Europe’s WAR against ISLAM –Maclean’s Jan 18th issue.

Europe’s “war” against Islam harkens back to the crusades, and Christian Europe’s animosity towards Jews even further. Jews were persecuted and expelled at time when Islam was more tolerant and allowed Jews and Christians to practice their religion amongst the majority Islamic populations, as long as they paid their poll taxes or “Dhimmis tax ”. The Ottoman Empire was secure enough in their faith not to feel threatened by a few Sephardic Jews or a minority of Christians, with a few exceptions such as the persecution of Armenians by Turkey.

Following the breakup of the Ottoman Empire after WW l, this changed. The fairly homogeneous Arab and Persians lands were split into various artificial entities, lorded over by the British and French. This, among other, was the seeds of the present conflicts in the Middle East.

The European Islamic problem is a more recent development. The democratic/liberal west welcomed Islam to their shores –In Germany mainly Turks, needed for work in their post-war expanding economy. The Brits accepted Pakistani-Muslims from the former colony, and the French from their former North-African colonies. However, it has become apparent that integrating a foreign culture into the old and settled European society is more difficult than anticipated. This is not just the fault of the old country culture. Muslims religion and culture is so intertwined that it is hard for them to integrate with post-modern Europe. This is also, to a lesser degree, true in Canada and the US. There is more than a little truth in Kipling’s dictum that east and west shall never meet; especially when it comes to the convoluted area of culture and religion. This is no more evident than in second-generation immigrant youths who become suicide bombers and terrorists against their own country.

It is too late to put the genie back into the bottle, but at least we can put a cork in it for now, until we can find a way to “join the twain”. Otherwise, we might be looking forward to a repeat of the annihilation of Yugoslavia, but on an immense scale.

Mark Steyn’s Column, Maclean’s Nov.30th.

Though I have no issue with the gist of Mr. Steyn’s position regarding “political correctness”, I do have a point to make regarding the issue of “honour killings” –surely an oxymoron if there ever was one.

While Muslim “honour killings” have been in the news lately, as mentioned by Mr. Steyn; such killings have also been perpetrated by non-Muslim immigrants in the past; in particular new Canadians from the more traditional cultures of southern Europe. Their cause was also the problem of their daughter wanting to dress as and emulate the native Canadian women in their social circles and schools. The parents try to shield and “protect” their children from unwanted (by them) intrusion on their old world habits, culture and beliefs, but feel they are losing a degree of control over their children as they grow older and mill with the general population, as they inevitably must.

From the point of view of Canadian society, this integration process is a good thing; but a stressful one for the “old country” generation with “old country” mores; particularly where the cultural gap is wide, such as between southern and northern Europe; or South Asian or Middle Eastern cultures; regardless of religion. Disobedient children combined with the lack of identity and control they feel in a foreign land, lends itself to friction and stress within the family unit, and in the extreme, to violence and mayhem, even murder.

There should be a requirement for better preparation of immigrants from such cultures, before they are encouraged to immigrate here. They should understand that in accepting our economic and social benefits, they must also be ready to make some adjustments for Canadian culture and social mores; lest the cultural divide become an unbridgeable schism.

A letter to the Editor re “Vilification of Islam”. Star, Feb.17/09.

Letter writer Aliya Khan (who also wants us to know that she is a professor of clinical medicine at McMaster University) is another example of hyper-sensitive Muslims, in all walks of life. Mrs. Khan takes umbrage at the Star’s reference to sharia and the Islamic relationship of the murderer and his victim. I beg to differ: the incident is not “totally unrelated to Islam”, since these two were intimately involved with the Muslim cause and with disseminating a positive view of Islam through their media.

This is an example of how intelligence and education is subordinated to emotion, tribalism and its concomitant religious fanaticism. Mrs. Khan asks “when, will we get past the hateful stereotypes and begin meaningful engagement with one another?” When, indeed! The answer begins with people like her and their hyper-sensitivity to the faintest perceived slight, instead of standing up to the radical Islamists who besmirch and demean all Islam.

Let’s look at the problem from another angle: let’s assume that some fervent Christian, or Jewish, fanatic (of which there are aplenty) followed the dictum of the Old Testament and stoned to death his unfaithful wife. Would not The Star be justified in publishing the fact that this man was an ardent Christian or Jew who killed his wife against all that his religious belief would mitigate? Just asking.