Postingan menarik, dear Mbak Angel! 
Walikota London, the Lord Mayor of London "Red" Ken Livingstone anggota Labour 
Party, krn "sangat kiri" pendapatnya 
2 tahun yg lau kena skors, entah sdh diampuni oleh partai atau bahkan hengkang 
dari Labour yang dibawah pimpinan Tony Blair
sedang tergonjang-ganjing karena banyak anggotanya menentang kebijakannya yang 
sangat pro-AS dalam invansi di Iraq. 

"Red" gelarnya krn oleh sayap kanan di UK dikatakan sbg komunis. Nyatanya Ken 
tetap saja menang dlm pilkada untuk Walikota di London, salah satu pusat 
kapital global dengan selera tinggi borjuis bahkan tradisi kebangsawanan yang 
kuat.. Tentu sbg politikus
 "lokal" dia tidak akan dapat melawan debat para profesor sayap kanan dalam 
dikusi terbuka itu.

Ken menurut CNN bahkan kini sedang di Davos, Swiss, untuk temu tahunan politisi 
dan bigbiz sedunia, dia disana 
men-sosialisasikan pungutan "tol" cukup tinggi untuk kendaraan bermotor bila 
masuk downtown London, yg ternyata sanggup 
mengurangi polusi di tengah kota tsb secara sangat signifikan.

Seluruhnya, saya anggap "Red" Ken di Eropa sbg salah satu tokoh "underdogs", 
wong cilik, yang mencuat. 
Spt seorang petani Prancis, lupa namanya, yang berkumis cambang dan lugu 
penampilannya 
membela petani gurem dan juga sangat sadar ekologi, tukang demo barangkali 
kayak Lae Hariman Siregar di RI,
keluar masuk tahanan polisi, dan sudah lama menjadi  pahlawan, dan "hati 
nurani" rakyat Prancis.

Bagaimanapun, didunia ini kadang-kadang lahir tokoh seperti Robin Hood, Janosik 
di Cekoslowakia,
Jeanne d'Arc, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandela yang berani 
berkorban melawan kekuasaan brutal
"demi-gods and  semi-evils" dan berpihak pada wong cilik. Tentu kita tidak lupa 
pada Nabi Isa yang pengaruh 
ajarannnya sangat kolosal.

B.rgds., Mbak Angel, bdg

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: angel_fire_20042000 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 6:19 PM
  Subject: [nasional-list] Debating Clash Civilisation in London


  Noted: Radical islam is a Problem, Moderate islam is a solution

  http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=debate12007.htm

  Dr. Daniel Pipes And Douglas Murray Triumph Over "Red" Ken 
  Livingstone In London Debate 

  By Beila Rabinowitz and William A. Mayer 

  January 21, 2007 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Saturday's 
  much anticipated squaring off between noted Middle East scholar Dr. 
  Daniel Pipes and London's leftist mayor Ken Livingstone - billed as 
  the "Clash of Civilisations or World Civilisation?" - was a rout, 
  with Pipes - teaming with Brit Douglas Murray - besting the far less 
  articulate Mayor's team while drawing considerable applause on 
  decidedly hostile ground. 

  Livingstone and his partner Birmingham Councilwoman Salma Yaqoob 
  were rendered speechless on occasion, unable to challenge Pipes' 
  professorial delivery and Murray's oratory. 

  Dr. Pipes presented the idea that radical Islam is the problem and 
  moderate Islam, the solution. He dramatically quoted a Quranic text 
  to show that the tenets for civil society were also to be found 
  within Islam, and in concluding his remarks, brought the audience to 
  their feet. 

  He critiqued Samuel Huntington's theory of clashing civilizations 
  explaining how the struggle was more properly a conflict between 
  civilization and barbarism. 

  According to eyewitness accounts, Murray "came out with guns 
  blazing" and attacked Livingstone for his claims that all the ills 
  of the world should be blamed on the West, challenging his belief 
  that jihad is "our fault." 

  Murray called multiculturalism an abject failure and pointedly asked 
  why Livingstone had chosen Salma Yaqoob an Islamist, as a debating 
  partner, noting that she is the Vice Chair of the Respect Party [a 
  group which prides itself of being "Zionist Free"] and had openly 
  campaigned for the release of terrorists and referred to the 7/7 
  bombings "as reprisals." 

  In stark contrast to Pipes and Murray, the London Mayor's speech was 
  standard leftist boilerplate, alleging the Cold War was part and 
  parcel of the United States' hegemonistic designs for dominion over 
  all and in what must have represented a Stalinist flashback moment 
  for many in the audience, actually blaming America for victimizing 
  the Soviet Union. He then expanded his comments into a general 
  attack on Western values, though he was careful to delimit his 
  espoused multiculturalism, cutting short of endorsing the practice 
  of cannibalism. 

  Contrary to the evidence provided by London's 7/7/05 bombings, a 
  similar but failed plot two weeks later and a seething population of 
  Islamists advocating jihad, Livingstone also proclaimed that the 
  city's considerable Muslim population had contributed much that was 
  good. 

  The Mayor's debate partner Yaqoob was even less restrained calling 
  Dr. Pipes an Islamophobe and, offering no factual basis, attempting 
  to directly link him to the Bush administration's war policies. 

  In keeping with Livingstone's bogeyman attitude toward the West in 
  general and the U.S. in particular at the conference Yaqoob denied 
  that Islamism presents any threat at all, claiming that terrorist 
  attacks are motivated - and presumably justified - because of 
  Western actions, "imperialism" et al. 

  The sense of those who witnessed the event was that Dr. Pipes and 
  Douglas Murray won a clear-cut victory, defeating Livingstone and 
  Yaqoob on their home turf and in front of an audience of 5,000. 

  ©1999-2007 Beila Rabinowitz/William A. Mayer/PipeLineNews.org LLC 



  http://pryce-jones.nationalreview.com/post

  Saturday, January 20, 2007

  Debating Clash

  Michael Wharton, a satirist of genius who wrote under the pseudonym 
  of Peter Simple, liked to describe some of the people about whom he 
  fantasised as "genial, unpopular." Such a fellow is Ken Livingstone, 
  the mayor of London. He specializes in being genial and unpopular, 
  probably attracting more general hatred than any other politician in 
  Britain. Not at all the tribune of the people he pretends to be, he 
  is an old-style Communist or more exactly Trotskyist, who never 
  passes up the chance to wage class war, to slam the United States, 
  to swipe at Israel and Jews, and to promote today's hard Left. He is 
  planning a festival in honour of his hero Fidel Castro, and lately 
  visited Hugo Chavez in Venezuela in search of cheap oil. He also 
  supports anything and everything on the Muslim agenda, for instance 
  inviting the egregious and retrograde Sheikh Qaradawi, spokesman of 
  the Muslim Brotherhood. Islamists and the hard Left in fact have 
  nothing in common except hatred of the West, and their alliance is 
  unnatural on both sides.

  It must have seemed a good idea to this sinister clown to hold a 
  conference sponsored by London, and to participate himself in a 
  debate on whether or not there is a clash of civilizations. He no 
  doubt saw his chance to make more anti-American mischief, and 
  perhaps pin the blame for everything on the "neo-cons," a 
  portmanteau phrase for everything the hard Left hates. Inviting 
  Daniel Pipes to come from Philadelphia and fit the role of 
  scapegoat, he in fact got more than he bargained for.

  This morning, the large hall and two overflow halls were filled. 
  Many in the audience were Muslims. As expected, Livingstone praised 
  multi-culturalism as the source of peace, love and (Muslim) 
  brotherhood. Here was really an updating of the old Comintern 
  doctrine of internationalism whereby the Soviet Union waged war on 
  everyone and called it peace. The Cold War was all the fault of the 
  West, and he charged that we were making the same mistake with the 
  Muslims. A young lady in a hijab seconded him, shrilly repeating 
  that the real terrorists were America and Britain.

  Scholar that he is, Daniel Pipes explained that the war is actually 
  between civilization and barbarism. Carefully he distinguished the 
  religion of Islam from Islamism, a totalitarian ideology with which 
  there could be no compromise. He was looking for victory over it. He 
  and his seconder, Douglas Murray, a brilliant young British 
  intellectual, made the point that moderate Muslims had to be 
  supported against extremist Islamists. And suddenly their arguments 
  began to shift the audience away from Livingstone, and to attract a 
  lot of applause. The war on terror has a long way still to go, but 
  victorious battles like this one in a debating hall may mean fewer, 
  or even no, future battles in the field or on the streets. 

  01/20 04:08 PM



   

Kirim email ke