An infidel interprets Islam
British PM, Tony Blair, made a significant
foreign policy speech on Monday
(November 13, 2006), at the
London Lord Mayor's banquet. He
outlined his "whole Middle-East strategy".
After stating Israel/Palestine "is the core", Blair drew a
direct line to Teheran.
is being confronted over its nuclear weapons ambitions... [T]hey are using
the pressure points in the region to thwart us.
So they help the most extreme elements of Hamas in Palestine;
Hizbollah in the Lebanon; Shia militia in Iraq.
That way, they put obstacles in the path to peace, paint us, as they
did over the Israel/Lebanon conflict, as the aggressors, inflame the Arab
street and create political turmoil in our democratic politics."
solution to the nuclear
threat, global terror and and
the Israel-Palestinian dispute is simple: appeal to moderate Islam.
His introduction was the base. "In this century, a new and
unconventional enemy has appeared: a
global terrorism, based on a thoroughly warped misinterpretation of Islam,
which is fanatical and deadly."
question is this: Where
is this moderate Islam? Why is
an "infidel" explaining that global terrorism is a warped
misinterpretation of Islam? Shouldn't it be Muslim's speaking for (not to
mention protecting) their own religion?
Where are the masses of Muslims who are leading or at least joining
the war on terror? And I don't mean lapsed or secular Muslims - I mean
studies of comparative religion in high school and the memory of
the Muslims I met at university create a dissonance between what I thought
was Islam, and what I see today. On
the other hand, the Islamist vision of dominating the world as the sole
religion has been openly and clearly declared, and is being brought to
implementation stage. It is not dissimilar to the vision of the Crusaders,
which led to the pogroms of the Middle Ages.
Not too different to the Catholic vision that created the
Inquisition. And I guess that
its political edge is parallel to the vision of the 1,000 year Reich.