Under the Heel

You can learn a lot from the Australian's editorials. (Fortunately, so in need are we of enlightenment in these dark times, their always industrious editorialist churns out around three per day.) As it happens I found two of today's particularly enlightening.

Spain confronts jihadi menace, for example, informed me that between 711 and 1492 "most of what is now Spain and Portugal was under the heel of Muslim Moors."

I got from this that Muslims had heels and that to find oneself under one of these was indeed most unfortunate.

As for the second, Patriots should close ranks informed me that "the defacement of statues of Captain Cook, Queen Victoria and Governor Macquarie in Sydney" was a huge NO-NO.

This got me wondering. Was I safe in concluding that the editorialist believed that, unlike your Muslim Moors, Christian Brits lacked this particular anatomical feature?

I believed I was - which led me to speculate:

Are heels an exclusively Muslim thing? Is this because of Islam? Is it in the Muslim DNA, so to speak, to grind non-Muslims underfoot?

Conversely, are Christians (and Jews for that matter), by virtue of their heel-lessness, therefore incapable of such dreadful behaviour?

Yes, that must be it! And so, with the editorialist's assistance, I could not but reflect on just how lucky Australia's first peoples were to make the acquaintance of James, Victoria, Lachlan and their ilk!

My God, if it'd been those bloody Muslims and their bloody heels, they'd have been in real trouble.

Spain's Tony Blair

What a piece of work is (this) man:

"This time it was Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. I am especially aggrieved at the brutal violence that has left dozens dead and injured in one of Europe's most important cities and one of the places I love the most... ," writes former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria Aznar in yesterday's Australian (For us not to be defeated, we must defeat terrorists).

Aznar, you'll recall, Spain's prime minister from 1996-2004, joined the 2003 Bush, Blair, Howard jihad against Iraq, which opened that country up to al-Qaida, led directly to the Madrid train bombings of March 2004  (192 killed and over 1,800 wounded), and contributed to his massive defeat in the 2004 Spanish elections.

"A personal responsibility is linked with a political purpose within those who voluntarily sign up for this jihad in its different manifestations. Any anti-terrorist policy that wishes to be successful must actively address these two aspects. In this respect, any self-blame, any reasoning designed to ignore the underlying political purpose, any desire to excuse the terrorist or blame the societies that suffer terrorism - including those with Muslim majorities - is completely out of place." (ibid)

But for Aznar there was no "personal responsibility" attached to "voluntarily signing up" to Bush's jihad in Iraq, nor one iota of "self-blame":

"I am going with my head held high and proud of the job I have done," he declared after being booted out of office in 2004. (Spain's Aznar: No regrets on Iraq War, foxnews.com, 22/3/04)

And, when asked how he felt about the carnage in Madrid, he uttered these words:

"Calm, serene, fulfilling my responsibilities and obligations as always... I see a lot of light in hope and in the future."

Maybe that explains why this war criminal is now a director of News Corp and opining in Murdoch's Australian.

Palestine Can Wait

Not just criminal, cutthroat scum, but mega-delusional as well:

"Spain has been a serious target for Islamic State because of its five-centuries-old land claims to the territory of Melilla and Ceuta, on the African continent bordering Morocco. The Counter-Terrorism Project reports: 'Spain's current anxieties are exacerbated by ISIS, al-Qa'ida, and other Islamist groups' vows to 'reconquer' what they refer to as 'al-Andalus',' the historic Arabic name for the Iberian mainland. Up until the late 15th century, large parts of Spain and Portugal were under the control of an Islamic caliphate. Spain is thus considered part of 'occupied lands' by jihadists and a legitimate target for re-inclusion in a future Islamic Caliphate. A Spanish-speaking ISIS member declared in 2014, 'I tell you, Spain is the land of our forefathers, and, Allah willing, we are going to liberate it, with the might of Allah...'

"Last year Islamic State called on its followers to attack Spanish tourist sites to avenge the crimes committed by Spain against Muslims, referring to the bloody 1212 Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa where 60,000 Muslims were killed." (Tougher controls thwarted attacks, Jacqueline Magnay, The Australian, 19/8/17)

Now For the Catholic Version

I've read thousands of letters to the editor which push one or other element of the false Zionist historical narrative, but the following, from Sophie York, Turramurra, NSW in The Australian, is the first I've ever read in the ms press which pushes a false Catholic narrative:

Here it is, minus the first sentence: "It was determined Catholic monarchs who threw off 700 years of dictatorial Moorish oppression in 1492 at the Battle of Granada, freeing Europe which then developed into constitutional monarchies and democracies. Catholicism, with its belief in individual human dignity, was the seedbed for modern democracy, because it rejected caste systems and wealth dictating innate value. It thus championed the poor, disabled and working-class, it let women work (nuns were teachers and nurses) - and all these formerly disenfranchised groups were eventually given the vote." (29/110/14)

First, a brief perspectival corrective from Emeritus Professor of Hispano-Arabic Studies at the University of Exeter, Richard Hitchcock, taken from his 2014 study Muslim Spain Reconsidered:

"Christians had no 'divine' right of possession over [the Iberian Peninsula]. Furthermore, the Muslims were not an occupying power in Christian territory; they were a permanent presence in the continent of Europe. Their state was one which was governed by a different raft of beliefs, but this circumstance did not necessarily obstruct relations with other powers... In retrospect, one may observe objectively that, by a number of yardsticks, the level of civilisation, for want of a better word, as manifested in al-Andalus was superior to that found elsewhere in the Iberian Peninsula and, in some periods, in the rest of Western Europe... The history of the Iberian Peninsula in the Middle Ages has traditionally been presented as that of two opposing creeds, yet the sources do not support this interpretation. When there were major thrusts from the north southwards or vice versa, it was when political weaknesses were perceived by either side. Such incursions were not motivated by religious interests, except at the time of the Crusades... There was no inherent hostility existing between al-Andalus and other powers in the Iberian Peninsula because of differing religious beliefs, at least for the first three and a half centuries after [the Muslim conquest] of 711." (pp 194-95)

Second, just look at those factoids and sweeping generalisations.

1) Dictatorial? How so?
2) Muslim Granada was blocking the development of constitutional monarchies/democracies in Europe? Come again?
3) Catholicism, with its belief in individual human dignity? Except for Jews (forced conversions/expulsion), Muslims (ditto), Christian dissenters (hello, Inquisition)... need I go on?
4) The Catholic church as a champion of the working class? Pull the other.

As I always say: Only in The Australian.

Back to the Future with Geert Wilders

So Geert Wilders loves Muslims but hates Islam. Thus the Dutch Messiah calls on "all the Muslims in the world to leave Islam for Christianity or atheism or whatever they want," which will be "good for them and also for our free society." (Change religion, politician tells Muslims, The Age, Barney Zwartz, 19/2/13)

This indefensible, even perhaps genocidal, call is just another variation on old Europe's hatred of 'the other'.

And so reminiscent of another time.

Although most of us are blissfully unaware of it, there was once a time when converting European Muslims to Christianity was all the rage..

It began following the conquest in 1492 of the Muslim emirate of Granada, the last (but one) foothold of Muslim rule in Spain to fall to the combined forces of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella. Despite a proclamation of religious tolerance by the latter, the urge to Christianise the Granadans was too strong, with one of Wilders' 'spiritual' forbears, Francisco Jimenez de Cisneros, archbishop of Toledo, setting out in deadly earnest to do just that:

However "[h]e quickly lost patience with the slow rate of progress and began sending recalcitrant Muslims to prison, where they were treated with... 'methods that were not correct' until they agreed to convert. One of those imprisoned was a Moorish noble named Zegri Azaator, whom Cisneros entrusted to the care of a thuggish priest known as the Lion from his surname Leon. After 20 days in the harsh company of this 'lion', the humiliated and filthy nobleman was brought in chains before Cisneros and announced that Allah had commanded him in a dream to become a Christian. Cisneros immediately had Zegri washed and dressed in a scarlet robe and whisked him off to the baptismal font, where he adopted the Christian name Gonzalo Fernandez Zegri." (Blood & Faith: The Purging of Muslim Spain, Matthew Carr, 2009, p 58)

After the 300,000 Muslims of Granada had become 'New Christians', the process was extended to the rest of Spain's Muslims, now derogatively labelled Moriscos (half-Moors).

But not even more than a century of wiping Muslim Spain off the map and forcibly converting its people could assuage the genocidal tendencies of Wilders' historical soulmates. As the 16th century wore on, they contemplated even more radical measures:

The Dominican monk Jaime Bleda, for example, "forged an obsessive loathing of a Morisco population he regarded as 'flesh-eating wolves and rabid dogs' whose members were 'born with the lie in their mouths'... Bleda's hatred of the Moriscos was entirely unconstrained by any consideration of mercy or humanity. Despite his fervent support of expulsion, Bleda was always attracted by more extreme possibilities and once expressed the hope that Moriscos might become infected with plague en route to Barbary and kill more 'Saracens' after their arrival." (ibid, p 208)

Eventually, inspired by the likes of Bleda, Philip III decided to deport the Moriscos en masse, beginning with those of Valencia:

"On the morning of September 24, 1609, town criers in the city of Valencia proclaimed the decree of expulsion to a fanfare of drums, horns, and trumpets. In it Philip accused the entire Morisco population of Valencia of heresy, apostasy, and 'divine and human lese-majeste' and announced his intention to expel them to Barbary in order to ensure the 'conservation and security' of his realms. All Moriscos were given 3 days to withdraw to their houses and wait for the royal commissioners to lead them to their assigned ports of embarkation... Printed copies of the decree were circulated throughout the kingdom and promulgated in every locality, so that within a few days there were few people in Valencia who were unaware of its contents... [S]oldiers and militiamen began patrolling the main towns and cities in a show of force, and workmen began constructing gallows by the roadsides as a warning to Moriscos considering resistance. In the city of Valencia, ironsmiths, swordmakers, and powdermakers manufactured weapons and ammunition to a constant rumble of militia drums and rifle shots as soldiers practised their marksmanship." (ibid, 233-234)

The uprooting of Valencia's 124,000 Moriscos was just an opener though. Tens of thousands were removed from the rest of Spain.

By 1614 it was all over - Spain had been ethnically cleansed of its Morisco population.

A deep study of history tells us that words and ideas, especially bad ones, can have terrible consequences. Listening to the Islamophobic rants of Wilders and his ilk, spewing forth their hatred for the Muslim 'other', I frankly find myself transported back to the terrible era of the Spain of the Reconquista and the Inquisition.

Bob Carr's Maiden Speech

Our new foreign minister, Bob Carr, delivered his maiden speech in the Senate on March 21.

While his focus on key environmental concerns and call for religious tolerance are welcome, the core issues of his portfolio, particularly those to do with our Middle Eastern (and more recently African) involvement, receive scant attention.

In this post I examine the relevant sections of Carr's speech in detail:

"I want to address another global challenge. One month ago, US soldiers burnt copies of the Koran at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan."

So what is the US doing in Afghanistan? And why are we there? Carr doesn't say. In fact, the only other reference to Afghanistan in his speech comes when he acknowledges that both Lab and Lib share a common "commitment to Afghanistan." As if the murder and mayhem in US-occupied Afghanistan today can be reduced to an act of desecration.

"Days later, young people destroyed 238 war graves in Benghazi, Libya. Whether intentional insult or error of judgment, such acts look like cultures of war. Senators may recall the sense of cultures being at war that was felt on hearing reports of the terrible dynamiting by the Taliban of the Buddhas of Bamiyan - those statues carved in stone 15 centuries ago."

No reference to his predecessor, Kevin Rudd, who acted as a one-man cheer squad for Western intervention there? No reflection on the 'wisdom' of that intervention?

"At such times, people might subscribe to the notion that we are being tugged toward the nightmare that the American writer Samuel Huntington predicted in his 1996 book 'The Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of World Order'. I remember King Abdullah of Jordan saying at a Davos conference in 2004: Let us avert the clash of civilisations, and help the overlap of cultures. I think those were eloquent words. That notion of an overlap of cultures, I think, is inspiring, especially compared to the alternative notion of monochrome monoliths destroying one another's statuary, smashing one another's grave sites and burning one another's books."

Dragged into a clash of civilisations are we? Or willingly involved in illegal acts of regime change without regard to the cost in lives, resources and treasure? Not a whisper about Iraq, the great crime against humanity that opened the 21st century, just the uncritical invocation of a neocon meme. And strangely, not a whisper about the coming USraeli aggression against Iran despite Carr's characterisation of it on his Thoughtlines blog as "certifiable insanity."

"There have been in the world's history some marvellous cultures of tolerance, and we should dwell on them. In Southern Spain, in medieval times, Moslems, Christians and Jews lived and worked together in the polity known as Al-Andalus. Andalusia, of course, springs from that Arabic noun. One of the caliphs, Abd-ar-Rahman III, who ruled between 912 and 961 - his name has probably not been spoken in this Senate chamber for many years - appointed a devout Jewish scholar, Hasdai ibn Shaprut, as his foreign minister. Why recall this all these centuries later? Simply because of the symbolism. Here was a Moslem ruler who appointed a Jew as his foreign minister. It is what King Abdullah must have had in mind: an overlap of cultures. In that civilisation, Al-Andalus, while Christian Europe's libraries were small, the caliph's library at Cordoba reportedly burst with 400,000 volumes. Jews in this civilisation had their sacred writings translated into Arabic, because they liked the sinuosity of the language. As Maria Rosa Menocal wrote in the Ornament of the World - a beautiful book that I commend to the Senate - this was a society that had the courage to 'live with it's own flagrant contradictions'."*

Certainly the most interesting part of Carr's speech from our perspective. Yes, I think we can say with complete confidence that his reference to Al-Andalus, or any other high point of Islamic civilisation for that matter, is a first for the Australian senate. And yes, he's done well to draw the attention of its unrepresentative swill to such an example. After all, anything that sticks in the craw of Senator Cory Bernardi and his kind is more than welcome.

However, it does rather sit at odds with Carr's lifelong support for the Jewish supremacist state of Israel, which has more in common with the Christian supremacist regimes which followed the reconquest of Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella in the 13th century, regimes which culminated in the expulsion of an estimated 300,000 Spanish Muslims between 1609 and 1614 by King Philip III. This was perhaps the largest act of ethnic cleansing ever carried out in Europe up to that time, and a forerunner of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Zionist forces from 1947 to 1950.

"We should ask what we Australians can do, in our modest way, to steer the world away from Koran burnings, the bombing of Buddhas and the despoilation of brave soldiers' graves towards peaceful overlap and pluralism. We can make sure that our multicultural society continues to tick over. I do not think there is a need to fetishise multiculturalism or to give it a capital 'M' but, simply, to relax into our easy going Australian ethnic and cultural diversity based on tolerance and respect. We can redouble our efforts in the Alliance of Civilisations - and earlier this afternoon I met another UN ambassador who was a member of that alliance - sponsored by the governments of Spain and Turkey. We can enhance our work in the region for interfaith dialogue. We can work with Indonesians, the largest Islamic nation in the world, which continues to spurn extremism."

All bandaid solutions I'm afraid. What we as Australians should do is decline to participate in, or better, forthrightly oppose, the kind of American imperial aggressions that set the scene for such behaviour and worse. But that, I'm afraid, is a bridge too far a conga-line suckhole like Carr.

"Running foreign policy is about protecting our national interest. Although by every tenet of diplomatic doctrine that comes first and foremost, it is also about being an exemplary global citizen when it comes to protecting human rights and protecting the world's oceans. To this I would like to add that in foreign policy we may also promote and defend cultural diversity, the idea of a planet of seven billion that celebrates and does not deny its contradictions."

Cultural diversity? Sure, it beats the resurgent Islamophobia of a Nicholas Sarkozy, but is that the best Carr can come up with?

[* Highly recommended: Blood & Faith: The Purging of Muslim Spain, Matthew Carr, 2009]