16 thoughts on “American Thinker: Should Spain Apologize to Muslims?

  1. Which history is false?

    Perhaps the Jews might have something to say about atrocities back then. They generally got it from both religions.

    Which is really rather ironic, since the Jews are the originals when it comes to Abrahamic roots to both Islam and Christianity.

    Perhaps an apology is nothing more than a modern acknowledgement that past atrocities were not some of mankind’s finest moments. And when one really thinks about it, atrocities among religions that 1) are all monotheistic and 2) have the same ancient roots is kind of ridiculous if it weren’t so brutal.

    It is not a matter of belief in God, but rather the technical details of how, when, where and through whose direction.

    We are still doing it today. Some places bloodier than others, of course. But generally pretty universal.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “Which history is false?”

      Specifically, the common claim that Muslim Spain was a happy place for the Christians and Jews who lived under Muslim rule. A related false history claim is that Muslim Spain amounted to golden age of sorts for European Civilization as a whole, even to the point of advancing the general evolution of humanity.

      Both of these false notions are fairly characteristic of Muslim propaganda about the period.

      Like

      1. Why are either of those claims false?

        “During waves of persecution in Medieval Europe, many Jews found refuge in Muslim lands. For instance, Jews expelled from the Iberian Peninsula were invited to settle in various parts of the Ottoman Empire, where they would often form a prosperous model minority of merchants acting as intermediaries for their Muslim rulers.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_under_Muslim_rule

        This article is extensive with the history of the Jews under Muslim rule.

        ” dhimmÄ« is a historical term referring to non-Muslims living in an Islamic state with legal protection. The word literally means “protected person”, referring to the state’s obligation under sharia to protect the individual’s life, property, and freedom of religion, in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax, which complemented the zakat, or obligatory alms, paid by the Muslim subjects. Dhimmis were exempt from certain duties assigned specifically to Muslims, and did not enjoy certain privileges and freedoms reserved for Muslims, but were otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract, and obligation.”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

        Now I am sure there were local rulers that abused their power. And not every minority was treated well. History is replete with horror stories up to and including the present day. But that would be true everywhere and by every ethnic, religious or majority group.

        Look at the treatment of some Protestant sects by the Catholics in power in France centuries ago.
        My guess the blacks in the apartheid era in the US were not treated as well as Christian or Jewish communities in Islamic empires of the past.

        I contend that the article in AmericanThinker is just another attempt at Islam bashing. And that revisionist history is the goal of the author.

        Like

        1. RE: “Why are either of those claims false?”

          For the reasons given in Spencer’s article.

          RE: “I contend that the article in AmericanThinker is just another attempt at Islam bashing. And that revisionist history is the goal of the author.”

          What do you base your contention on? Are there any statements of fact in Spencer’s article which you know to be false? Do you think your Wikipedia references are more authoritative than the AT piece? If so, why?

          Like

          1. He is making a big deal out of a handful of abuses. Slavery? Heck we had slavery 1000 years later.

            I stand by the general thesis of the well annotated Wikipedia articles over the sensationalist BS in the AT article.

            Like

          2. RE: “He is making a big deal out of a handful of abuses.”

            I see. I doubt I can disabuse you of your observations. But if you believe Spencer’s facts are correct, surely you can see why he makes a big deal out of the abuses he cites. After all, the Muslim, Yihad Sarasua, makes an outrageous demand of the Spanish king. The Muslims conquered Christian Spain then ruled it for several centuries until the Christians finally expelled them. Yihad Sarasua wants today’s Spannish King to apologize for expelling yesterday’s Muslims and disrespecting the beneficence yesterday’s Muslims brought to the region while they ruled it.

            It is hardly “Islam bashing” to point out that Muslim beneficence in Andalusia was not as sublime as today’s Muslims and their dupes portray it to be.

            Like

          3. “Today’s Muslims and their dupes.”

            Duplicates?

            What most Americans know about Islam you can fit under your fingernail. And just about all of it is based on the actions of a very few out of the billion or so worldwide Muslim population.

            (Before you jump all over this rebuttal, I am not professing expertise in the Muslim faith, or at least not anymore than you have.)

            Most of the violence by the extremists is perpetrated against other Muslims. And considering how many Iraqi’s died or were displaced by us, Americans probably contributed our fair share against the Muslims.

            So how does this fit the narrative of the revisionist history spewed by your author?

            Sincerely,

            A dupe according to Chesapean.

            Like

          4. RE: “So how does this fit the narrative of the revisionist history spewed by your author?”

            That a strain of violent extremism exists in Islam is a theme that Spencer explores in many of his books and articles I have read. The problem is ignorant Westerners who rationalize away or downplay the significance of it.

            Like

  2. Why would anyone publicize such a silly story? Answer : it plays into their desire to set up an American jihad against Islam.

    Of course, the history IS pretty ugly. In essence the Christians were the lean and hungry barbarians at the gates out for rape, plunder and pillage.

    Like

    1. An American jihad against Islam is not needed. Simple, factual history will suffice, as that is enough to debunk Muslim apologetics that too many contemporary liberals endorse in ignorance.

      Like

      1. You are the ignorant one in this conversation. You show that on this and every other subject. In this case I studied Spanish history for a full year at the University of Madrid where the relationship between the two cultures – Christian and Muslim – was a central topic. I know what I am talking about. You don’t.

        Like

        1. As it happens I pursued a deep interest in Islamic classical history and literature for many years as a young man and it is on that basis that I find your commentary inept. You seem not to have learned anything at university, since you share no particular aspect of your superior knowledge to rebut a single statement in Spenser’s brief atricle. Perhaps you dispute that the Muslims conquered Spain, or that the “dhimmis suffered severe economic hardship” under Muslim rule, a fact which helped inspire the Reconquista.

          Instead of sharing any substance of your self-avowed expertise, you only make a pretense of it, and so contribute to falsehood.

          Like

          1. I offered an opinion. Spreading this story about the statement of a single Imam seeking an apology for wrongs committed five hundred years ago is silly and that the only purpose it serves is to exacerbate differences. That was his purpose and it is obviously your purpose as well. It is what White Nationalist do. The Christians are always the victims and martyrs and the “others” are always the bad guys.

            I did not challenge the facts offered. I take it for granted that the Imam was quoted accurately. And, there is no reason to doubt the horror stories the author cherry-picked from a 700 year period. (FAR worse horror stories could easily be picked from 500 years of Christian rule in THIS hemisphere). But, for the record, the Imam’s complaints were largely accurate. As I stated above the Christians WERE the bad actors in the fifteenth century drama. They WERE the barbarians attacking far more advanced people out of pure greed, lust and envy. If you are not fully aware of that then your “many years” of study were a total waste.

            Like

          2. RE: “the Christians WERE the bad actors in the fifteenth century drama. They WERE the barbarians attacking far more advanced people out of pure greed, lust and envy. If you are not fully aware of that then your ‘many years’ of study were a total waste.”

            At least you are blatant in your anti-Western bigotry: Christians bad, Muslims good.

            I, too, once imagined Islam to be superior. It was the motive for my reading. But I came to realize at last that the early Christians who opposed Islam were right to characterize it as an aberrant cult, in fact a Christian knock-off.

            Islam today remains stuck in its historical collapse into fundamentalism. If it is ever to reform itself, it will not be because of people like you who worship it without understanding it.

            Like

          3. Knowing the actual history of Western Civilization does not make me a bigot. That is a truly ignorant accusation. Islam is no more a “cult” than is Christianity or Judaism. And, after expressing such an opinion you accuse me of bigotry?

            With all due respect, you seem to have no ability to distinguish between objective and informed history and the lying lies and cherry-picking of hate mongers. What is worse, when offered facts that contradict your preconceived ideas you always fall back on goofy counterfactual obtuseness. In this case, you simply will not acknowledge that from about 800 to about 1400 the most civilized and advanced people around the Mediterranean were the Moors. Whether you and your sort want to admit it, that is the simple truth.

            Like

          4. RE: “In this case, you simply will not acknowledge that from about 800 to about 1400 the most civilized and advanced people around the Mediterranean were the Moors.”

            I won’t acknowledge it because it is a lie.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s