Saudi 'conservatives' will teach Austrians about tolerance

Turning ‘conservative’ into a dirty word:

This is Fox language. Was Fox ever ‘conservative?’

 Some recent examples of Saudi conservatism and tolerance:

My BS meter just exploded:  “Tolerance” in Islam-speak means da’awa. The Arabs will demand that Austrians  submit to their intolerance, implement strict laws against free speech and stifle any criticism of Islam.

Saudi-Backed Religious Tolerance Center Founded

Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud exchanges documents with his Austrian counterpart Michael Spindelegger, from left, after signing the agreement for the establishment of the King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Center for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue, KAICID, in Vienna, Austria, Thursday, Oct. 13, 2011.

VIENNA– A Saudi-backed interfaith center was inaugurated Thursday in Vienna, igniting debate over the subject of religious tolerance.

Backers hope the center will promote increased tolerance in Saudi Arabia, a kingdom that now prohibits any religion outside of Islam. Detractors say the Saudis are the last people who should be hosting initiatives on religious coexistence.

Wahhabism — the strain of Sunni Islam that is practiced in Saudi Arabia — is considered one of the religion’s most conservative. Strict interpretations of the faith have left Saudi women without the right to drive or to go out without permission from a male relative. They have also have tattered ties with Islam’s other major branch, Shiism, that have exposed deep rivalries between Saudi Arabia and predominantly Shiite Iran.

Relations reached a new low this week after U.S. allegations that Iran was behind a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

In Vienna to launch the interfaith center, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal accused Tehran of “murder and mayhem” and said his country is working on a “measured response” to the purported Iranian assassination attempt.

But most of his comments focused on the “King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue” — and he appeared keen to dispel skepticism about his country’s commitment to make it a focal point of interfaith dialogue and tolerance.

“Saudi Arabia is willing to financially participate in this project, and to place all its moral and political resources behind such a center, without infringing … on its autonomy or independence from any political interference,” he told officials and reporters.

And he warned against “extremist minorities within every religious and cultural community … seeking … to propagate notions of intolerance, exclusion, racism and hatred.

“These tiny minorities,” he said, “are trying to hijack and disrupt the legitimate identities and aspirations of people of all cultures and faiths.”

The founding document cites principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human rights, “in particular, the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” It emphasizes “human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.”

Its board will consist of three Christians, three Muslims, a Jew, a Buddhist and a Hindu.

They will be good dhimmies who will lie, obscure and deceive everyone because they will be well paid.

“A Reformer”

King Abdullah, who is regarded as a reformer by Saudi standards, is slowly moving to lift some restrictions dictated by conservative Saudi society. He recently decreed that women would be allowed for the first time to vote and run as candidates in elections for municipal councils starting in 2015. He also promised to appoint women after two years to the Shura Council, the currently all-male consultative body with no legislative powers.

At the same time, the kingdom continues to impose many religiously motivated social restrictions on women.

In Saudi Arabia, no woman can drive, travel, work, marry, get divorced, gain admittance to a public hospital or live independently without permission from a male guardian. Men can beat women who don’t obey them and fathers or brothers can prevent their female relatives from getting married if they don’t approve.

Any reforms at home must be cautious so as not to offend the country’s senior clergy, which the Saudi royal family depends on for support, a fact that has apparently prompted the king to pave the ground for changes abroad.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/10/13/saudi-backed-religious-tolerance-center-founded/#ixzz1aiKtrTe1

Here’s the whole thing fisked by JW:

The situation in Saudi Arabia itself proves that this outfit, the King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue (you can’t make this stuff up), is nothing but an outpost for dawah, or Islamic proselytizing, and deception. If it is good for anything, it sets up a glaring study in contrasts between Sharia as advertised, in this “interfaith” scam in Vienna, and Sharia as observed, in Saudi Arabia.

Caveat emptor. “Saudi-backed religious tolerance center opens,” by George Jahn for theAssociated Press, October 13:

VIENNA (AP) — Saudi Arabia inaugurated an interfaith center in Vienna Thursday and its foreign minister said he hoped the spirit of tolerance embodied by the new institution will help change his conservative Muslim country, which prohibits any religion except Islam.

If in 1683 you don’t succeed, try, try again. “War is deceit,” Muhammad said.

The statement by Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal was an unusually clear declaration of intent by Saudi Arabia’s rulers to work for religious and societal reforms from abroad in the face of domestic opposition to rapid change.

The center has ignited debate. Backers hope it will promote increased tolerance in Saudi Arabia, a kingdom that now prohibits any religion outside of Islam. Detractors, including Austria’s Green party and moderate Muslim groups in Austria say the Saudis are the last people who should be hosting initiatives on religious coexistence.

If the goal is to change Saudi Arabia, they might consider trying it in, say, Saudi Arabia.

Ahead of Thursday’s inauguration ceremonies, the daily Der Standard cited Rabbi David Rosen of the American Jewish Committee as criticzing Saudi plans to exercise initial leadership oversight of the institution, saying it had to be “totally independent.”

Wahhabism — the strain of Sunni Islam that is practiced in Saudi Arabia — is considered one of the religion’s most conservative. Some of its tenets were hijacked by Osama bin Laden and other terrorists to justify their acts.

Strict interpretations of the faith have left Saudi women without the right to drive or to go out without permission from a male relative. They have also have tattered ties with Islam’s other major branch, Shiism, that have exposed deep rivalries between Saudi Arabia and predominantly Shiite Iran.

The Sunni-Shi’ite jihad is not the invention of either country, of course.

Relations reached a new low this week after U.S. allegations that Iran was behind a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

In Vienna to launch the interfaith center, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal accused Tehran of “murder and mayhem” and said his country is working on a “measured response” to the purported Iranian assassination attempt.

But most of his comments focused on the “King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Centre for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue” — and he appeared keen to dispel skepticism about his country’s commitment to make it a focal point of interfaith dialogue and tolerance.

In an unsually fortright [sic] statement reflecting the Saudi leadership’s push for change, the minister said he hoped “the center will take the lead” in making Saudi Arabia a more tolerant society.

How exactly is that supposed to work again?

“Saudi Arabia is willing to financially participate in this project, and to place all its moral and political resources behind such a center, without infringing … on its autonomy or independence from any political interference,” he told officials and reporters.

And he warned against “extremist minorities within every religious and cultural community … seeking … to propagate notions of intolerance, exclusion, racism and hatred.

Picked up a Saudi textbook lately?

“These tiny minorities,” he said, “are trying to hijack and disrupt the legitimate identities and aspirations of people of all cultures and faiths.”

The founding document cites principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human rights, “in particular, the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” It emphasizes “human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.”

Its board will consist of three Christians, three Muslims, a Jew, a Buddhist and a Hindu….

So, two thirds of the board could not openly practice their religion in Saudi Arabia. Tell us again which country is really in need of a brand spankin’ new tolerance institute.

 

2 thoughts on “Saudi 'conservatives' will teach Austrians about tolerance”

  1. O.T Oklahoma recently voted to prohibit sharia law from being considered in their civil courts and now there is a historian who claims that Jewish and Christian women voluntarily submitted themselves to sharia courts because they could get a better deal in inheritance. This appears to be very fishy. Is this the thin end of the wedge to justify sharia law in the States? Perhaps some readers would want to comment on this.
    There is more at:
    “OKLA. CITY — Several weeks ago, a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver asked an attorney representing the state of Oklahoma questions regarding the legality of the constitutional measure approved by the voters of Oklahoma that prohibits the state courts from considering Sharia law when making judicial decisions.
    But historian Phillip Mansel has written in “Levant, Splendor and Catastrophe on the Mediterranean” of a time when both Christian and Jewish women in the Turkish empire voluntarily submitted to Muslim courts because of the greater inheritance rights women had under Sharia law then they did under Christian or Jewish law at that time. He also documents how Christians and Jews who lived in the lands ruled by the Turkish sultan often voluntarily submitted to Muslim courts to resolve legal disputes.
    http://www.edmondsun.com/opinion/x1372391653/Multiculturalism-continues-to-grow-in-Central-Oklahoma

    1. Thanks, Gerald.

      Isn’t it funny that they go to any length to force the sharia on us while denying all the while that we will never have sharia in the west, that there is no danger whatsoever that we will ever have to fear a thing from sharia because the muzz amounts only to a ‘tiny minority of excremists’ and all that jazz?

      Then they’re even willing to pay some Christian and Jewish dhimmies to testify on their behalf.

Comments are closed.