Review as
    "the doyen of Middle Eastern studies," Bernard Lewis is one of
    the West's foremost authorities on Islamic history and culture.
    In this striking volume, he offers an incisive look at the historical
    relationship between the Middle East and Europe."

    --------

    Citations for easy reference.

    -----

    https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/e75AHvR1vKQ


    Either from that, or separate to that,
    from
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Said

    "In the essay "Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims" (1979), Said
    argued in favour of the political legitimacy and philosophic
    authenticity of the Zionist claims and right to a Jewish homeland; and
    for the inherent right of national self-determination of the Palestinian people.[70] Said's books about Israel and Palestine include The Question
    of Palestine (1979), The Politics of Dispossession (1994), and The End
    of the Peace Process (2000).

    Palestinian National Council
    From 1977 until 1991, Said was an independent member of the Palestinian National Council (PNC).[71] In 1988, he was a proponent of the two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and voted for the
    establishment of the State of Palestine at a meeting of the PNC in
    Algiers. In 1993, Said quit his membership in the Palestinian National
    Council, to protest the internal politics that led to the signing of the
    Oslo Accords (Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements, 1993), which he thought had unacceptable terms, and
    because the terms had been rejected by the Madrid Conference of 1991.

    Said disliked the Oslo Accords for not producing an independent State of Palestine, and because they were politically inferior to a plan that
    Yasir Arafat had rejected—a plan Said had presented to Arafat on behalf
    of the U.S. government in the late 1970s.[72] Especially troublesome to
    Said was his belief that Yasir Arafat had betrayed the right of return
    of the Palestinian refugees to their houses and properties in the Green
    Line territories of pre-1967 Israel, and that Arafat ignored the growing political threat of the Israeli settlements in the occupied territories
    that had been established since the conquest of Palestine in 1967.

    A map of the West Bank and Gaza strip highlighting administrative
    domains of the Palestinian authority in red.
    The administrative domains of the Palestinian Authority (red)
    In 1995, in response to Said's political criticisms, the Palestinian
    Authority (PA) banned the sale of Said's books; however, the PA lifted
    the book ban when Said publicly praised Yasir Arafat for rejecting Prime Minister Ehud Barak's offers at the Middle East Peace Summit at Camp
    David (2000) in the U.S.[73][74]

    In the mid-1990s, Said wrote the foreword to the history book Jewish
    History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years (1994), by
    Israel Shahak, about Jewish fundamentalism, which presents the cultural proposition that Israel's mistreatment of the Palestinians is rooted in
    a Judaic requirement (of permission) for Jews to commit crimes,
    including murder, against Gentiles (non-Jews). In his foreword, Said
    said that Jewish History, Jewish Religion is "nothing less than a
    concise history of classic and modern Judaism, insofar as these are
    relevant to the understanding of modern Israel"; and praised the
    historian Shahak for describing contemporary Israel as a nation subsumed
    in a "Judeo–Nazi" cultural ambiance that allowed the dehumanization of
    the Palestinian Other:[75]

    In all my works, I remained fundamentally critical of a gloating and
    uncritical nationalism. . . . My view of Palestine . . . remains the
    same today: I expressed all sorts of reservations about the insouciant nativism, and militant militarism of the nationalist consensus; I
    suggested, instead, a critical look at the Arab environment, Palestinian history, and the Israeli realities, with the explicit conclusion that
    only a negotiated settlement, between the two communities of suffering,
    Arab and Jewish, would provide respite from the unending war.[76]

    In 2003, Haidar Abdel-Shafi, Ibrahim Dakak, Mustafa Barghouti, and Said established Al-Mubadara (The Palestinian National Initiative), headed by
    Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, a third-party reformist, democratic party meant
    to be an alternative to the usual two-party politics of Palestine

    (Boy!!! They sure did & do need an alternative!!!)

    On 24 September 2003, after enduring a 12-year sickness with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, Said died, at 67 years of age, in New York City.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Thu Feb 16 14:31:54 2023
    On 2/14/23 21:17, gggg gggg wrote:

    On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 7:58:19 PM UTC-8, a425couple wrote:
    Thoughts on "What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in
    the Middle East" by Bernard Lewis.
    From when Islam was founded, through the end of Medieval Times
    around 1500, and in many important areas, "For many centuries the world
    of Islam was in the forefront of human civilization and achievement".
    These areas included military, economic, and scientific.
    Then things headed differently.

    ------------

    https://groups.google.com/u/1/g/soc.history.early-modern/c/e75AHvR1vKQ

    Historian Bernard Lewis received the American Enterprise Institute’s
    Irving Kristol Award for 2007. He delivered the Irving Kristol Lecture
    at the Institute’s annual dinner on the topic of “Europe and Islam.” Topics included the lessons of history, the end of European influence in
    the Middle East, al Qaeda, the 14-century struggle between Christianity
    and Islam, the sequence of events leading up to the September 11
    attacks, and Muslim immigrants living in Europe.

    Uncorrected transcript (a425 has added para breaks)

    EVENING. ALL I CAN SAY IS THANK YOU. THANK YOU AGAIN. [APPLAUSE] TIME IS
    SHORT AND I'M SURE YOU ARE HUNGRY SO I WILL GET DOWN TO BUSINESS.

    MY TOPIC THIS EVENING IS EUROPE AND ISLAM. LET ME BEGIN WITH THE WORD OF PERSONAL EXPLANATION. YOU ARE ACCUSTOMED TO THE MOST PART TO HEARING
    FROM PEOPLE INVOLVED IN MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS. WITH DIRECT PRACTICAL INVOLVEMENT. I AM AFRAID I CANNOT OFFER YOU THAT. MIGHT DIRECT INVOLVEMENT WITH MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE MATTERS AND DID QUITE A LONG
    TIME AGO TO BE PRECISE, ON THE 31ST OF AUGUST, 1945. WHEN I LEFT HIS
    MAJESTY'S SERVICE AND RETURNED TO THE UNIVERSITY TO JOIN WITH COLLEAGUES
    AND TRYING TO COPE WITH A SIX YEAR BACKLOG OF BATTLE SCARRED
    UNDERGRADUATES. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THIS EVENING IS SOMETHING OF
    THE LESSONS OF HISTORY. AND HERE AGAIN I MUST BEGIN WITH A SECOND THIS
    OF ALL. IT IS SOMETIMES THAT THE BUSINESS OF HISTORY, THE BUSINESS OF
    THE STORY IS THE PAST, NOT THE FUTURE. I REMEMBER ONCE AT A MEETING IN
    ROME AT AN INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF HISTORIANS, A GROUP OF US WERE
    SITTING IN DISCUSSING ASSURED HISTORIANS ATTEMPT TO PREDICT THE FUTURE.
    WE BETTER THIS BACK-AND-FORTH. THIS WAS IN THE DAYS WHEN THE SOVIET
    UNION WAS STILL ALIVE AND WELL. ONE OF OUR SOVIET COLLEAGUES FINALLY
    INTERVENED AND SAID, IN THE SOVIET UNION THE MOST DIFFICULT TASK OF THE HISTORIAN IS TO PREDICT THE PAST. [LAUGHTER]

    I DON'T INTEND TO OFFER ANY PREDICTIONS OF THE FUTURE IN EUROPE OR THE
    MIDDLE EAST OR WHAT I THINK CAN LEGITIMATELY BE EXPECTED OF THE STORY IN
    IS TO IDENTIFY TRENDS, IDENTIFY PAST HISTORIES, TO LOOK AT THE TRENDS IN
    THE PAST, WHAT IS CONTINUING IN THE PRESENT AND THEREFORE TO SEE THE POSSIBILITIES AND THE CHOICES, WHICH WILL FACE US IN THE FUTURE. ONE
    OTHER INTRODUCTORY WORD. MY FAVORITE THEME OF THE HISTORIAN, AS YOU SURE ENOUGH, IS. THE STATION, DIVIDING HISTORY INTO PERIODS. DAILINESS
    STATION IS MOSTLY CONVENIENCE OF THE HISTORIAN THE PURPOSES OF WRITING
    OR TEACHER. NEVERTHELESS, THERE ARE TIMES IN THE LONG HISTORY OF THE
    HUMAN ADVENTURE, WHEN WE HAVE A REAL TURNING POINT, A MAJOR CHANGE, THE
    END OF AN ERA, THE BEGINNING OF A NEW ERA AND I AM BECOMING MORE AND
    MORE CONVINCED THAT WE ARE IN SUCH AN AGE AT THE PRESENT TIME. A CHANGE
    IN HISTORY COMPARABLE WITH SUCH EVENTS AS THE FALL OF ROME, THE
    DISCOVERY OF AMERICA AND THE LIKE. I WILL TRY TO EXPLAIN THAT.

    CONVENTIONALLY, THE MODERN HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE EAST BEGINS AT THE END
    OF THE 18TH-CENTURY, WHEN A SMALL FRENCH EXPEDITIONARY FORCE COMMANDED
    BY YONGE GENERAL NAPOLEON BONAPARTE, WAS ABLE TO CONQUER EGYPT AND
    CORRELATE WITH IMPUNITY, A TERRIBLE SHOCK, ONE OF THE HEARTLANDS OF
    ISLAM WHICH COULD BE INVADED, OCCUPIED AND RULED WITH VIRTUALLY NO
    RESISTANCE, NO EFFECTIVE RESISTANCE.

    THE SECOND SHOCK CAME AT KIWI YEARS LATER WITH THE DEPARTURE OF THE
    FRENCH. WHICH IS BROUGHT ABOUT NOT BY THE EGYPTIANS, NOR BY THE ASSESSOR
    RAINS THE TURKS, BUT BY A SMALL SQUADRON OF THE 180, COMMANDED BY YONGE
    EBERLE RACHAEL NELSON, WHO DROVE THE FRENCH OUT AND BACK TO FRANCE. THIS
    IS OF SYMBOLIC IMPORTANCE AT THE END OF THE 18TH AND BEGINNING OF THE
    19TH CENTURY, FROM THEN ON WORDS THE HEARTLANDS OF ISLAM WERE NO LONGER CONTROLLED BY THE RULERS OF THIS LONG. THEY WERE UNDER DIRECT OR
    INDIRECT INFLUENCE OR CONTROL FROM OUTSIDE AND THE DOMINATING FORCES IN
    THE ISLAMIC WORLD WORK OUTSIDE FORCES, WHAT SHAPE THEIR LIVES IS WESTERN INFLUENCE, WHICH EVEN CHOICES WAS WESTERN RIVALRIES.

    THE POLITICAL GAIN THEY COULD PLAY, THE ONLY ONE OPEN TO THEM, WAS TO
    TRY AND PROFIT FROM THE RIVALRIES BETWEEN THE OUTSIDE POWERS, TO TRY TO
    USE THEM AGAINST ONE ANOTHER. WE SAID THAT AGAIN AGAIN IN THE COURSE OF
    THE 19TH, 20TH AND EVEN TO THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST CENTURY. WE SEE
    HOW, FOR EXAMPLE IN THE WAR BETWEEN COME IN THE FIRST WORLD WAR, THE
    SECOND WORLD WAR AND THE COLD WAR, MIDDLE EASTERN GOVERNMENTS LEADERS
    TRYING TO PLAY THIS GAME WITH VARYING DEGREES OF SUCCESS. THAT GAME IS
    NOW OVER. THE ERA THAT WAS INAUGURATED BY NAPOLEON WAS TERMINATED BY THE
    REAGAN AND GORBACHEV.

    AND THE MIDDLE EAST IS NO LONGER CONTROLLED OR ROLLED OR DOMINATED BY
    THE OUTSIDE POWERS. THEY'RE HAVING SOME DIFFICULTY ADJUSTING TO THIS NEW SITUATION. THEY'RE TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS, THEIR
    OWN SITUATIONS AND SO ONE, BUT THEY'RE BEGINNING AND THIS HAS BEEN
    EXPRESSED WITH HIS USUAL CLARITY AND ELOQUENCE BY OSAMA BIN LADEN. WE
    SEE WITH THE ENDING OF THE ERA OF OUTSIDE DOMINATION THE REEMERGENCE OF
    CERTAIN OLDER TRENDS, OLDER, DEEPER CURRENTS IN THE MIDDLE EASTERN
    HISTORY, WHICH HAVE BEEN SUBMERGED OR AT LEAST OBSCURED DURING THIS
    CENTURY OF WESTERN DOMINATION. NOW THEY'RE COMING BACK AGAIN. ONE OF
    THEM I WOULD CALL THE INTERNAL STRUGGLES. ETHNIC, SECTARIAN, REGIONAL,
    BETWEEN DIFFERENT FORCES WITHIN THE MIDDLE EAST. THESE HAVE OF COURSE
    CONTINUED WITH LESS IMPORTANCE IN THE IMPERIAL ERA. THEY'RE COMING OUT
    AGAIN NOW AND KEATING FORCE AS WE SEE FOR EXAMPLE FROM THE CURRENT CLASH BETWEEN SUNI AND SHIA ISLAM, SOMETHING WITHOUT PRECEDENCE FOR CENTURIES.

    THE OTHER THING MORE DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO MY THEME THIS EVENING IS SIGNS
    OF A RETURN AMONG MUSLIMS TO WHAT THEY PERCEIVE AS THE COSMIC STRUGGLE
    FOR WORLD DOMINATION BETWEEN THE TWO MAIN FAITHS, CHRISTIANITY AND
    ISLAM. THERE ARE MANY RELIGIONS IN THE WORLD BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW THERE
    ARE ONLY TWO THAT WILL CLING TO THEIR TRUTHS, MODERN-DAY UNIVERSAL OR
    RELIGIONS CLAIM THAT BUT EXCLUSIVE. THEY, THE CHRISTIANS IN THE ONE
    CASE, THE MUSLIMS ON THE OTHER, ARE THE FORTUNATE RECIPIENTS OF GOD'S
    FINAL MESSAGE TO HUMANITY, WHICH IS THEIR DUTY NOT TO KEEP SELFISHLY TO THEMSELVES LIKE THE JEWS OR THE HINDUS, BUT TO BRING TO THE REST OF
    HUMANITY REMOVING WHATEVER OBSTACLES THERE MAY BE ON THE WAY. THIS SELF PERCEPTION SHARED BETWEEN CHRISTIANS AND ISLAM LED TO THE LONG STRUGGLE
    THAT IS NOW BEEN GOING ON FOR MORE THAN 14 CENTURIES BETWEEN THE TWO.
    AND WHICH IS NOW ENTERING A NEW PHASE.

    IT IS INTERESTING, BOTH SIDES FOR QUITE A LONG TIME REFUSED TO RECOGNIZE
    THIS STRUGGLE. IT IS INTERESTING THAT ON BOTH SIDES, THE NAME TO EACH
    OTHER BY NONRELIGIOUS TERMS. THE CHRISTIAN WORLD CALLED THE MUSLIMS
    MOORS, CITIZENS, TARTARS, TURKS AND EVEN A CONVERT SOURCE SAID TO HAVE
    TURNED TURNER. THE MUSLIMS FOR THEIR PART CALLED THE WEST CHRISTIAN
    WORLD, ROMANS, FRANCS, SLAVS AND THE LIKE. IT WAS ONLY SLOWLY AND
    RELUCTANTLY THEY BEGAN TO GIVE THEM RELIGIOUS DESIGNATIONS AND THEN
    THESE WERE, FOR THE MOST PART, DEMEANING AND INACCURATE. AND THE WORST
    IT WAS CUSTOMARY TO CALL MUSLIMS, WHICH THEY NEVER USE THEMSELVES BASED
    ON THE TOTALLY FORCED ASSUMPTION THAT MUSLIMS WORSHIP MOHAMMUD IN THE
    WAKE CHRISTIANS WORSHIP CHRIST. THE MUSLIM TERM FOR QUESTION WAS NEVER
    IN THE US FROM ECONOMY AND THE LOCAL CULTS OF A PLACE CALLED NAZARETH
    AND PALESTINE. THE DECLARATION OF LAW BEGINS RIGHT AT THE VERY BEGINNING
    IN ISLAM. THERE CERTAIN LETTERS REPORTED TO HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY THE
    PROPHET MOHAMMED, RETURN TO THE CHRISTIAN EMPEROR COM-ED THE EMPEROR OF
    PERSIAN AND VARIOUS OTHER RULERS, SAYING I HAVE NOW BROUGHT GOD'S FINAL MESSAGE, YOUR TIME HAS PASSED. ACCEPT MY MISSION AND MY FAITH OR RESIGN
    OR SUBMIT, YOU ARE FINISHED. THE MESSAGE IS CLEAR AND AUTHENTIC IN THE
    SENSE THAT IT DOES REPRESENT THE DOMINANT VIEW AS OF THE ISLAMIC WORLD.

    A LITTLE LATER WE HAVE HARD EVIDENCE, AND I MEAN HARD IN THE MOST
    LITERAL SENSE, INSCRIPTIONS'. MANY OF YOU I SHOULD THINK HAVE BEEN TO JERUSALEM. YOU HAVE PROBABLY VISITED THE TERM OF THE ROCK AND REMARKABLE BUILDING. IT IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. IT IS BUILT ON A SACRED TO THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN RELIGION. ITS ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IS THAT OF THE
    EARLIEST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES. IT DATES FROM THE END OF THE SEVENTH
    CENTURY AND WAS BUILT BY ONE OF THE EARLY CALIPHS AND WHAT IS COME
    CLEARLY SIGNET IS THE MESSAGE IN INSCRIPTION'S INSIDE THE DOME. HE IS
    GOD, HIS ONE, HE IS NO COMPANION, HE DOES NOT GET, HE IS NOT BE GOTTEN.
    THIS IS CLEARLY A DIRECT CHALLENGE TO CERTAIN PRINCIPLES OF THE
    CHRISTIAN FAITH.

    INTERESTINGLY, THEY DID THE SAME THING ON A NEW GOLD COINAGE. UNTIL
    THEN, SPANKING GOLD COINS HAD BEEN AN EXCLUSIVE ROHMAN PRIVILEGE. THE OF
    THE ISLAMIC FOR THE FIRST TIME STRUGGLED CLAIMS, OF BREACHING THE AND
    MEMORIAL PRIVILEGE OF ROME AND PUTTING THE SAME INSCRIPTION ON THEM. AS
    I SAID, A CHALLENGE. THE MUSLIM CONFLICT AS IT TRIED TO POINT OUT, MORE
    FROM THEIR RESEMBLANCES THEM FROM THEIR DIFFERENCES. THAT'S ATTACK HAS
    GONE THROUGH THREE PHASES. THE FIRST FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF ISLAM,
    WHEN THE NEW FACE SPILLED OUT OF THE ARABIAN PENINSULA, WHERE IT WAS
    BORN COMING INTO THE MIDDLE EAST AND BEYOND. IT WAS THEN THAT THEY
    CONQUERED SYRIA, PALESTINE, EGYPT, NORTH AFRICA, ALL AT THAT TIME A PART
    OF THE CHRISTIAN WORLD AND WENT BEYOND INTO EUROPE, COCHRANE A SIZABLE
    PART OF SOUTHWESTERN EUROPE, INCLUDING SPAIN AND PORTUGAL AND SOUTHERN
    ITALY, ALL OF WHICH BECAME PART OF THE ISLAMIC WORLD AND EVEN CROSSING
    THE PYRENEES INTO FRANCE AND OCCUPYING FOR A WHILE PARTS OF FRANCE.

    AFTER A LONG AND BITTER STRUGGLE , THE CHRISTIANS MANAGED TO RETAKE
    PART, BUT NOT ALL OF THE TERRITORY THEY HAD LOST. THEY SUCCEEDED IN
    EUROPE AND IN A SENSE EUROPE WAS DEFINED BY THE LIMITS OF THAT SUCCESS.
    THEY FAILED TO RETAKE NORTH AFRICA OR THE MIDDLE EAST. WHICH WERE LOST
    TO KRISTIAN THEM, NOTABLY IN THE TENT KNOWN AS THE CRUSADES. THAT WAS
    NOT THE END OF THE MATTER. IN THE MEANTIME, AND ISLAM, ISLAMIC WORLD
    HAVING FAILED THE FIRST TIME, WAS BRACING FOR THE SECOND ATTACK. THIS
    TIME CONDUCTED NOT BY ARABS, A MORRIS, LED BY TURKS AND TETRAS. THEY
    CONQUERED ANATOLIA, THEY CONQUERED RUSSIA, THEY CAPTURED THE AGENT
    CITADEL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. THEY CONQUERED A LARGE PART OF THE BALKANS.
    THEY CONQUERED HALF OF HUNGARY. TWICE THEY REACHED AS FAR AS VIENNA. THE
    FIRST AND SECOND SEIGES IN 1529 AND 1683.

    AND EVEN IN WESTERN EUROPE, COURSE AS WELL KNOWN TO HISTORIANS OF THE
    UNITED STATES, THE WENT TO ICELAND TO MADEIRA TO THE OUTERMOST LIMITS
    BUT ALSO TO SEVERAL PLACES IN WESTERN EUROPE AND NOTABLY, AIR RAID ON BALTIMORE. IN 1631 THE CONTEMPORARY DOCUMENT WE HAVE A LIST OF 107
    CAPTIVES WHO WERE TAKEN FROM BALTIMORE TO ALGIERS. INCLUDING THE FAMILY
    CALLED JEANIE. [LAUGHTER] AGAIN, EUROPE COUNTERATTACKED, THIS TIME MORE SUCCESSFUL AND MORE RAPIDLY. THEY SUCCEEDED IN RECOVERING THE BALKAN
    PENINSULA AND RECOVERING RUSSIA, AND IN ADVANCING FURTHER INTO THE
    ISLAMIC LANDS, CHASING THEIR FORMER RULERS WEDNESDAY HAD COME. FOR THIS
    PHASE OF EUROPEAN COUNTERATTACK, A NEW TERM WAS INVENTED, IMPERIALISM.
    WHEN THE PEOPLES OF ASIA AND AFRICA INVADED EUROPE, THIS WAS NOT
    IMPERIALISM. WHEN YOU'RE ATTACKED ASIA AND AFRICA, THIS WAS.

    THIS EUROPEAN COUNTERATTACK THAT THE MENTIONED BEFORE BEGINS IN NEW
    PHASE, WHICH BRINGS THE EUROPEAN INTO THE VERY HEART OF THE MIDDLE EAST.
    BUT TO IN OUR OWN TIME, WE HAVE SEEN THE END OF THAT DOMINATION. OSAMA
    BIN LADEN IS A VERY INTERESTING PROCLAMATIONS AND DECLARATIONS, HAS THIS
    TO SAY ABOUT THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN, THE WAR IN WHICH YOU REMEMBERED LED
    TO THE DECEIT AND RETREAT OF THE RED ARMY AND TO THE COLLAPSE OF THE
    SOVIET UNION. WE TEND TO SEE THAT AS A WESTERN VICTORY, MORE
    SPECIFICALLY AN AMERICAN VICTORY IN THE COLD WAR AGAINST THE SOVIETS.
    FOR OSAMA BIN LADEN, IT IS NOTHING OF THE KIND. IT IS A MUSLIM VICTORY
    OF JIHAD. AND IF ONE LOOKS AT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHAT HAPPENED IN
    AFGHANISTAN AND WHAT FOLLOWED, THIS IS I THINK ONE MUST SAY, EIGHT NOT
    IN PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION. AS OSAMA BIN LADEN SAW IT, ISLAM HAD REACHED
    THE ULTIMATE HUMILIATION IN THE ISLAMIC STRUGGLE AFTER WORLD WAR I, WHEN
    THE LAST OF THE GREAT MUSLIM EMPIRE, THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE WAS BROKEN UP
    AND MOST OF ITS TERRITORY IS DIVIDED BETWEEN THE VICTORIOUS ALLIES, WHEN
    THE CALIPHATE WAS SUPPRESSED, THE CALIPHATE WAS ABOLISHED, THE LAST
    CALIPH DRIVEN INTO EXILE. THIS SEEMS TO BE THE LOWEST POINT IN MUSLIM
    HISTORY. AND FROM THERE, THEY WENT UP WORDS. SEVERAL PHASES OF THE
    STRUGGLE AS HE SOUGHT AGAINST VARY VARIES IN PERIL POWER SAID IT
    SUCCEEDED THE ROMANS AND THE LEADERSHIP OF THE WORLD OF THE INFIDELS,
    THE BISON TIMES, THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, THE BRITISH AND FRENCH AND
    RUSSIAN EMPIRES AND AND THIS FINAL PHASE HE SAYS THE WORD OF THE
    INFIDELS WAS DIVIDED AND DISPUTED BETWEEN TWO RIVALS WHO PROPOSED THE
    UNITED STATES AND THE SOVIET UNION.

    AS OSAMA BIN LADEN PUTS IT, WE HAVE MET DEFEATED, AND DESTROYED THE MORE DANGEROUS AND THE MORE DEADLIER OF THE TO AND THE BILL SUPERPOWERS.
    DEALING WITH THE SOFT, PAMPERED AND EFFEMINATE AMERICANS. THIS BELIEF
    WAS CONFIRMED BY THE 90'S, WHEN WE SAW ONE ATTACK AFTER ANOTHER OF
    AMERICAN BASES AND INSTALLATIONS WITH VIRTUALLY NO EFFECTIVE RESPONSE OF
    ANY KIND. ANGRY WORDS AND EXPENSIVE MISSILES DISPATCH REMOTE AND
    UNINHABITED PLACES. THIS WAS A SEQUENCE LEADING UP TO 9/11, CLEARLY
    INTENDED TO BE THE COMPLETION OF THE FIRST SEQUENCE AND THE BEGINNING OF
    THE NEW ONE, TAKING THE WAR INTO THE HEART OF THE ENEMY CAMP. THE THIRD
    ATTACK, HAS CLEARLY BEGUN. IT IS UNDER WAY. AND WE SHOULD NOT DELUDE
    OURSELVES AS TO WHAT IS AND WHAT IT MEANS. AT THIS TIME IT IS TAKING
    DIFFERENT FORMS AND TO IN PARTICULAR, TERROR AND MIGRATION.

    (And here, he gives his version, of what I'd posted about
    earlier, that a Muslim should not remain living in land
    that is ruled by non-Muslims.)

    THE SUBJECT OF TERROR HAS BEEN FREQUENTLY DISCUSSED AND IN GREAT DETAIL
    AND DON'T NEED TO SAY MUCH ABOUT THE RIGHT NOW. WHAT THEY DO WANT TO
    TALK ABOUT IS THE OTHER ASPECT OF MORE PARTICULAR RELEVANCE TO EUROPE
    AND THAT IS THE QUESTION OF MIGRATION. IN EARLIER TIMES, IT WAS
    INCONCEIVABLE THAT A MUSLIM WOULD VOLUNTARILY MOVE TO AND NON MUSLIM
    COUNTRY. THE JURIST WHO DISCUSSED IT AT GREAT LINKS IN THE TEXTBOOK,
    MANUALS OF SHARIA, IN A DIFFERENT FORM, IS IT PERMISSIBLE FOR A MUSLIM
    TO VISIT A NON MUSLIM COUNTRY? AND IF SO, IF HE DOES, WHAT MUST HE DO? GENERALLY SPEAKING, THIS WAS CONSIDERED UNDER HIS CERTAIN SPECIFIC
    HEADINGS A CAPTIVE, A PRISONER OF WAR OBVIOUSLY HAS NO CHOICE THAT HE
    MUST PRESERVE HIS FAITH AND GET HOME AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. A SECOND CASE
    IS THAT OF IT AS AN UNBELIEVER IN A LAND OF THE UNBELIEVERS, WHO SEES
    THE LIGHT AND EMBRACES THE TRUE FACE. IN OTHER WORDS, BECOMES A MUSLIM.
    HE MUST LEAVE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND GO TO THE MUSLIM COUNTRY. THEIR
    CASE IS THAT OF THIS A TON. THE ONLY HEADING WHICH IS CONSIDERED
    LEGITIMATE IS TO RANSOM CAPTIVES. THIS IS LATER EXPANDED INTO DIPLOMATIC
    AND COMMERCIAL MISSIONS. WITH THE ADVANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COUNTERATTACK, THERE'S A NEW HEADING IN THIS ONGOING DEBATE.

    WHAT IS THE POSITION IF OF A MUSLIM IN THIS COUNTRY IS CONQUERED BY
    INFIDELS. MAY HE STAY OR MUST LEAVE? WE HAVE SOME INTERESTING DOCUMENTS
    FROM THE LATE 15TH CENTURY, WHEN THE RECONQUEST OF SPAIN WAS COMPLETED
    AND MOROCCAN JURISTS WERE DISCUSSING THIS QUESTION. THEY ASK THE
    QUESTION, MADE A STATE? THE GENERAL ANSWER WAS NO, IT IS NOT
    PERMISSIBLE. THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, AMID A STATE OF THE KRISTIAN
    GOVERNMENT THAT TAKES OVER AS TOLERANT? THIS PROVED TO BE A PURELY
    HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION OF COURSE. THE ANSWER WAS NO, EVEN THEN THEY MAY
    NOT STAY BECAUSE THE TEMPTATION OF APOSTASY WOULD BE EVEN GREATER AND
    THEY MUST LEAVE AND HOPE THAT IN GOD'S GOOD TIME THERE WOULD BE ABLE TO RECONQUER THEIR HOMELANDS AND RESTORE THE TRUE FAITH. THIS WAS THE LINE
    TAKEN BY MOST JURISTS.

    THERE WERE SOME, AT FIRST THE MINORITY, LATER A MORE IMPORTANT GROUP WHO
    SAID IT IS PERMISSIBLE FOR MUSLIMS TO STAY, PROVIDED THAT CERTAIN
    CONDITIONS ARE MET MAINLY OF COURSE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO PRACTICE THEIR
    FAITH. THIS RAISES ANOTHER QUESTION, WHICH I HAVE COME BACK TO IN A
    MOMENT. WHAT IS MEANT BY PRACTICING THEIR FAITH? PIER I WOULD REMIND YOU
    THAT WE'RE DEALING NOT ONLY WITH A DIFFERENT RELIGION, BUT WITH A
    DIFFERENT CONCEPT OF WHAT RELIGION IS ABOUT, WHAT RELIGION EMBRACES AND REFERRING OF COURSE ESPECIALLY TO WHAT MUSLIMS CALL SHARIA AND THE HOLY
    LOT OF EXCESS OF ISLAM WHICH COVERS A WIDE RANGE OF MATTERS REGARDED AS
    SECULAR AND THE CHRISTIAN WORLD, EVEN DURING THE MEDIEVAL PERIOD BUT
    CERTAINLY ONE IS TEMPTED TO CALL THE POST KRISTIAN ERA OF THE WESTERN WORLD.

    THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY NOW MANY ATTRACTIONS, WHICH DRAW MUSLIMS TO EUROPE.
    THE OPPORTUNITIES OFFERED PARTICULARLY IN VIEW OF THAT GROWING ECONOMIC IMPOVERISHMENT OF MUCH OF THE MUSLIM WORLD AND THE ATTRACTIONS OF
    EUROPE, WELFARE AS WELL AS EMPLOYMENT. THEY ALSO HAVE THE FREEDOM, WHICH
    THEY LACK AT HOME, FREEDOM OF EDUCATION AND OF EXPRESSION, FAR MORE THAN
    AT HOME. THIS OF COURSE IS A GREAT INCENTIVE TO THE TERRORISTS WHO
    MIGRATE. TERRACE HAVE FAR GREATER FREEDOM OF OPERATION IN EUROPE THAN
    THEY DO AND THE ISLAMIC LANDS.

    I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO SOME OTHER FACTORS OF IMPORTANCE
    IN THE SITUATION AT THIS MOMENT. ONE IS THE NEW RADICALISM IN THE
    ISLAMIC WORLD, WHICH COMES IN SEVERAL KINDS, SUNI ESPECIALLY, WAHHABI,
    AND THE IRANIAN SHIITE TEACHING FROM THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION. BOTH OF
    THESE ARE BECOMING ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT FACTORS AND THE HAVE THESE
    STRANGE PARADOX THAT THE DANGER OF TERRORIST RADICALISM OR RADICAL
    TERRORISM IS FAR GREATER IN EUROPE AND AMERICA THAN IT IS IN THE MIDDLE
    EAST AND NORTH AFRICA, WHERE THEY'RE MUCH BETTER AT CONTROLLING THEIR
    EXTREMIST THEN WE KNOW HOW.

    THE SUNNI KIND IS MAINLY WAHHABI AND HAS BENEFITED FROM THE PRESTIGE AND INFLUENCE AND POWER OF THE HOUSE OF SOME WHO AS CONTROLLERS OF THE HOLY
    PLACES OF ISLAM AND OF THE EL AND THE ENORMOUS OIL WEALTH AT THEIR
    DISPOSAL. THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. THE TERM
    REVOLUTION IS MUCH USED IN THE MIDDLE EAST. IT IS VIRTUALLY GENERALLY
    ACCEPTED TITLE OF LEGITIMACY. THE RICH IRANIAN REVOLUTION IS A REAL
    REVOLUTION IN THAT THIS SENSE WE USE THE TERM FRENCH OR RUSSIAN
    REVOLUTION. LIKE THE FRENCH AND RUSSIAN REVOLUTION IN THEIR DAY, IT HAS
    HAD AN ENORMOUS IMPACT IN THE WHOLE AREA WITH WHICH THEY SHARE A COMMON UNIVERSE OF DISCOURSE, THAT IS TO SAY THE ISLAMIC WORLD.

    NOW, LET ME TURN TO ANOTHER QUESTION, A QUESTION WHICH IS MUCH DISCUSSED NOWADAYS OF ASSIMILATION. HOW FAR IS IT POSSIBLE FOR MUSLIM MIGRANTS
    COMING LESS SETTLED IN EUROPE, IN NORTH AMERICA AND ELSEWHERE, AND TO
    BECOME PART OF THOSE COUNTRIES, IN A WAY THAT SO MANY OTHER WAYS OF
    IMMIGRANTS HAVE DONE? I THINK THERE'S SEVERAL POINTS, WHICH NEED TO BE
    MADE. ONE OF THEM IS THE BASIC DIFFERENCE IN WHAT PRECISELY IS MEANT BY DISSIMILATION AND ACCEPTANCE. THERE IS AN IMMEDIATE AN OBVIOUS
    DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN AND THE AMERICAN SITUATION. FOR AN
    IMMIGRANT TO BECOME AN AMERICAN MEANS A CHANGE OF ALLEGIANCE. FOR AN
    IMMIGRANT TO BECOME A FRENCHMAN OR A GERMAN MEANS A CHANGE OF ETHNIC
    IDENTITY, A CHANGING POLITICAL ALLEGIANCE IS CERTAINLY VERY MUCH EASIER,
    MORE PRACTICAL, THE CHANGING ETHNIC IDENTITY, IT EITHER IN ONE'S
    FEELINGS OR MEASURE OF ACCEPTANCE. IN ENGLAND CHARACTERISTICALLY WE HAD
    IT BOTH WAYS. YOUR NATURALIZE, HE BECAME BRITISH BUT HE DID NOT BECOME
    ENGLISH. [LAUGHTER]

    I MENTIONED EARLIER THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE IN WHAT ONE MEANS BY
    RELIGION, FOR MUSLIMS IT COVERS ALL WHOLE RANGE OF DIFFERENT THINGS,
    MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, INHERITANCE, MOST OBVIOUS EXAMPLES. A WHOLE RANGE OF
    THINGS WHICH, IN THE WESTERN WORLD, THE CHRISTIAN WORLD SINCE ANTIQUITY
    HAVING PART OF SECULAR MATTERS. THE WHOLE DISTINCTION OF CHURCH AND
    STATE, SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL, LATER BEGAN ECCLESIASTIC, THIS IS A
    CHRISTIAN DISTINCTION, WHICH HAS NO PLACE IN ISLAMIC HISTORY AND IS
    THEREFORE DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN TO MUSLIMS, EVEN AT THE PRESENT DAY.
    UNTIL VERY RECENTLY THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE VO VOCABULARY TO EXPRESS IT.
    THEY HAVE NOW, OF COURSE. EXCUSE ME. ONE OF THE EUROPEAN RESPONSES TO
    THIS SITUATION, IN EUROPE AS IN THE U.S. A VERY FREQUENT RESPONSE IS
    WHAT THIS SERIOUSLY KNOWN AS MULTI-CULTURALISM AND POLITICAL
    CORRECTNESS. IN THE MUSLIM WORLD THEY SUFFER FROM NO SUCH VIEWS. THEY'RE
    VERY CONSCIOUS OF THEIR IDENTITY, THEY KNOW WHO THEY ARE, WHAT THEY ARE
    AND WHAT THEY WANT. THE QUALITY WHICH WE SEEM TO HAVE LOST TO A VERY
    LARGE EXTENT. THIS IS A SOURCE OF DANGER AND WEAKNESS. A TERM SOMETIMES
    USED IS CONSTRUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT.

    LET'S TALK TO THEM AND GET TOGETHER TO SEE WHAT WE CAN PICK CONSTRUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT HAS A LONG TRADITION. WIN SALI THEN CONQUERED JERUSALEM AND
    OTHER PLACES IN THE HOLY LAND, HE ALLOWED THE CHRISTIANS, MERCHANTS FROM EUROPE, TO STAY IN THE SEAPORTS. HE WAS CRITICIZED FOR THIS AND HE WROTE
    A LETTER TO THE CALIPH IN BAGHDAD, JUSTIFYING HIS ACTIONS. I WOULD LIKE
    TO QUOTE IT TO YOU. HE WROTE EXPLAINING, I QUOTE, THERE'S NOT ONE AMONG
    THEM THAT DOES NOT BRING REFERENCE OF WAR TO THEIR DETRIMENT AND TO OUR ADVANTAGE. DISCONTINUED DURING THE CRUSADES AND CONTINUED AFTER AND
    CONTINUED AFTER THE OATS MITIGANT INTO EUROPE, WINNICK IT ALWAYS SIGN
    EUROPEAN MERCHANTS WILLING TO SELL THEM WEAPONS THEY NEEDED AND EUROPEAN BANKERS WILLING TO FINANCE THE PURCHASES. CONSTRUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT HAS A
    LONG HISTORY.

    ONE ALSO FINDS A RATHER STARTLING MODERN VERSIONS OF IT. THE CRUSADES,
    FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE SEEN IN OUR OWN DATE THE EXTRAORDINARY SPECTACLE OF
    A POPE APOLOGIZING TO THE MUSLIMS FOR THE CRUSADES. YES, I DID NOT
    INVENT THAT. I WOULD NOT WISH TO APOLOGIZE AND DEFEND THE BEHAVIOR OF
    THE CRUSADERS, MANY RESPECTS INTRUSIVE ATROCIOUS. WE'RE NOW LED TO
    BELIEVE THE CRUSADES WERE UNWARRANTED ACT OF AGGRESSION AGAINST THE
    PEACEFUL MUSLIM WORLD, HARDLY. THE CRUSADE WAS A LATE LIMITED AN
    UNSUCCESSFUL LIMITATION OF THE JIHAD, AN ATTEMPT TO RECOVER BY HOLY WAR
    WHAT HAD BEEN LOST BY HOLY WAR. FAILED AND IT WAS NOT FOLLOWED UP. A
    MORE RECENT EXAMPLE OF MULTI-CULTURALISM. ON OCTOBER 8, 2002, I INSIST
    ON GIVING YOU THE DATE BECAUSE YOU MAY WANT TO LOOK IT UP. THE THIN
    FRENCH PRIME MINISTER I AM TOLD A STAUNCH ROMAN CATHOLIC, WAS MAKING A
    SPEECH IN THE FRENCH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY AND TALKING ABOUT THE SITUATION
    IN IRAQ AND REFERRED TO SADDAM HUSSEIN AND HE REMARKED, THAT ONE OF
    SADDAM HUSSEIN'S HEROES WAS HIS COMPATRIOT SALI THEN, WHO CAME FROM THE
    SAME IRAQI TOWN OF TEN CREEK. ANY CASE THE MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY WERE
    NOT AWARE OF SOME OF ITS IDENTITY, HE EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT IT WAS HE
    WHO IS ABLE I "TO DEFEAT THE CRUSADERS AND LIBERATE JERUSALEM. . " YES.
    WHEN THE FRENCH PRIME MINISTER DESCRIBES CELADONS CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM
    FROM A LARGELY FRENCH CRUSADERS AS AN ACT OF LIBERATION, THIS WOULD SEEM
    TO INDICATE A RATHER EXTREME CASE OF REALIGNMENT OF LOYALTIES. I WAS
    TOLD THIS, I DID NOT BELIEVE IT. I CHECKED IN THE PARLIAMENTARY RECORD
    AND WHEN HE USED THE WORD LIBERATE, NAY NOT GIVEN, HE JUST SAILED
    STRAIGHT ON. THAT WAS THE ONLY INTERRUPTION AND AS FAR AS I WAS AWARE
    THERE WAS NO COMMENT AFTERWARDS. THEY HAVE EVEN BEEN ABLE TO FIND SOME
    ALLIES IN EUROPE. IN DESCRIBING THEM I SHALL HAVE TO USE THE TERMS LEFT
    AND RIGHT COMEAUX TERMS WHICH ARE BECOMING INCREASINGLY MISLEADING.

    THE SEATING ARRANGEMENTS IN THE FIRST FRENCH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY AFTER THE REVOLUTION ARE NOT THE LAWS OF NATURE, THAT WE HAVE BECOME ACCUSTOMED TO
    USING THEM. THEY'RE DIFFICULT WHEN APPLIED TO THE WEST NOWADAYS. THERE
    ATTORN NONSENSE WHEN APPLIED DIFFERENT BRANDS OF ISLAM. AS I SAY, THERE
    WHAT PEOPLE USE. SO LET US PUT IT THIS WAY. THEY HAVE A LEFT WING APPEAL
    TO THE ANTI-U.S. ELEMENTS IN EUROPE, WHERE THEY SO TO SPEAK, REPLACE THE SOVIETS. THEY HAD A RIGHT-WING APPEAL TO THE ANTI-JEWISH ELEMENTS IN
    EUROPE, REPLACING THE ACCESS. AND THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WIN
    CONSIDERABLE SUPPORT UNDER BOTH HEADINGS. FOR SOME IN EUROPE, THEIR
    HATRED APPARENTLY OUTWEIGHED THEIR LOYALTIES.

    IT IS AN INTERESTING EXCEPTION TO THAT IN GERMANY WHERE THE MUSLIMS ARE
    MOSTLY TURKISH. THERE, THEY HAVE OFTEN HAD PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS AND
    EQUATED THEMSELVES WITH THE JEWS TO SEE THEMSELVES AS HAVING SUCCEEDED
    THE JEWS AS THE VICTIMS OF GERMAN RACISM AND PERSECUTION. I REMEMBER A
    MEETING IN BERLIN, WHICH I WAS ASKED TO PARTICIPATE IN TO DISCUSS NEW
    MUSLIM MINORITIES IN EUROPE, AND IN THE EVENING I WAS ASKED BY A MUSLIM
    GROUP OF TURKS TO JOIN WITH THEM AND HEAR WHAT THEY HAD TO SAY ABOUT IT,
    WHICH WAS VERY INTERESTING AND A PHRASE WHICH STICKS MOST VIVIDLY IN MY
    MIND IS ONE OF THEM SAID, ONE DOZEN YEARS THERE WERE UNABLE TO ACCEPT
    400,000 JEWS. WHAT HOPE IS THERE THAT THEY WILL ACCEPT 2 MILLION TURKS?
    THEY USED THIS VERY SKILLFULLY AND PLAYING ON GERMAN FEELINGS OF GUILT
    IN ORDER TO INHABIT ANY EFFECTIVE GERMAN MEASURES TO PROTECT GERMAN
    IDENTITY, WHICH I WOULD SAY LIKE OTHERS IN EUROPE, IS SERIOUSLY IN DANGER.

    MY TIME IS RUNNING OUT SO I THINK I WILL LEAVE OTHER POINTS THAT I
    WANTED TO MAKE. NO? YOU DON'T MIND A BIT MORE? [APPLAUSE]

    I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE QUESTION OF TOLERANCE. YOU WILL RECALL
    THAT COME AT THE END OF THE FIRST PHASE OF THE CHRISTIAN RECONQUEST
    AFTER SPAIN AND PORTUGAL AND SICILY, MUSLIMS HAD BY THAT TIME VERY
    NUMEROUS IN THE RECONQUERED LANDS, WERE GIVEN THE CHOICE, BAPTISM,
    EXILE, OR DEATH. IN A FORMER OTTOMAN LANDS IN SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE, THE
    LEADERS OF WHAT YOU MIGHT CALL THE RECONQUEST ARE SOMEWHAT MORE
    TOLERANT, BUT NOT A GREAT DEAL MORE AND SOME MUSLIM MINORITIES REMAINED
    IN SOME BALKAN COUNTRIES WITH TROUBLE STILL GOING ON AT THE PRESENT DAY.
    I SEE NAMES LIKE CLOSABLE OR BOSNIAC, YOU WILL KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING
    ABOUT. NEVERTHELESS, I IMAGINE THIS POINT BECAUSE OF THE VERY SHARP
    CONTRAST WITH THE TREATMENT OF CHRISTIANS AND OTHER NON MUSLIMS IN THE
    ISLAMIC LANDS AT THAT TIME, WHEN MUSLIMS CAME TO EUROPE THEY HAD A
    CERTAIN EXPECTATION OF TOLERANCE, A FEELING THAT THEY WERE ENTITLED TO
    AT LEAST THE DEGREE OF TOLERANCE, WHICH THEY HAD ACCORDED TO NON MUSLIMS
    IN THE GREAT MUSLIM IMPASSE OF THE PAST AND BOTH THEIR EXPECTATIONS AND
    THEIR EXPERIENCE ARE VERY DIFFERENT. COMING TO EUROPE, TO EUROPEAN
    COUNTRIES, THEY HAD BOTH MORE AND LESS THAN EXPECTED. MORE IN A SENSE
    THAT THEY GOT IN THEORY AND OFTEN IN PRACTICE EQUAL POLITICAL RIGHTS,
    EQUAL ACCESS TO THE PROFESSIONS, AND ALL THE BENEFITS OF THE WELFARE
    STATE OF THE MODERN TIMES, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
    BUT THEY ALSO GOT SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THEY HAD GIVEN AS TRADITIONAL
    ISLAMIC STATE. IN THE OSMENT EMPIRE AND IN OTHER STATES BEFORE THAT, THE
    NON MOSLEM COMMITTEES HAD SEPARATE ORGANIZATIONS AND RAN THEIR OWN
    AFFAIRS. THEY COLLECTED THEIR OWN TAXES AND ENFORCED THEIR OWN LAWS. YOU
    HAD SEVERAL CHRISTIAN COMMUNITIES, EACH LIVING UNDER ITS OWN LEADERSHIP, RECOGNIZED BY THE STATE AND, AS I SAID, RUNNING ITS OWN SCHOOLS, IT'S ON EDUCATION ADMINISTERING ITS OWN LAWS IN SUCH MATTERS AS MARRIAGE,
    DIVORCE AND INHERITANCE AND THE LIKE. THE JEWS, THE SAME.

    SO YOU ARE IN A POSITION WHICH THREE MEN LIVING IN THE SAME ST. DYE AND
    THEIR STATES ARE DISTRIBUTED UNDER THREE DIFFERENT LEGAL SYSTEMS. WHAT
    HAPPENS TO BE JEWISH, ONE CHRISTIAN, AND ONE MUSLIM. EDGE YOU COULD BE
    PUNISHED BY THEY RABBINICAL COURT AND JAILED FOR VIOLATING THE SABBATH
    FOR EATING ON YOM KIPPUR. A CHRISTIAN COULD BE ARRESTED AND IMPRISONED
    FOR TAKING A SECOND WIFE, BIGAMY IS A CHRISTIAN OFFENCE. IT WAS NOT AN
    ISLAMIC OR AN OTTOMAN DEFENSE. THAT DEGREE OF INDEPENDENCE IN THEIR OWN
    SOCIAL LIFE, THEY DO NOT OF COURSE HAVE IN THE MODERN STATE AND IT WOULD
    BE QUITE ABSURD FOR THEM TO ACCEPT IT. GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE MODERN
    STATE. THAT IS NOT HOW THEY SEE IT. THEY FEEL THAT THEY'RE ENTITLED TO
    WHAT -- RECEIVE WHAT THEY GAVE.

    AS ONE MUSLIM FRIEND OF MINE IN EUROPE PUT IT, WE ALLOWED TO PRACTICE
    MONOGAMY, WHY SHOULDN'T YOU ALLOW US TO PRACTICE POLYGAMY? [LAUGHTER]
    SUCH QUESTIONS POLYGAMY IN PARTICULAR RAISE IMPORTANT ISSUES OF THE MORE PRACTICAL NATURE. THIS EMIGRATION PERMITS. NATURALLY IT BECOMES AS AN
    APPROVED IMMIGRANT, HE'S ENTITLED TO BRING HIS FAMILY WITH HIM. NOW WHAT EXACTLY DOES HIS FAMILY CONSIST OF? THEY ARE INCREASINGLY DEMANDING AND
    GETTING PERMISSION TO BRING PLURAL WIVES, THE SAME IS ALSO APPLYING MORE
    AND MORE TO WELFARE PAYMENTS AND SO ON. ON THE OTHER HAND, PENALTIES ARE
    A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT AND IT HAS BECOME AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE ISSUE.
    ANOTHER EXTREMELY SENSITIVE ISSUE IS THE POSITION OF WOMEN, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, VERY DIFFERENT COME BACK TO THE EARLIEST TIMES IN ISLAM. AND
    THIS HAS BEEN ONE OF THE MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO SOCIETIES.

    IS IT THE THIRD TIME LUCKY? NOT IMPOSSIBLE. LET'S SEE WHERE WE STAND.
    THEY HAVE CERTAIN CLEAR ADVANTAGES. THEY HAVE FERVOR AND CONVICTION,
    WHICH IN MOST WESTERN CUT COUNTRIES ARE EITHER WEAK OR LACKING. THEY ARE
    SELF ASSURED OF THE RIGHTNESS OF THEIR CAUSE, WHERE IS WE SPEND MOST OF
    OUR TIME IN SELF DENIGRATION AND SELF ABASEMENT. THEY HAVE LOYALTY AND DISCIPLINE AND PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL, THEY HAVE DEMOGRAPHY, A COMBINATION OF NATURAL INCREASE AND MIGRATION, LEADING TO MAJOR
    POPULATION CHANGES, WHICH COULD LEAD WITHIN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE TO SIGNIFICANT MAJORITIES IN AT LEAST SOME EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.

    BUT WE ALSO HAVE SOME ADVANTAGES THE MOST IMPORTANT OF WHICH ARE FREEDOM
    AND KNOWLEDGE. THE APPEAL OF GENUINE MODERN KNOWLEDGE IN A SOCIETY
    WHICH, IN THE PAST, IN THE MORE DISTANT PAST HAD A LONG RECORD OF
    SCIENTIFIC AND SCHOLARLY ACHIEVEMENT IS OBVIOUS PICK THEY ARE AWARE
    KILLY AND PAINFULLY AWARE, OF THEIR BACKWARDNESS AND WELCOMING
    OPPORTUNITY TO RECTIFY IT.

    LESS OBVIOUS BUT ALSO POWERFUL IS THE APPEAL OF FREEDOM. IN THE PAST, IN
    THE ISLAMIC WORLD, THE WORD FREEDOM WAS NOT USED IN A POLITICAL SENSE.
    FREEDOM WAS A LEGAL CONCEPT, NOT THE POLITICAL CONCEPT. HE WERE FREE IF
    YOU WERE NOT A SLAVE. THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY EXISTED. FREE MEANT NOT
    SLAVE. UNLIKE THE WEST, THEY DID NOT USED FREEDOM AND SLAVERY AS A
    METAPHOR FOR GOOD AND BAD GOVERNMENT, AS WE HAVE DONE FOR A LONG TIME IN
    THE WESTERN WORLD. THE TERMS THEY USED TO THEIR GOOD AND BAD GOVERNMENT
    ARE JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE OF IT JUST GOVERNMENT IS A GOOD GOVERNMENT,
    LIVING UNDER JUSTICE IS THE NEAREST APPROACH TO WHAT WE WOULD CALL
    FREEDOM. BUT, THE IDEA OF FREEDOM AND ITS WESTERN INTERPRETATION IS
    MAKING HEADWAY. IT IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE UNDERSTOOD, MORE AND MORE APPRECIATED AND DESIRED AND IT IS, PERHAPS, IN THE LONG RUN, OUR BEST
    HOPE PERHAPS EVEN OUR ONLY HOPE OF SURVIVING THE DEVELOPING STRUGGLE.
    THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] Show Less Text

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)