Remember the 58 Catholics killed in a Baghdad church in November? The Jews did it.

Gregory III Laham, the patriarch of the Catholic Melkite Greek church (which follows the Eastern liturgy, but is in union with Rome), has said that there was a “Zionist conspiracy against Islam” behind the al Qaeda’s attack and hostage taking last month at a Catholic church in Baghdad in which 58 parishioners were killed.

Concerning the increasing violence against Christians in Iraq, the patriarch stated that “All this behavior has nothing to do with Islam.” Rather, it is “a conspiracy planned by Zionism and some Christians with Zionist orientations and it aims at undermining and giving a bad image of Islam.”

The linked story does not explain what this conspiracy consisted of, according to Gregory. Did the Jews somehow goad al Qaeda into the attack against their will? Or did Mossad agents disguise themselves as al Qaeda terrorists and take over the church and kill the people? Or did the Zionists hypnotize everyone and make the world believe that a hostage-taking situation had occurred and 58 Christian worshippers had been killed, when in reality nothing happened at all and the whole thing was just a fantasy?

No matter how difficult it would have been to carry off such a conspiracy, we can be sure that Gregory is right about it, because we’re talking here about the Jews, and the Jews can do anything.

- end of initial entry -

Clark Coleman, who sent the item, writes:

Another non-Islam theory of Islamic terrorism.
LA replies:

On one hand, this is not your usual non-Islam theory of Islamic extremism, because NITIE’s are typically theories concocted by Western intelligentsia who are imposing familiar Western preoccupations and thought forms onto Islam instead of taking the trouble to look at Islam in its own terms. On the other hand, the patriarch’s Jew conspiracy theory does fit the overall pattern of the NITIE’s, as it provides a total explanation for Islamic extremism which has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.

In fact, this is the second new non-Islam theory of Islamic extremism that I’ve chanced upon in the last two hours. As discussed in the previous entry, three enterprising reporters at the Telegraph have come up with a new NITIE: Islamic terrorism is caused by the failure of British universities to do enough to stamp out the recruiting of extremists on campus.

December 14

Kristor writes:

My first thought when I read about this was, “Laham is terrified of Muslim assassins, should he speak the truth. So terrified is he, that he hides the truth even from himself, in order to find a way to stay on the good side of his oppressors. He makes excuses for them, insists it isn’t their fault. It’s like a battered wife making excuses for her husband, insisting his brutality is not his fault. It’s like Stockholm Syndrome. Same thing happens with Christians in Gaza & Lebanon.” Or he could be insane. Either way.

Paul V. writes:

Unless something new and verifiable comes to light, Patriarch Gregory’s allegation that Zionists were behind the attack that killed 59 Christians in Bagdad is absurd on the face of it. It’s the sort of thing one might be required to say when being held hostage; the expectation is that the absurdity and the circumstances would be plain to everybody. The survival of Christians in Bagdad is definitely at stake; whether this excuses the statement is beyond my ken. However, I think it is highly unlikely that the Patriarch in this traumatic moment for him and the community he is responsible for would find time and inclination to express latent anti-Semitic tendencies, assuming they exist. I see no reason to assume they do exist.

LA replies:

The statement doesn’t suggest the existence even of latent anti-Semitic tendencies, huh? You’re not as delusional as Gregory, but you do sound delusional.

Ron L. writes:

Is this a parody of Arab antisemitic conspiracy or an unintended indictment of dhimmi attempts at collaboration for protection? I can’t imagine anyone saying this, who is not under duress.

Sage McLaughlin writes:

Let me begin by saying that Patriarch Gregory is beneath contempt. At the same time, I had the same reaction as Paul V., when he says that “I can’t imagine anyone saying this, who is not under duress.” It seems impossible from our vantage point that he really thinks the Mossad (or whoever) carried out the bombing to frame the poor innocent Muslims of Iraq. Similarly, it seems impossible that American blacks really believe that the CIA invented crack cocaine simply to poison them, but a shocking number of them seriously credited the idea when it started circulating.

My own view is that the Patriarch is indeed under duress, but it is the duress of a captive population; it is duress of long standing. It is the same duress we will all be under if Islam is ever allowed to become a widely-practiced faith in America. Before long, lies that are repeated out of cowardice will be sincerely believed. After all, it is only because we are under duress that we subject ourselves to the humiliations we experience at the airports these days, but those humiliations have become routine and many people firmly have convinced themselves that they are necessary and that they have something to do with security. I think the Patriarch might actually believe what he says, even if it is only the cruel conditions of Muslim dhimmitude that make such ways of thinking necessary. A person living under anti-Semitic barbarism will become an anti-Semite eventually, because it would seem there is no other way to be.

So I suppose I believe that it is true that he is under duress, but this does not mean he does not believe what he says. That is the real shame of it. We should also take it as a warning.

Lydia McGrew writes:

On the Melkite patriarch’s statement that a Zionist conspiracy somehow is to blame for the deaths of Christians in Iraq, remember the conference at which Archbishop Bustros was reported to have denied God’s promises to the Jews? The conference at which Israel was blamed for persecution of Christians in the Middle East? There was some question raised at VFR at the time as to whether that report was accurate. That, I believe, was the Melkites as well. I think they are just crazy on this topic. Dhimmi to the point of being insanely anti-semitic.

Don Feder writes:

What was it Lenin said about useful idiots?

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 13, 2010 08:34 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):