Take a look at Norman Geras's weblog and Biased BBC for how the BBC Online story on this was steadily toned down then relegated from the Front Page to Asia Pacific.

Indeed. Their initial response to the speech was to say that:

"Dr Mahathir's comments were uncompromising."

A leading cleric basically advocates mass murder and genocide and the BBC reports on it as if he's just being a bit troublesome in some business negotiation.

I'm certain we can placate them. Perhaps if we admit to and pay compensation for our colonial crimes? Toss in the Jews?

Muslims of all flavours can surely be persuaded that a keystone of their philosophy, universal Shari'a Law, be changed. Meanwhile, our success in mollifying the non-militants will eventually trickle down to the militants.

There is great hope for compromise.

Maybe they'll be happy with the Sudetenland...

Even worse, Hamid Karzai (the current dictator-in-chief of Afghanistan) was applauding and congratulating Mahathir on his stand for Islam. Afghanistan's going to need another lesson in democracy pretty soon.

I dont know if anyone remembers Mrs Thatchers approach to groups in N.Ireland - starving them of the oxygen of publicity - if this threat is that serious then perhaps it is wise for the BBC to tone-down its coverage of this speech, if it threatens to inflame opinion.

If Hitler was getting started today - the same subtle censorship would probably be used. The best way forward through this kind of situation is by not frightening the horses, or the children.

The anti-semitic anti-Jew hatred that poured out from Mahathir should be taken as symbolic. If a serving PM of a so called moderate Islamic state believes such nonsense, and has the confidence to say so in an international conference, how much more visceral must be the hatred of Jews and infidels in the minds of ordinary Muslims worldwide.

No I dont believe that there is anything such as a moderate Muslim. Not in any significant numbers. Perhaps 10 or 12 worldwide. We have been exploring the world, going deep into rain forests but no sign yet of the lost moderate Muslim tribes. Moderate muslims are as difficult to find as Big Foot or the Yeti.

Besides the existence of these 10 or 12 moderate Muslims deter us from taking the actions that are necessary, for we seem to think that their presence is representative of a larger but yet unfound moderate Muslim majority.

The fact is that there is a rising tide of Muslims in our midst who harbour the same attitudes as displayed by Mahathir and this bodes ill for the us all in the West.

R.O.P.M.A. - Religion of PEace My Ass!

Will you all just calm down. If you read biographies of these people - Ramsi Josef, for example. His problem was being unable to handle the conflict between what his religion says and the fact that he enjoyed a decadent western playboy lifestyle. He needed to blame this on something - the outcome of this was the first attempt on the WTC in '91. The urge for middle-class wealthy, born-again fanatics to rebel against western things - this is a popular reaction to modernity that is seen in most traditoinal cultures. Some people just dont like change. The good news is, they are outnumbered by those are able to adapt to modernity, albeit grudginly.

The world is not going to end - not for this reason anyway.

Sorry Jimmy - I read your comment twice & I still don't understand what you mean.

Terrorists are wealthy conservative reactionaries?

My religion (Christianity) teaches sobriety, I occasionally overindulge with a bottle of red. My subsequent guilt trip does not lead me to bomb the vineyards of California.

Anyway, Mahathir's views are easy to dismiss as the rantings of a mad man. But he is the leader of a populous, modern(ish) nation.

"But today the Jews rule this world by proxy."

This statement would not be out of place on a KKK/neo-nazi site, in a Pat Robertson speech, on a loopy David Icke screed or, indeed, in much of the Arabic media.

But what is frightening is that if you replace 'Jews' with 'Neo-con', PNAC mob, or 'Right-wing cabal' - all code words for 'Jew', then it could appear in much of the western press.

We live in deeply bizarre times.

Actually Mahathir's comment would be out of place in a Pat Robertson speech. As Daniel Pipes has pointed out in his book "Conspiracy" Robertson is not flogging anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. He flogs anto-Secret society conspriacy theories. Pipes traces both traditions in his book, from their origins to the present day (well a few years ago now). They were distinct traditions until recently. People think Robertson is anti-Semitic not because he says anything anti-Semitic, but because his anti-Secret Society rantings sound so similar to anti-Semitic rantings that they are taken for coded versions fo the latter. Pipes points out where this is an incorrect conclusion.

We should not forget that Mahathir, amid his anti-Semitc garbage, also identified the West as enemies the Muslims should think harder about beating. First the Jews, then the Christians and others. And this man is generally considered a moderate, modernized Muslim leader.

Mahathir is the type of person who makes clear-thinking Aussies very, very nervous about the proximity of our neighbours.
Bushy
(Australia)

The speech has finally emerged in the New York Times today, Tuesday, October 21. There is also an interesting article on the op-ed page by regular contributor Paul Krugman. He notes that most of the speech was about the need for reform and progress in the Muslim world. Krugman says that the references to Jews was part of a delicate "balancing act aimed at domestic politics." Mahathir is always caught between an entrepreneurial Chinese minority and the less affluent Muslim Malay majority. The words about the Jews were there to help the main message of the speech be better accepted by his audience.

I have no idea if Krugman is right. But if he is, it is still not totally comforting. If he has to pander to anti-Semitic attitudes, then it only shows how strong they are even in his part of the world.