Is Islam a Religion of Peace?

October 7, 2010

9 min. clip from the Hitchens - Ramadan debate: Is Islam a Religion of Peace? Moderated by Laurie Goodstein. October 5, 2010 at the 92nd Street Y

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Weird how Hitch looks more healthy than for a long time....Augurs well I hope.

Anonymous said...

Will there be more Tom? Thank you

Anonymous said...

Lookin good!

Anonymous said...

where can i watch the whole debate?

oh lovely, thank you

HJ said...

Who won the debate?

Tom said...

I doubt 92nd Street Y will upload the whole debate. They didn't do it with the Rushdie event back in June, just a 11 min clip.

Daniel said...

I attended this debate in NYC. I must say, Hitchens outdid even himself. He didn't let a single one of Ramadan's platitudes go by unchecked. As is often the case, Hitchens's opponent wasted his time talking about why Hitchens is wrong instead of making his own positive case. Not one thing Ramadan said suggested that Islam is a religion of peace. The best part of the debate, which I hope you'll be able to see, is about the lack of Muslim authority

Daniel said...

...next time I post a comment I'll watch the video...

Mark G said...

"I must say, Hitchens outdid even himself."

Must you say it? Are those the orders from HQ?

Unfortunately, that clip doesn't give much away. Ramadan gives a good, honest answer to a question about the 'crisis of leadership' facing Islam. Hitchens responds with an admittedly funny joke about Islam not having a Pope. But then he uses the rest of his time to inexplicably go off on a tangent about, oh, you know, the usual litany: Rushdie, Denmark, etc.

Anonymous said...

@Mark G: Seems Hitchens is illustrating the subject of the talk 'Is Islam a Religion of Peace?' and Ramadan is going off on an irrelevant rant not addressing the issue. Just playing it safe.

I like how Hitchens implies Ramadan is a liar. Ha ha! Naughty Hitch! Well played. Can't wait for full talk.

HJ said...

Question for Mark G:

Is Islam a religion of Peace?

Yes or no.

HJ said...

I just watched that clip and I think Mark G doesn't really give a good summary.

The question is "Is Islam a religion of peace?"

The answer is yes or no.

The prolbem is who speaks for Islam to tell if there is a correct interpretation?


The moderator gave the example of Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Tariq Ramadan said the one thing that must cause groans everywhere. His answer was, "I read what he says and I try to be selective."

Now, that would be okay if we were talking about a philosopher or a scientist. But Qaradawi is an imam and he bases his opinions on the Koran suggesting that the sole athority he has is selectively picked by people like Ramadan.

Hitchens does mention the Ayatollah, yes. But the Ayatollah is a Shia, as you know Mark. And Qaradawi is obviously a Sunni, right. And Ramadan is a Sunni. So, Ramadan first of all needs to point out what Islam is and what the true path of Islam is and what happens to those who happen to disagree about the interpretation of the Koran.

Mark G, what do you think history shows us about those that disagree in their interpretations of the religion of peace?

HJ said...

By the way, I think Ramadan is not a bad guy. In fact, I think he's a very good guy. I think he is trying hard to do something that really is impossible and that is to make the world think he speaks for Islam and his diplomatic version of Islam will be accepted by extremists.

SmartestGuyInThisRoom said...

Can I buy a dvd of this debate somewhere?

or rather

Is it possible to see the whole thing somehow?

Anonymous said...

or get access to the transcript? someone?

Daniel said...

Though Mark G. has flattered me by quoting my comment, I'm sorry to say his own comment falls short of an accurate assessment of Ramadan. I agree that Ramadan gave an honest answer, but it wasn't good. He suggested that the mainstream is not promoting violence or extremist views but is instead promoting diversity, democracy, etc. But where, Hitchens was forced to again ask, are the mainstream Muslim denunciations of violence and extremism? Who are the Muslim leaders who are clearly and sharply separating themselves from the frightening views that have gotten the publicity? Not shown in this video, Ramadan was eventually forced to concede that the "leaders" he was defining as "mainstream" and "moderate" were Muslim scholars, not the Imams and others setting the religious agenda.

T. Top said...

Jesus, Ramadan is a terribly vacuous excuse for an intellectual. As apologists for near fascist ideologies go, he's also a terrific bore. Paul Berman has so thoroughly discredited this guy that it still somewhat shocks me to see people who consider themselves to be educated fawn on him.

FGFM said...

But where, Hitchens was forced to again ask, are the mainstream Muslim denunciations of violence and extremism?

Because too much is never enough.

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

FGFM said...

Berman has so thoroughly discredited this guy that it still somewhat shocks me to see people who consider themselves to be educated fawn on him.

I feel the same way about Hitchens. Yellowcake, anyone?

Anonymous said...

But not Bukowski. Go figure.

FGFM said...

But not Bukowski. Go figure.

Bukowski died from a smoking-related illness, go figure.

Smoking causes leukemia, cataracts, pneumonia and cancers of the cervix, kidney, pancreas and stomach

Anyone care for a Rothmans?

Sean said...

When I see Ramadan I always keep in mind what Malek Boutih, the former head of SOS Racisme (France's largest anti-racist NGO) who, after meeting Ramadan, described him as...."a fascist...whi is no different from Jean Marie Le Penn"

No mincing words there!!!

 
 
 

Christopher reads from Hitch-22: A Memoir